U.S. Government Proposes "Internet Kill Switch"
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
I have an issue with this.
Turning off the internet?
You'd have to turn off every ISP in the world to "turn off the internet".
Somehow or other I doubt that anyone outside of la la land will appreciate this.
Turning off the internet?
You'd have to turn off every ISP in the world to "turn off the internet".
Somehow or other I doubt that anyone outside of la la land will appreciate this.
You know, there's a certain merit to the idea of governmental control over mass communications in a time of crisis, in theory at least. Uncontrolled communications means a lot of miscommunication, which can cause panic in an already unsettled population, whereas if the government has control over primary communication channels it's in a better position to keep people calm and make sure they only know what they need to in order to get through the crisis. I recall back when the 'Swine Flu' was a big thing, there was a lot of wild speculation and misinformation flying around Facebook and Twitter and all those social networking things, and by the time I even heard about the damn thing everyone was convinced that a simple flu virus would be the end of us all. And that wasn't even a genuine crisis!
Now this doesn't mean I support the bill. I only think that controlling information is good in theory. In practice, this bill only arranges for the blocking of communications, with no provisions for arranging government-controlled spreading of information. Plus I don't trust the US government to hold that sort of power, even if they did manage to actually make it work on a technical level. Plus there's the little fact that it somewhat works directly against that whole 'freedom' idea that the government was founded on. Let's not forget Ben Franklin's advice: "Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lost both."
Now this doesn't mean I support the bill. I only think that controlling information is good in theory. In practice, this bill only arranges for the blocking of communications, with no provisions for arranging government-controlled spreading of information. Plus I don't trust the US government to hold that sort of power, even if they did manage to actually make it work on a technical level. Plus there's the little fact that it somewhat works directly against that whole 'freedom' idea that the government was founded on. Let's not forget Ben Franklin's advice: "Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lost both."
You nailed it!El Poncho said:
Let's take this fictive(but possible) example:
There's a calamity(a city get's nuked for example).
And you want to be informed, find out what really happened.
But on the Internet, those darn commies will try to feed you false information!
So just let papa US, tell you how everything raps up on the news(if he feels like it), while he's fixing the problem.
I hope you guys get my conspiracy theory point.
I mean the power to turn off the net is awesomely destructive, in the wrong hands. Good news that the US government is 100% good and won't ever do anything wrong. We must trust those nice guys.
Anyway, the only single not so solid argument they could have brought(but they didn't), is still a far fetched one: to stop SKYNET, or aliens that fry us through our communication devices.
Besides, I'm sure there were ways for the public to access usenet and telnet before they could access the World Wide Web. I was just reading some Usenet discussions from 1983 yesterday, although those were posted by people at universities with usenet and/or arpanet access. Regardless, ever seen the movie War Games? There were modems available well before we had the web.Hopeless Bastard said:
well you would have to have sufficient proof. Im guessing as hes listed in news articles and is hailed by many to be the inventor of the internet, he has more proof that it is his idea. However, feel free if u can get away with it and then sue the US for interfering without your permission!Hopeless Bastard said:
Aww, old people talking about things they don't understand are just too precious...
Ok, could somebody tell this guy that it's impossible to shut down a portion of the internet (even the Chinese thing isn't all restrictive, or look at the Iranian elections) unless you go directly for their servers? It might be possible to shut down the whole thing (if the ISPs are involved), but that would cripple the economy.
And some more random things:
1) I'm behind 7 proxies, dipshit!
2) What pray tell would a cyber 9/11 be? Some bloke stealing a few thousand people's identities? Yeah, that's not exactly a rare occurrence...
3) Continuing on that note, who the hell still uses "Cyber" to describe anything other than chat sex?
4) Stay the fuck away from my \b\
Ok, could somebody tell this guy that it's impossible to shut down a portion of the internet (even the Chinese thing isn't all restrictive, or look at the Iranian elections) unless you go directly for their servers? It might be possible to shut down the whole thing (if the ISPs are involved), but that would cripple the economy.
And some more random things:
1) I'm behind 7 proxies, dipshit!
2) What pray tell would a cyber 9/11 be? Some bloke stealing a few thousand people's identities? Yeah, that's not exactly a rare occurrence...
3) Continuing on that note, who the hell still uses "Cyber" to describe anything other than chat sex?
4) Stay the fuck away from my \b\
..Yeah, "Cyber 9/11"? Not falling for that one, Leiberman!
Although I live in Canada, the US Government can go and rightfully fuck itself with this. Rather daft to to think they can shut down the entire internet in case of "emergency", it cripples them more than it does anything else.
Although I live in Canada, the US Government can go and rightfully fuck itself with this. Rather daft to to think they can shut down the entire internet in case of "emergency", it cripples them more than it does anything else.
I have seen people write some stupid things on discussion boards in my life, but seriously, it is like you idiots are trying to out do one another for the title of biggest internet moron.
If any of you dumbasses had taken the time to read even a little bit of the actual document, you would realize that it does not simply give them a "kill switch" but rather allows the president to declare a state of emergency. Allowing the situation to be assessed and appropriately addressed, just like any other emergency situation. It is no different than enacting the Emergency Broadcast System, Grounding Planes, or closing the ports.
Stop being stupid and do some freaking research.
If any of you dumbasses had taken the time to read even a little bit of the actual document, you would realize that it does not simply give them a "kill switch" but rather allows the president to declare a state of emergency. Allowing the situation to be assessed and appropriately addressed, just like any other emergency situation. It is no different than enacting the Emergency Broadcast System, Grounding Planes, or closing the ports.
Stop being stupid and do some freaking research.
we didn't invent it but we put the most work into it out of all the parties involvedGrinningManiac said:
