U.S. Government Proposes "Internet Kill Switch"

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 . . . 25 NEXT
 

Danik93:

GrinningManiac:
HA! Loving the mocking, Mr. Chalk. Cyber-this and Cyber-that

Mr. Government,
[/i]You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means[/i]

OT: Is this just for the US? Cus I'm questioning why they would have any right to turn off British internet, considering A) They HAVE no right and B) We technically invented it

I thought that the US military invented it? please tell me more!

The internet, dial up, they earliest form was invented by the Department of Defense for secure communication for the US military. It was a really complicated yet basic form of IMing. CERN, the european civilian agency that runs the LHC tweaked (actually it was one guy working at CERN, not the entire agency) it so that it could be accessible to anyone and not just people who knew complicated code. The people at CERN did this because they needed a way to quickly transmit and receive data from scientists around the world, to share research and all that good stuff

Owyn_Merrilin:

feather240:

Lizmichi:

Yay someone reads. Someone reads a good book too. Yea I hope this is just a farce so I don't have to start making sighs and find some way to DC and protest this. Cause I will.

...and I knew I'd get beaten to it. -,- Okay, but it's time for round two. If 1984 plays on our fear which books dystopia plays on our pleasures?

That would be Brave New World, by Aldous Huxley. Do I win anything?

Yes, you can has cookie.

That is some seriouse garbage. What would warrent that?

fair enough, i think thats quite a good idea

Lizmichi:
Oh my good lord. I can see it now, so we'll lose words in our language and they'll be able to listen to us threw our TVs. If anyone gets what I'm referencing I will be surprised.

I get what you're referencing because that's one of my favorite books in the world and someone needs to step up and make a good movie adaptation of it for the modern era.

I also think that society is already headed in that direction. We have a news media that feeds us nothing but bullshit headlines that no one should actually care about, the internet practically functions as a viewscreen in that we've been taught to tell the world what it is we're doing and how we feel, we have no choice in how our governments are actually run because our votes don't mean shit and whoever has the most money chooses who is in an elected office...

!

ionpulse2:

Dalton Frantz:

thenumberthirteen:
Don't scoff at the risk this could be Cyber 9/11 times 1000!

The trouble with the internet is it was designed to withstand Nuclear attacks. You can't stop the signal.

Wow, that would be Cyber 911,000!

Americans: LEIBERMAN, WHAT DOES THE SCOUTER SAY ABOUT CYBER 9/11's POWER LEVEL?

Leiberman: ITS OVER 9000!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The World: WHAT 9000!?

QTF!
ITS OVER 9000!!!!!!!!!!!!

Why are so many powers being given to the President. Basicly making him some all powerful beeing.

The President was never ment to have all the power he does, but over the years things have happened and "they" have put in little extra bits of power until now. Where you elected lord can do what ever the hell he or she wants with no one battering an eye lid.

Thought of giving the president power over the internet has been arround for ages, net nutrality, internet 2, now this all trying to get free internet controled and censerd so only the rich and priveliged who do as they are told can post something on the internet.

All that is needed is a good situation, an event will be needed and the someone will come out saying "the internet is not safe we need it to close down" and likly hood is you will not get a chance to vote on it or more liklyer (if that is even a word) they will just inpliment it.

DONT TRUST WHAT THESE PEOPLE SAY TO YOU!!!
If they clame they are attacked chances are it is false flag attack to push it though.

well thats a brilliant idea, no really it is. give the government the ability to only have them selves heard. this way the pepole do not get false info right? they are doing us a favor, and only have our best intentions in mind.

I am sure that this could never go wrong, right? giving the government the ability to turn off the web would never evolve to filtering, or be misused. This is the most retarded proposal ever and i hope it gets shot down in congress. If it does not i am positive that the president would have better judgement than to let it become law, although considering the health care bill it would go the supreme court. The highest court of the land, has the brain cells necessary to see the pure stupid of this idea, and would be a direct violation of the 1st amendment in several ways by suppressing our free speech and blocking most news and directly silencing reporters. So its not happening and i doubt the senator would ever support this as a bill, it was probably a mistake, he is not exactly the most tech-capable and does not understand that the web is the news, the web is like our phones, and the web is well it is the basis for modern society, it would be like telling pepole in the 1800's that the government could take their horses if the need be. with out the access to information the nation would quickly fall into full out rebellion and would be torn apart from each other not brought together, most pepole in 10 years will have a tv that they never use and rely on their computer for news, shows, and work; without the web modern society would crash, in 10 years what do you think would happen?

