PDA

View Full Version : "Popular websites may have to be blocked"




Dieseler
10-28-2009, 08:38 PM
"Popular websites may have to be blocked" in the case of a pandemic according to HLS

http://theflucase.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1384%3Aqpopukar-sites-may-have-to-be-blockedq-in-the-case-of-a-pandemic-according-to-hls&catid=1%3Alatest-news&Itemid=64&lang=en

Plans are in place to shut down parts of the Internets when the pandemic situation escalates according to Reuters. Authorities will needī"legitimate" reasons to shut down sites that might give "conflicting information". Especially popular sites are in danger because the "suck up bandwidth" which would be needed by the population if "they stay at home and play online games".

It is clear that the Federal Government will actively block and shut down sites and parts of the country according to their own judgement of what is "needed" and not.

Johan Niklasson

http://theflucase.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1384%3Aqpopukar-sites-may-have-to-be-blockedq-in-the-case-of-a-pandemic-according-to-hls&catid=1%3Alatest-news&Itemid=64&lang=en

SEC and Homeland Security need Web backup, GAO says

Mon Oct 26, 2009 6:53pm EDT
By Maggie Fox, Health and Science Editor

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Securities exchanges have a sound network back-up if a severe pandemic keeps people home and clogging the Internet, but the Homeland Security Department has done little planning, Congressional investigators said on Monday.

The department does not even have a plan to start work on the issue, the General Accountability Office said.

But the Homeland Security Department accused the GAO of having unrealistic expectations of how the Internet could be managed if millions began to telework from home at the same time as bored or sick schoolchildren were playing online, sucking up valuable bandwidth.

Experts have for years pointed to the potential problem of Internet access during a severe pandemic, which would be a unique kind of emergency. It would be global, affecting many areas at once, and would last for weeks or months, unlike a disaster such as a hurricane or earthquake.

H1N1 swine flu has been declared a pandemic but is considered a moderate one. Health experts say a worse one -- or a worsening of this one -- could result in 40 percent absentee rates at work and school at any given time and closed offices, transportation links and other gathering places.

Many companies and government offices hope to keep operations going as much as possible with teleworking using the Internet. Among the many problems posed by this idea, however, is the issue of bandwidth -- especially the "last mile" between a user's home and central cable systems.

"Such network congestion could prevent staff from broker-dealers and other securities market participants from teleworking during a pandemic," reads the GAO report, available here

"The Department of Homeland Security is responsible for ensuring that critical telecommunications infrastructure is protected."

BLOCKING WEBSITES

Private Internet providers might need government authorization to block popular websites, it said, or to reduce residential transmission speeds to make way for commerce.

The Financial Services Sector Coordinating Council for Critical Infrastructure Protection and Homeland Security, a group of private-sector firms and financial trade associations, has been working to ensure that trading could continue if big exchanges had to close because of the risk of disease transmission.

"Because the key securities exchanges and clearing organizations generally use proprietary networks that bypass the public Internet, their ability to execute and process trades should not be affected by any congestion," the GAO report reads.

However, not all had good plans for critical activities if many of their employees were ill, the report reads.

Homeland Security had done even less, it said.

"DHS has not developed a strategy to address potential Internet congestion," the report said.

It had also not even checked into whether the public or even other federal agencies would cooperate, GAO said.

"The report gives the impression that there is potentially a single solution to Internet congestion that DHS could achieve if it were to develop an appropriate strategy," DHS's Jerald Levine retorted in a letter to the GAO.

"An expectation of unlimited Internet access during a pandemic is not realistic," he added.

(editing by Philip Barbara)

Original article
http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSN2620750120091026
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Zombies?

Dieseler
10-28-2009, 08:42 PM
If I see this happen I'm gonna think somebody is getting rounded up.

pcosmar
10-28-2009, 08:52 PM
If I see this happen I'm gonna think somebody is getting rounded up.
I certainly wouldn't trust MSM reports.
I would also check which alternate radio hosts are not on the air.
Then check shortwave. Pirate stations. Ham broadcasts.

In the Keys there was the Coconut Telegraph. Other areas have a similar grapevine.

NYgs23
10-28-2009, 09:39 PM
I suppose all the whoopers for "net neutrality" didn't see this coming.

