Shutting down the internet??

[trulykiwi]

Here, this is interesting! Jay Rockefeller speaks that the internet should never have been invented. Click here to watch.

[Palerider]

where is Al Gore when you need him.....

[LittleWyvern]

Jay Rockefeller says a lot of things...

[pam]

where is Al Gore when you need him.....

Sitting in a room with air conditioning.

[Palerider]

no no...he is out saving the Planet......:)

[blusun7]

Wouldnt surprise me if the news starts emphasizing the dangers of internet and that it needs to be revamp.. Calling it internet 2

[Palerider]

The Internet as we know it is going to change...in case you havn't heard the latest it is going to file bankruptcy....the Gov't is stepping in with some Bailout cash and will soon take it over....everyones homepage will be either C-span or CNN (Clinton News Network)....the screen savers will be Al Gore trying to save us all from Global warming....your arrow on the screen will be a pic of Nancy Pelosi.......:D....the mouse pads will be the face of Dinghy Harry

Edited April 3, 2009 by Palerider

[Mahone]

Wouldnt surprise me if the news starts emphasizing the dangers of internet and that it needs to be revamp.. Calling it internet 2

They did. It's called web 2.0 - Web 2.0 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As for the video, he actually has a point. He wasn't saying the internet should be shut down, he was just highlighting some negative and valid points. Never heard of Gary Mckinnon ( Gary McKinnon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia )? If you think US government systems are as secure as they like to make out to be, think again. Gary broke into nasa systems simply though lax security and loopholes which any sensible network administrator would have secured. Don't always listen to what they tell you, cyber attacks on government networks are still possible and even likely. I think people underestimate the intelligence and skill that terrorists actually have access to. Before 9/11 the USA was saying that it'd be almost impossible to have a major attack on them - everyone was absolutely shocked. Just because they say it is almost impossible now, it doesn't mean to say it really is and with the nature of technology and the rate that it changes, you can -never- say that a system is 100% secure.

[TheyCallMeMom]

the only change the internet needs is maybe it should be mandatory that all porn sites domain extension be .XXX. fortunately it has gotten better, but I still dont like surprises

as far as national security... I also see his point, but we have to adapt.. with advanced technology for good comes advanced technology for evil.. How much have we accomplished as far as missionary work due to the internet? Personal Education? Without internet I would not be able to watch general conference

[Mahone]

the only change the internet needs is maybe it should be mandatory that all porn sites domain extension be .XXX. fortunately it has gotten better, but I still dont like surprises

It isn't really possible to force people to do it though. Remembering the internet in the worldwide thing, there is no one "base" or "control room". It's extremely difficult to make changes like this and does really require worldwide cooperation.

[TheyCallMeMom]

It isn't really possible to force people to do it though. Remembering the internet in the worldwide thing, there is no one "base" or "control room". It's extremely difficult to make changes like this and does really require worldwide cooperation.

right but they can work with domain hosting companies..instead of the domain owners.. right now you have to be an org to get .org, so its not unrealistic, but I realize you will have some who dont comply.. but the majority would

its not like we are asking them to close up shop.. we just want them to put black paint on the windows

[Dravin]

As for the video, he actually has a point. He wasn't saying the internet should be shut down, he was just highlighting some negative and valid points.

Gotta agree 100%. In fact when he actually utters the phrase, "It makes you ask the question, "Would it have been better if we'd never invented the internet?" he follows that up with a laugh at the idea and the conclusion, "And that's a stupid thing to say."

[trulykiwi]

You DO realise who this guy is though and what he stands for don't you?!

[LittleWyvern]

You DO realise who this guy is though and what he stands for don't you?!

Yeah, rich old people who don't understand technology.

[Dravin]

You DO realise who this guy is though and what he stands for don't you?!

Nope, and if he stands for something I'm supposed to object to the video linked isn't an example of it.

[Just_A_Guy]

I haven't been able to view the video, but this isn't just idle talk. There is a bill on the floor.

It actually doesn't provide for shutting down the internet (though it does allow Obama to disconnect Federal resources from the internet in the event of emergency). But more troubling is the following provision:

The Secretary of Commerce [who works for the President]

(1) shall have access to all relevant data concerning such networks [including privately maintained networks--you know, like the one maintained by your employer or your ISP] without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule, or policy restricting such access; …

Allow me to translate:

If government wants to know what's on your computer, they will have two options:

1) get a warrant, seize your computer, bring it in and analyze it (which option they've always had);

2) hack it remotely, without getting a warrant.

Rockefeller, Nelson, and Snowe would never have let a Republican administration slip this by them.