TL;DR
The good senator does not understand the internet and might as well be from a different world from us, he does not comprehend that what he is purposing is shutting down most of the nations communications, and news. I doubt he would support it as a bill and can not think of most senators ever voting yay on this.

Glad to know that governments everywhere are stupid... The very idea of this bill reminds me of North Korea, after all the jaw-boning, whining, fighting and dyin people have done for freedom to speak, to express and for information this one paranoid idiot who probably lives in a hut in the middle of the bondu without a mobile, a computer or a car with electronic assisted anything comes along and tries to take us all back to the stone age.
I'm being over the top but the very idea that this could go through tells me that the US "apple" has fallen far from the tree(of liberty).

My god, that was a lot of cyber-words.

So, let me get this straight:

"Oh nos! The hax are here! TURN OFF THE INTERNET, QUICK!"

Methinks Mr. Lieberman has a rather simple view of how the Internet works.

People's bank accounts and whatnot aren't suddenly going to be vulnerable to a massive attack, because there's no universal means to get in there an hack them, and if the bank that runs those accounts is smart they won't make it all that easy to do. The worse that'll happen is that those giant botnets will be used to spam down an important site to make it inaccessible. Turning off the entire Internet would simply achieve their goal for them on a larger scale.

Surely turning off the internet during a time of crisis would worsen things? Most people rely on electronic news sources these days. I mean for example:

Crisis 1: Terrorists denote an explosive
Internet gets turned off: People assume the internet is broken because the Russopeans/Chapanese/Islamistanis have BLOWN UP THE DATA CENTRES! IT'S AN INVASION! GET YOUR GUN! SHOOT ANYONE IN A UNIFORM!

Crisis 2: A small earthquake
Internet gets turned off: IT'S A SUPERQUAKE! WASHINGTON HAS BEEN DESTROYED! GET YOUR GUN! SHOOT THE GROUND! IT'S THE ONLY WAY TO STOP THE SANDWORMS!

I could go on.

It doesn't help that "Lieberman" really sounds like the name you'd give a Bond villain.

People are reacting like at the drop of the hat they would turn off the internet. The people running this are probably smarter than you think and would only do something this serious in case of an emergency.

Woodsey:
Oh yeah?

Well the US government can suck my cock.

this

Andy Chalk:

"We cannot afford to wait for a cyber-9/11 before our government realizes the importance of protecting our cyber-resources," said bill co-sponsor Senator

did anyone else picture a terrorists using flight simulators to crash into www.worldtradecentre.com?

This is giving the US government even more global power. Let me know when they start killing people's internet and arresting "terrorists" for having opposition to America's stance on...well, anything.

Spend the money on tracking down and eliminating the threats, don't spend it on a "oops, we lost the cyber war" back up plan.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOD NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! *ahem*

OT: These sound like the kind of people who would think the internet is a tangible thing; they appear scared that a terrorist is going to st3al teh internetz ZOMG!

Boba Frag:

Woodsey:
Oh yeah?

Well the US government can suck my cock.

Damn right!

How amazingly self-centred of them... That would disrupt internet commerce the world over!

I'm all for increased levels of security online... but that's just going way too far.

Oh noes! the government can shut down the internet if a full-scale cyber-attack would have occur!

the horror...

But seriously, i think national security is more important that finishing a game of TF2.

Edit:

Daverson:
Surely turning off the internet during a time of crisis would worsen things? Most people rely on electronic news sources these days. I mean for example:

Crisis 1: Terrorists denote an explosive
Internet gets turned off: People assume the internet is broken because the Russopeans/Chapanese/Islamistanis have BLOWN UP THE DATA CENTRES! IT'S AN INVASION! GET YOUR GUN! SHOOT ANYONE IN A UNIFORM!

Crisis 2: A small earthquake
Internet gets turned off: IT'S A SUPERQUAKE! WASHINGTON HAS BEEN DESTROYED! GET YOUR GUN! SHOOT THE GROUND! IT'S THE ONLY WAY TO STOP THE SANDWORMS!

I could go on.

