Bill would give president emergency control of Internet

[KittenKoder]

how does that help when your ISP is located here? if your ISP is here....you will still be controlled and all info passes through your ISP...isn't that right?

Um ... huh? My web host is where I put all my internet files, I got it specifically because it had the software and OS I wanted at a low price ... what does my ISP have to do with keeping my website on a truly secure server instead of a government run Windoze server?

i might be wrong....but can't your ISP spy on what you are downloading/uploading? if they wanted to....not saying they can access your files on the server, rather, they can "capture" the files on the way to the server.....my understanding is....hackers can do this, so if they can...i fail to see how your ISP, which controls your internet can't....

Yes, they can, and that's their business and right, they own the line I am using to connect. However, I also have the option of changing to one if I don't like it and if they actually are. The contract I have with them does not yet allow them to, legally. But if it did I would still use them. However, they can only monitor, they cannot access your computer, not legally and if you know how to use a computer they wouldn't be able to successfully anyway.

This bill isn't about personal computers though, and that's why what you are talking about has no connection.

 

[MaggieMae]

3. "Massive cyber-attack" ... um yeah ... you know ... well nothing about the internet.

OK, let's start here.

Let's do a for instance, ok?
Let's say the government of, say, Iran has hired a whole bunch of Russian "botters" to create an interruption of service attack on several key systems.
These botters have slowly been turning millions of personal computers into "Bot" machines for the last few years through various spyware programs to use for just this type of endeavor.
Now, just so I understand, since I know "nothing about the internet", how would this type of situation not present a threat to national security?

Rusians, Russians, why does it always have to be the Russians? Can you make that Belizeans commiting this terrible botter crime?

Because the Russians have already hacked into Pentagon files. So has China. Hello?

 

[Sirius]

What is this the patriot act 2? Bush was rightfully criticized about wire tapping. Obama is being rightfully criticized for trying to control the information flow.

If this bill passes the Supreme Court should rule it unconstitutional under the first ammendment.

 

[Intense]

Hail Obama. I'm really thinking Bogey in "The Caine Mutiny". Control freak / Control Freak Nation, thats CNF to you.

 

[MaggieMae]

3. "Massive cyber-attack" ... um yeah ... you know ... well nothing about the internet.

OK, let's start here.

Let's do a for instance, ok?
Let's say the government of, say, Iran has hired a whole bunch of Russian "botters" to create an interruption of service attack on several key systems.
These botters have slowly been turning millions of personal computers into "Bot" machines for the last few years through various spyware programs to use for just this type of endeavor.
Now, just so I understand, since I know "nothing about the internet", how would this type of situation not present a threat to national security?

i've got a for instance for you- what if bush had proposed this bill?

You didn't ask me, but I would have absolutely NO problem with it. I don't have a problem with the existing safeguards, which clearly are not adequate.

 

[Yurt]

Um ... huh? My web host is where I put all my internet files, I got it specifically because it had the software and OS I wanted at a low price ... what does my ISP have to do with keeping my website on a truly secure server instead of a government run Windoze server?

i might be wrong....but can't your ISP spy on what you are downloading/uploading? if they wanted to....not saying they can access your files on the server, rather, they can "capture" the files on the way to the server.....my understanding is....hackers can do this, so if they can...i fail to see how your ISP, which controls your internet can't....

Yes, they can, and that's their business and right, they own the line I am using to connect. However, I also have the option of changing to one if I don't like it and if they actually are. The contract I have with them does not yet allow them to, legally. But if it did I would still use them. However, they can only monitor, they cannot access your computer, not legally and if you know how to use a computer they wouldn't be able to successfully anyway.

This bill isn't about personal computers though, and that's why what you are talking about has no connection.

you said you are glad your stuff is on a server in england.....how does that relate to this bill?

 

[KittenKoder]

OK, let's start here.

Let's do a for instance, ok?
Let's say the government of, say, Iran has hired a whole bunch of Russian "botters" to create an interruption of service attack on several key systems.
These botters have slowly been turning millions of personal computers into "Bot" machines for the last few years through various spyware programs to use for just this type of endeavor.
Now, just so I understand, since I know "nothing about the internet", how would this type of situation not present a threat to national security?

Rusians, Russians, why does it always have to be the Russians? Can you make that Belizeans commiting this terrible botter crime?

Because the Russians have already hacked into Pentagon files. So has China. Hello?

So have Brits, Japanese, Indians, even Iraqis ... which only proves my point to begin with.

 

[KittenKoder]

i might be wrong....but can't your ISP spy on what you are downloading/uploading? if they wanted to....not saying they can access your files on the server, rather, they can "capture" the files on the way to the server.....my understanding is....hackers can do this, so if they can...i fail to see how your ISP, which controls your internet can't....