[Mahone]

right but they can work with domain hosting companies..instead of the domain owners.. right now you have to be an org to get .org

Not true. Anyone can register .org domain names. Each top end domain extension has a reason, though there is no rule or law requiring you to stick to these. Like the .NET extension was orignally created for technical websites. However sites like lds.net are definately not technical. I haven't had much to do with webservers and domain names for a couple of years now since my job changed, however I believe the freedom to register these domains still exists as it did.

The only people who could even attempt to enforce p0rn organisations and companies to register .XXX domain names is ICANN, the headquarters of which are in the USA. They have technical authority over route DNS servers and therefore could make the change. However, how do they regulate it? They have no-where near enough people to shut down domain names because they are of the wrong category and they would be risking a lot by just shutting them down. Then there is the fact that route DNS servers, while under the authority of ICANN, reside in 100s of countries around the globe. Most, if not all of those countries governments would have to not be opposed to the decision, or they could refuse to have any route dns servers in their country which would cause major complications globally.

Edited April 6, 2009 by Mahone

[Mahone]

Allow me to translate:

If government wants to know what's on your computer, they will have two options:

1) get a warrant, seize your computer, bring it in and analyze it (which option they've always had);

2) hack it remotely, without getting a warrant.

What can I say? Use linux . Microsoft is obviously an American company. They reside by American laws in most cases. Call me paranoid if you will, but I have strong beliefs that microsoft have ties with the US government to enable this to happen at the governments will. However, linux is created by hundreds of thousands of different people around the globe and the source code is all open to everyone to view. While I'm not saying a very clever government funded hacker would never be able to find a loophole in any linux systems, I am saying they'd find it one heck of a lot more difficult.

It is well known and proven that microsoft purposely create their operating system so that it's very difficult to fully remove records of your actions on the computer short of formatting the hard drive and running an eraser program on it, so that IT forensic scientists have an easier job when searching the computer. I dread to think what else they have done to their operating system to make life easier for the American government.

[Moksha]

Is this some incidious plot against LDS.net? Have they pegged our Palerider as that kid in Latvia?

[LittleWyvern]

For those of you worried about the government taking over the internet, I think it would be good to learn about the concept of network neutrality (especially the end-to-end principle), which I think we all should support. The FCC is our friend here.

[Palerider]

Is this some incidious plot against LDS.net? Have they pegged our Palerider as that kid in Latvia?

we had a young lady a few years ago stay with us as an exchange student and she was from Latvia.....she stayed with us for a year and when she left I felt like I was letting one of my own daughters go....wow

[a-train]

The only thing central planners fear is their own irrelevancy. The internet is quite capable of delivering that status to them.

-a-train

[Mahone]

For those of you worried about the government taking over the internet, I think it would be good to learn about the concept of network neutrality (especially the end-to-end principle), which I think we all should support. The FCC is our friend here.

Lol, it wasn't a fear of the US government taking over the internet - that concept is impossible. The internet is a worldwide mesh network and as I have previously stated, has no one base, hence it being a mesh network. You could take the USA completely out of the equation and the rest of the world, after some adjustments should theoretially be able to operate almost as normal, with the obvious exception of not being able to access those websites hosted in the USA. It was a suggestion that I wouldn't put it past microsoft to have enabled the government easier access to computers running windows that they want to access, providing they are connected to the internet.

I have absolutely no evidence to back this suspicion up, however given their track record of including things in their OS which are of no advantage to the end user - like several seperate records of all internet activity on that computer which is fairly annoying to find and remove (and doesn't get removed when you clear your browser history), I wouldn't have put it past them. The only reason for these seperate records is for any investigator who might want to find out what the computer was used for, whether that is a network administrator or a computer forensic expert. And they do use them as well, it's one of the first files a forensic expert will look for. Remember not many organisations have full access to the windows source code, but the US government is one of the organisations that do.

Edited April 6, 2009 by Mahone

[a-train]

For those of you worried about the government taking over the internet, I think it would be good to learn about the concept of network neutrality (especially the end-to-end principle), which I think we all should support. The FCC is our friend here.

LOL

If anything our government is doing is aimed in the direction of taking over the internet, the net neutrality bill is it.

I find it laughable how everything is given an antonymic name on the basis that law makers know that the public will not read the bills or the new laws. They are so emphatic in this belief that they themselves do not read them. The net neutrality bill will make the ISP business UNEQUAL.

-a-train

[LittleWyvern]

I wouldn't put it past microsoft to have enabled the government easier access to computers running windows that they want to access, providing they are connected to the internet.

You could always use linux then. :)

If anything our government is doing is aimed in the direction of taking over the internet, the net neutrality bill is it.

Wha? The key concept of net neutrality is keeping the government and internet service providers from regulating the internet. Explain to me how keeping the government's regulation of the internet at the bare minimum somehow helps the government take over the internet. You may want to read the wikipedia page again.

Edited April 6, 2009 by LittleWyvern