Bill would give president emergency control of Internet

[MaggieMae]

I find it funny that she thinks there is even a chance that everything can "simultaneously crash" ... that almost made me laugh.

Well...thanks to YOU spilling the beans to non-pros like me, we now know that yaw'll will be the sole survivors. I can see it now--IMing and texting each other like crazy screaming HALLELEULA!!! WE WON!!!

Meh ... us and our friends.

You couldn't pay me enough anyway.

 

[KittenKoder]

Well...thanks to YOU spilling the beans to non-pros like me, we now know that yaw'll will be the sole survivors. I can see it now--IMing and texting each other like crazy screaming HALLELEULA!!! WE WON!!!

Meh ... us and our friends.

You couldn't pay me enough anyway.

Obama Pod People are not my friends, not anymore than Bushbots are.

 

[Terry]

The people that put this bill in place seem to think it's feasible.

Senate Bill Would Give President Emergency Control of Internet - Political News - FOXNews.com

The new legislation allows the president to "declare a cybersecurity emergency" relating to "non-governmental" computer networks and make a plan to respond to the danger, according to an excerpt published online -- a broad license that rights experts worry would give the president "amorphous powers" over private users.

Non governmental.

Do we remember what happened in Iran and the subsequent twitters that went out over the net? This type of communication would be one instance of what is likely that Obama and his thugs would be interested in shutting down.


I am shocked (no I'm not) that libs are ok with this. :/

1-They are either of the same Marxist type Ideology
2-They are sheep "My Team, My Team at all cost"
3-They do see the danger's but still act like the puppet for the dems because doing otherwise would go against everything they've said or typed in the past 10 years or more.

 

[veritas]

The government can already shut the entire deal down whenever it wants to, like I said, they have complete authority over all communications satellites and the telecoms already.

I think you all are paranoid about the wrong things.

 

[MaggieMae]

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

I'm a little sick of people using the Constitution as a crutch for their weird beliefs too. Apparently you don't think cyber invasion has anything to do with national security and thus clearly within the purview of DEFENSE of this nation in the Constitution?

 

[KittenKoder]

The government can already shut the entire deal down whenever it wants to, like I said, they have complete authority over all communications satellites and the telecoms already.

I think you all are paranoid about the wrong things.

Not really. They can shut down certain parts of it, but far from everything. I wish I knew the words to explain it, but it's just not possible.

 

[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?

Really, you haven't looked into anything at all. Microsucks has a contract with the government, it's the reason they have managed to stay afloat in spite of people switching to Linux/Unix or Mac by the hundreds each year (possibly thousands now, my stats on that are dated). The contract I think should expired in about 5 more years ... unless they renew it (if they haven't already). All federally owned computers are running Windoze, even their servers. The only reason this contract happened was because of two facts, at the time the government went to sign one Microsucks was the leader in OS development and the computers were all IBMs, and Bill Gates is a damned good salesman and (ex)CEO. Windoze started to fall apart much later (quite recently actually) because Bill stopped caring about Microsucks, which is why he turned control of the company to the idiot that has been making the really bad decisions lately.

That's how I know what their servers are running. I knew one of the people who installed the first Windoze into our local federal computers. He's dead now sadly, probably rolling over in his grave at how fall Microsucks has fallen.

Yes, I'm so sure the government publicizes all its Internet access information, including its deals with servers and contractors. Are you daft, woman?

 

[MaggieMae]

^^Some of us try to keep it honest. What is amazing to us is the sheer volume of criticism no matter what this administration attempts to do.

It amazes me, it truly does -- the sheer robot like quality of some of his supporters.

I have yet to hear an Obama supporter criticize him. Everything he does is worthwhile and should be supported no matter what.

Then I guess you don't visit here too often. Bottom line, as I've said a gazillion times, I'm one of those who is willing to give this administration more than eight months on the job, especially when the economy had gone into a nosedive before he had a chance to find a men's room at the White House.

 

[veritas]

The government can already shut the entire deal down whenever it wants to, like I said, they have complete authority over all communications satellites and the telecoms already.

I think you all are paranoid about the wrong things.

Not really. They can shut down certain parts of it, but far from everything. I wish I knew the words to explain it, but it's just not possible.