It doesn't help that "Lieberman" really sounds like the name you'd give a Bond villain.

THEY WOULD NOT TURN OF THE INTERNET IF SOME TERRORIST WOULD DETONATE A BOMB.

I get that people like to scream "1984!" every time the government does ANYTHING but this is just bordering on sheer stupidity.

Woodsey:
Oh yeah?

Well the US government can suck my cock.

Exactly! Just when I think the US government is beginning to ease up on media tyranny, they go and do something like this and bring my tick back.

"Those who would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both."

Does this phrase mean absolutley nothing anymore? This is stupid on so many levels. Plus, as has been stated what kind of emergency would this be for?

Just in case the whole our world communication ever needs to be severed? Communication is a positive thing. When communication stops, it is time to worry. When someone is trying to sever communication - never trust their motives. Ever.

GrinningManiac:
HA! Loving the mocking, Mr. Chalk. Cyber-this and Cyber-that

Mr. Government,
[/i]You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means[/i]

OT: Is this just for the US? Cus I'm questioning why they would have any right to turn off British internet, considering A) They HAVE no right and B) We technically invented it

It's just for the US. The bill would require American ISPs/companies/etc to shut down internet traffic when a state of emergency is declared. The US government has no authority over anything else.

That said, it's an incredibly stupid move. All it would do is lock up the entire US infrastructure, and it's unlikely to even stop the real threats. It's not that hard to set up a satellite connection to a proxy in another country and route back into the system through that. It just strikes me as a really dumb move made by people who don't actually understand the system.

The idea is a good one if you set it up for important government servers so you could cut them off, from the rest of internet. I don't think they need to turn my internet off. What happens if we get invaded by Aliens who can use our Internet Connection to invade our homes!

Chris^^:
fair enough, i think thats quite a good idea

lolwut

molesgallus:

Znakemane:
Why should the us government have the authority over the internet in the first place? It's not like it's theirs.

Exactly.

Portions of it are. The US military is still in control of two of the top level DNS servers, and DARPA a third cluster. That's out of 13 top level clusters.

Lizmichi:
Oh my good lord. I can see it now, so we'll lose words in our language and they'll be able to listen to us threw our TVs. If anyone gets what I'm referencing I will be surprised.

1984 isn't exactly unheard of...

Besides, everyone loves them some Orwellian dictatorships.

"Oh, no", they say. "Americans are not mad", they say. "You just gotta have faith", they say. "People are dumb everywhere", they say.

And that's fine - but do you have to elect every damned one of them into office?

This story has already been on the escapist once before I thought....

As someone else said.. how unbelievably self-centred (given a lot of traffic routes through America to everywhere else).

I wonder how likely it is the rest of the world will respond by centralising their internet assets so that America can't screw over their economies during something they consider an 'incident'.

WHAT!?!??!?

One VERY important part about my Apocalypse survival plans was "Contact fellow survivors on the Escapist"

What am I supposed to do now?
LOOK for fellow survivors? HELL NO!

WTF!!!! This is clearly going too far and is a clear violation of our rights.

Well, they better only shut it down in th US.

My internet personas just ceded from the union. We must plan ahead; build an underground internet for the resistance to use. My government has provoked the internet; we must consider our rights while we have them!

However on a logical note I would allow this if there was one line added, "The American people get a "kill switch" on Congress's pay due to the threat that they may misspend their money and hurt their family's economic future". So all of Congress gets paid or no one gets paid or it could be state by state.

As a Conservative Libertarian I'm completely opposed to this. How many freedoms do we have to sacrifice in order to be what the government considers "safe?" This has the potential to be even worse than the patriot act.

Net Neutrality FTW.

Mr. Grey:
I could have sworn Lieberman was an Independent Democrat. So wouldn't he be left wing? Or is that the problem? I haven't paid much attention with politics, they've increasingly made me jaded and depressed.

Both of the major political parties in the US are becoming more and more similar, so it doesn't much matter. The fact of the matter is, it's irrelevant which "side" it comes from. All the matters is that he's scaremongering in a fairly pathetic and transparent attempt to increase the power of the federal government. It's foolishness at it's finest, or worst as the case may be.

I hate when stuff like this happens.

Need I say it?
ITS A CONSPIRACY!!11!!1!1!!!

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 . . . 25 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here