Dieseler
10-28-2009, 09:46 PM
I certainly wouldn't trust MSM reports.
I would also check which alternate radio hosts are not on the air.
Then check shortwave. Pirate stations. Ham broadcasts.

In the Keys there was the Coconut Telegraph. Other areas have a similar grapevine.
I have a good friend a block away with a really nice Ham set, I'll keep that in mind.


I suppose all the whoopers for "net neutrality" didn't see this coming.

Good Point!
It all comes down to control.




.

dr. hfn
10-28-2009, 10:25 PM
if this happens, thats the last straw.

NoMoreFed
10-28-2009, 10:28 PM
I don't get this. If a person is staying at home due to a severe pandemic and the site he is surfing is blocked, then that individual will just move on to some other part of the Internet. How does blocking a site reduce the bandwidth being used due to a person being online?

brandon
10-28-2009, 10:37 PM
I would imagine something like 75% of people who surf the internet in their free time also use the internet from work.

Galileo Galilei
10-28-2009, 11:00 PM
Good post. Just another reason why we need to keep a free Internet with Net Neutrality.

It is much easier for a quasi-private telecom cartel to shut down the Net, than the government.

dannno
10-28-2009, 11:06 PM
Good post. Just another reason why we need to keep a free Internet with Net Neutrality.

No. (reason below)



It is much easier for a quasi-private telecom cartel to shut down the Net, than the government.

Untrue.

Galileo Galilei
10-28-2009, 11:43 PM
No. (reason below)



Untrue.

Not untrue.

A quasi-private cartel is essentailly a section of the government that "privatizes" part of itself.

Besides the Internet, another good example of a quasi-private entity is the Fed. The Fed is quasi-private, so it able to hide behind the "free market" ruse to operate in secrecy.

Under your logic, we should not be able to audit the Fed in the name of "free market" banking.

Just as the privately owned Fed is created by the government, telecom corporations are also created by the government. Both are granted special monopoly rights, special corporate status, and special use of government assets not available in a free market, under the guise of the "natural monopoly" concept.

Net Neutraliy needs to be maintained, until the quasi-private status of the telecom giants is restored to the status real private corporation, aka a non-quasi-private corporation.

PS

Here is another example of a quasi-private entity; a privateer. A privateering organization is quasi-private. It is a creation of the government and is given a special government monopoly to pillage the shipping of a designated enemy of the government.

Question:

Should the govenment be able to audit the actions of a privateering organization?

Yes.

Should a privateering organization be able to claim that the audit is a violation of free market principles to avoid the audit?

No.

Should a privateering organization be allowed to charge rents for right of passage to citizens of the same government that created it?

No.

Hence, telecom giants should not be allowed to charge extra fees or block service to citizens of the same government that created the quasi-private organization in the first place.

The essence of your confusion relates to your confusion between what is public and private, and the gray areas in between them. You are making a common error of some Libertarians, who demand an absolute distinction between public and private, when in fact, gray areas exist.

I suggest this book:

Gangs and Governments: The Human Predicament (Paperback)
by the Valorian Society (author)
Publisher: Sovereign Press (January 1992)
http://www.amazon.com/Gangs-Governments-Predicament-Valorian-Society/dp/0914752316

hugolp
10-29-2009, 03:43 AM
Good post. Just another reason why we need to keep a free Internet with Net Neutrality.

It is much easier for a quasi-private telecom cartel to shut down the Net, than the government.

False and false.

And then you are saying that the telecoms can block the internet because they are like part of the goverment. If that is true, then the goverment its not going to ban itself anything. :eek:

The only way to have a free internet is through getting rid of the control of the goverment and competition. Anything else is playing their game.

SimpleName
10-29-2009, 03:54 AM
I would imagine something like 75% of people who surf the internet in their free time also use the internet from work.

Reading, taking college courses, seeking other education, catching up with friends, buying products, informing family/friends of emergencies, online banking, sending last minute reports for work, trading stock, finding a job, finding employees, etc. Lots of important things that take place in many different areas of the web. People will go absolutely nuts without these things.

These people are just the worst type of scum. They will do anything wag their willy. "Look what I have! Look what I can do!"