You don't have the words because you are incorrect. The government owns the frequencies and licenses them out. Most of the BANDWIDTH they kept to themselves. The FCC dictates what frequencies you may use and what type of equipment may be built to operate on these bandwidths and the hardware must comply. They can effectively jam whatever public bandwidths they want and operate alone on the ones they kept to themselves.

 

[KittenKoder]

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

Really, you haven't looked into anything at all. Microsucks has a contract with the government, it's the reason they have managed to stay afloat in spite of people switching to Linux/Unix or Mac by the hundreds each year (possibly thousands now, my stats on that are dated). The contract I think should expired in about 5 more years ... unless they renew it (if they haven't already). All federally owned computers are running Windoze, even their servers. The only reason this contract happened was because of two facts, at the time the government went to sign one Microsucks was the leader in OS development and the computers were all IBMs, and Bill Gates is a damned good salesman and (ex)CEO. Windoze started to fall apart much later (quite recently actually) because Bill stopped caring about Microsucks, which is why he turned control of the company to the idiot that has been making the really bad decisions lately.

That's how I know what their servers are running. I knew one of the people who installed the first Windoze into our local federal computers. He's dead now sadly, probably rolling over in his grave at how fall Microsucks has fallen.

Yes, I'm so sure the government publicizes all its Internet access information, including its deals with servers and contractors. Are you daft, woman?

They didn't have to before, but we knew about the Microsucks one because they had advertised it as part of their gimmick originally, not to mention I already explained how I personally found out about it. But ... now they have to release that information on request. Recent law was enacted, remember?

 

[MaggieMae]

"Cyber-attacks" are typically hackers or malware. Malware is easy breezy. Hackers though wouldn't flinch at such a "security" measure, they are in and out before you realize it. As I said, this bill isn't about protecting anything, it's an attempt to gain more control over something that is inherently uncontrollable.

And that's really all this is about for you--stupidly believing in some sort of vast socialist conspiracy. Pathetic.

It's not a conspiracy if it's feasible, and this is feasible. Look what they did to TV ... why wouldn't they want to try to control the net the same way. Do you really think the FCC was started to control TV content?

Now what are you blubbering about? I get anything I want on my television. Some of it I have to pay for, but it doesn't go to the FCC. Huh?

 

[KittenKoder]

The government can already shut the entire deal down whenever it wants to, like I said, they have complete authority over all communications satellites and the telecoms already.

I think you all are paranoid about the wrong things.

Not really. They can shut down certain parts of it, but far from everything. I wish I knew the words to explain it, but it's just not possible.

You don't have the words because you are incorrect. The government owns the frequencies and licenses them out. Most of the BANDWIDTH they kept to themselves. The FCC dictates what frequencies you may use and what type of equipment may be built to operate on these bandwidths and the hardware must comply. They can effectively jam whatever public bandwidths they want and operate alone on the ones they kept to themselves.

No, I don't have the words because I have never been good at explaining things to people who do not already know them.

... and no, the government doesn't "own" the frequencies, not to mention that is nothing about the internet. Only portions utilize sats, and then those are being dropped for the more stable and less expensive cable systems.

 

[MaggieMae]

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.

Yeah it pretty much is. Everything uses the internet to operate nowadays. Commerce especially. Try to purchase something without cash without the internet. All credit and deposits are managed via the internet. Banks and the stock market don't have dedicated networks. Most businesses utilize the internet. Nobody's got an entire system to themselves but the military and some governmental installations, but they can and do still operate off their own grid. The utility companies operate off the internet with monitoring systems to manage flows. Even intranets are hooked in with regard to transportation, we've gone beyond radar and radio into integrated monitoring systems.

I have two fireplaces and pool full of water, but as far as operating without electricity and communications I'd be pretty much screwed. And since our electrical grid is screwed up and held together with duct tape at this point, a computer doesn't run on hamster power so unless you've got off the grid generation you're not getting on the web.

I ignored her comment. The fact that it even needed a response was incredible. But thanks for doing it anyway.

 

[BolshevikHunter]

I'm a little sick of people using the Constitution as a crutch for their weird beliefs too. Apparently you don't think cyber invasion has anything to do with national security and thus clearly within the purview of DEFENSE of this nation in the Constitution?