Yes, they can, and that's their business and right, they own the line I am using to connect. However, I also have the option of changing to one if I don't like it and if they actually are. The contract I have with them does not yet allow them to, legally. But if it did I would still use them. However, they can only monitor, they cannot access your computer, not legally and if you know how to use a computer they wouldn't be able to successfully anyway.

This bill isn't about personal computers though, and that's why what you are talking about has no connection.

you said you are glad your stuff is on a server in england.....how does that relate to this bill?

Means my website won't be effected by their stupidity and that the server won't be infected with their software. Quite simple really.

 

[CaféAuLait]

OK, let's start here.

Let's do a for instance, ok?
Let's say the government of, say, Iran has hired a whole bunch of Russian "botters" to create an interruption of service attack on several key systems.
These botters have slowly been turning millions of personal computers into "Bot" machines for the last few years through various spyware programs to use for just this type of endeavor.
Now, just so I understand, since I know "nothing about the internet", how would this type of situation not present a threat to national security?

Rusians, Russians, why does it always have to be the Russians? Can you make that Belizeans commiting this terrible botter crime?

Because the Russians have already hacked into Pentagon files. So has China. Hello?

Oh good grief, stop taking yourself so seriously-- it was meant to lighten the conversation.

 

[KittenKoder]

OK, let's start here.

Let's do a for instance, ok?
Let's say the government of, say, Iran has hired a whole bunch of Russian "botters" to create an interruption of service attack on several key systems.
These botters have slowly been turning millions of personal computers into "Bot" machines for the last few years through various spyware programs to use for just this type of endeavor.
Now, just so I understand, since I know "nothing about the internet", how would this type of situation not present a threat to national security?

i've got a for instance for you- what if bush had proposed this bill?

You didn't ask me, but I would have absolutely NO problem with it. I don't have a problem with the existing safeguards, which clearly are not adequate.

"Those willing to sacrifice basic liberties for security deserve neither."

 

[MaggieMae]

emergency control? For what reasons? what emergency could possibly justify regulation of the internet?

With comments like that, I tend to think that the younger generations who have known nothing but computers as a way of life can't possibly conceive of the dangers that lurk in this vast and largely still imperceptible vehicle that now controls everything.

 

[Sirius]

emergency control? For what reasons? what emergency could possibly justify regulation of the internet?

With comments like that, I tend to think that the younger generations who have known nothing but computers as a way of life can't possibly conceive of the dangers that lurk in this vast and largely still imperceptible vehicle that now controls everything.

Well what emegency could justify the regulation of information? Has there ever been one?

 

[BolshevikHunter]

With comments like that, I tend to think that the younger generations who have known nothing but computers as a way of life can't possibly conceive of the dangers that lurk in this vast and largely still imperceptible vehicle that now controls everything.

The internet is the newest form of Freedom. Of course the madman Obama want's to control it. That's what Socialist dictators thrive for. ~BH

 

[Mr Natural]

Who's Bill?

 

[BolshevikHunter]

You didn't ask me, but I would have absolutely NO problem with it. I don't have a problem with the existing safeguards, which clearly are not adequate.

Of course you wouldn't Maggie. You don't support or understand anything to do with The United States Constitution. You would freely give up your Liberties like a good little sheople. They love people like you. ~BH

 

[MaggieMae]

i've got a for instance for you- what if bush had proposed this bill?

Bush didn't need to propose the bill, he had already assigned himself the power to do this.

are you this stupid in real life?

He justified a lot of things "in the interest of national security." Where were you?

 

[elvis]

Isn't this emergency control of the internet already in place? I thought I remember hearing if there were another 9/11. the internet would be shut down. (shrug)

 

[KittenKoder]

emergency control? For what reasons? what emergency could possibly justify regulation of the internet?

With comments like that, I tend to think that the younger generations who have known nothing but computers as a way of life can't possibly conceive of the dangers that lurk in this vast and largely still imperceptible vehicle that now controls everything.

That last part ... now you are making me laugh on purpose, aren't you?

First, if one's life is completely "controlled" by the internet, one needs to get a life.

Secondly, no, it doesn't control everything, not even close.

 

[MaggieMae]

Not to mention they'd have to write code that could successfully hit Linux/Unix servers ... yeah, that'll happen ... not. The government systems are only vulnerable because they're using Microsucks, but even then, they can be "disconnected" very quickly and easily without any bills, this bill isn't about protecting a damned thing, now if they took a few bucks (literally) from taxes and upgraded the OSes on their servers to Linux or a few hundred and go for Unix since they clearly need the tech support, that would be for protecting their systems and would be a smart move.

How do you know what the government "uses"?? Hell, if YOU know about Linux/Unix, do you honestly think DHS does not?

 

[KittenKoder]

Isn't this emergency control of the internet already in place? I thought I remember hearing if there were another 9/11. the internet would be shut down. (shrug)

No, the government run systems have an isolation mechanism in place, that was the compromise Bush found which kept people happy enough to leave it be. Basically, the government networks break their internet connections, so there is no way in or out except at their office terminals.