Yeah, You guys are not big fans of it now are yuh? Even though it has allowed you to speak freely without worry or fear. This isn't a Left or Right issue, Much like The Patriot Act. You either defend the Constitution, or you don't. There is no in between where you can pick and choose whenever it serves your Political agenda.

I don't give a crap if it was created by The Government, which I already know that it was. It has become something bigger now and it's a public domain. If they are ever worried about Security, disconnect all the sensitive material from the Internet. Surely they have the know how to create a program for that? Why shut it all completely down? I'll tell yuh why. If they ever turn on us full force, they want to prevent us from communicating or organizing. Wake up.

Nope, This is all about more Government control. They also want to control what is reported through the Government mass media complex. It sickens them that they can't dictate what people hear about or discuss.

Wake up Maggie. I know you got it in yuh.~BH

 

[KittenKoder]

And that's really all this is about for you--stupidly believing in some sort of vast socialist conspiracy. Pathetic.

It's not a conspiracy if it's feasible, and this is feasible. Look what they did to TV ... why wouldn't they want to try to control the net the same way. Do you really think the FCC was started to control TV content?

Now what are you blubbering about? I get anything I want on my television. Some of it I have to pay for, but it doesn't go to the FCC. Huh?

Okay, now you are flat out lying about not knowing. I didn't say a damned thing about paying for it, though you do through taxes, and even cable now has their content censored (ie controlled) by the FCC.

 

[MaggieMae]

The people that put this bill in place seem to think it's feasible.

Senate Bill Would Give President Emergency Control of Internet - Political News - FOXNews.com

The new legislation allows the president to "declare a cybersecurity emergency" relating to "non-governmental" computer networks and make a plan to respond to the danger, according to an excerpt published online -- a broad license that rights experts worry would give the president "amorphous powers" over private users.

Non governmental.

Do we remember what happened in Iran and the subsequent twitters that went out over the net? This type of communication would be one instance of what is likely that Obama and his thugs would be interested in shutting down.


I am shocked (no I'm not) that libs are ok with this. :/

A a major cyber attack is a tad more serious than an election protest.

 

[KittenKoder]

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.

Yeah it pretty much is. Everything uses the internet to operate nowadays. Commerce especially. Try to purchase something without cash without the internet. All credit and deposits are managed via the internet. Banks and the stock market don't have dedicated networks. Most businesses utilize the internet. Nobody's got an entire system to themselves but the military and some governmental installations, but they can and do still operate off their own grid. The utility companies operate off the internet with monitoring systems to manage flows. Even intranets are hooked in with regard to transportation, we've gone beyond radar and radio into integrated monitoring systems.

I have two fireplaces and pool full of water, but as far as operating without electricity and communications I'd be pretty much screwed. And since our electrical grid is screwed up and held together with duct tape at this point, a computer doesn't run on hamster power so unless you've got off the grid generation you're not getting on the web.

Nothing is "controlled" by the internet, many things "contribute" and are "connected" to the internet. Sheesh, even I'm not that bad with words. People still control everything, except automated systems which control themselves. Most data that is sensitive is transmitted through secure lines, connections that have no other connection or purpose.

 

[KittenKoder]

Let me guess, all of you supporting this thought Y2K was actually going to destroy the world to ...

 

[MaggieMae]

The people that put this bill in place seem to think it's feasible.

Senate Bill Would Give President Emergency Control of Internet - Political News - FOXNews.com

The new legislation allows the president to "declare a cybersecurity emergency" relating to "non-governmental" computer networks and make a plan to respond to the danger, according to an excerpt published online -- a broad license that rights experts worry would give the president "amorphous powers" over private users.

Non governmental.

Do we remember what happened in Iran and the subsequent twitters that went out over the net? This type of communication would be one instance of what is likely that Obama and his thugs would be interested in shutting down.


I am shocked (no I'm not) that libs are ok with this. :/

1-They are either of the same Marxist type Ideology
2-They are sheep "My Team, My Team at all cost"
3-They do see the danger's but still act like the puppet for the dems because doing otherwise would go against everything they've said or typed in the past 10 years or more.

Yep. That's it.

 

[BolshevikHunter]

Let me guess, all of you supporting this thought Y2K was actually going to destroy the world to ...

Yep, I bet they fell for the everyone needs to purchase a Y2K kit with 1000 boxes of Top Ramen and matches in it. ~BH