And how are we supposed to relieve the stress of the day without PORN?!? For sure, they will shut down porn as soon as possible. There after, everyone (at least the guys) will be in a pissy mood. :p

Live_Free_Or_Die
10-29-2009, 04:14 AM
nt

Oyate
10-29-2009, 04:33 AM
I think a couple of points got missed here. Net Neutrality doesn't mean the net remains open and free, it means more government control.

And how about the zinger right at the top. The securities exchanges get bottled up? You mean we gotta keep the "tubes and pipes" open so criminal banksters can fling their worthless securitized debt around in circles unabated?

Fuckit, if hate is a crime now we have at least a chance of outlawing stupidity.

Working Poor
10-29-2009, 05:08 AM
I think a couple of points got missed here. Net Neutrality doesn't mean the net remains open and free, it means more government control.

And how about the zinger right at the top. The securities exchanges get bottled up? You mean we gotta keep the "tubes and pipes" open so criminal banksters can fling their worthless securitized debt around in circles unabated?

Fuckit, if hate is a crime now we have at least a chance of outlawing stupidity.

yea outlaw stupidity that could shut down half the net right there problem solved

LittleLightShining
10-29-2009, 05:59 AM
Obama forbid you try to discern anything for yourself...

moostraks
10-29-2009, 08:08 AM
Obama forbid you try to discern anything for yourself...

:D too true...

HOLLYWOOD
10-29-2009, 08:14 AM
Watching DHS's budget since 2003... $30, $40, $50 Billion a year budget buys a lot of control.

I guess they'll target Long haul/Dark Fiber locations and well as every single ISP & COLO on their target control lists.

Galileo Galilei
10-29-2009, 08:28 AM
I think a couple of points got missed here. Net Neutrality doesn't mean the net remains open and free, it means more government control.



The government has total control of the Internet either way, whether they keep or get rid of Net neutrality. The fact that they are making this decision proves this. Any decision they make today can be changed tomorrow.

That's because the giant telecom companies are quasi-private and are creations of the govenrnment, while the Internet is quasi-public.

You have been duped by an illusion.

Galileo Galilei
10-29-2009, 08:33 AM
False and false.

And then you are saying that the telecoms can block the internet because they are like part of the goverment. If that is true, then the goverment its not going to ban itself anything. :eek:

The only way to have a free internet is through getting rid of the control of the goverment and competition. Anything else is playing their game.

You have over-generalized what I said. I said the telecoms are quasi-private. A quasi-private organization is not part of the free market. A quasi-private organization uses the initiation of force to operate.

Dieseler
10-29-2009, 09:39 AM
They want control.
Total control.
As in, how fast, how often and who YOU can connect to.
They want to be able to take away your ability to SEND ANY info anywhere WHNEVER they want to.
They also want to be able to FILTER WHAT YOU SEND at ALL times.

Flipside

They do not want these rules and abilities to effect,
The market
HHS
Intelligence
or the
Military and or
Police.

That's it in a nutshell and it's quite a conundrum and corner that they find themselves painted in there boys and girls.

ShowMeLiberty
10-29-2009, 09:53 AM
I don't get this. If a person is staying at home due to a severe pandemic and the site he is surfing is blocked, then that individual will just move on to some other part of the Internet. How does blocking a site reduce the bandwidth being used due to a person being online?

It won't. This will just be an excuse used to block "fishy" sites and maybe "not real news organizations" web sites. That way, the sheeple will be able to see and hear the Official News, undiluted.


I would imagine something like 75% of people who surf the internet in their free time also use the internet from work.

Of course they do. I'm doing so right now! :p

Surfing from home vs surfing from work probably comes pretty close to balancing out since you have to be in one place or the other. Also, if they are home sick, many will probably spend LESS time online than they would if they were at work.

LittleLightShining
10-29-2009, 10:20 AM
It won't. This will just be an excuse used to block "fishy" sites and maybe "not real news organizations" web sites. That way, the sheeple will be able to see and hear the Official News, undiluted.


I agree but I also wonder if they'll try to block chat features so people can't communicate.

silverhandorder
10-29-2009, 10:20 AM
You have over-generalized what I said. I said the telecoms are quasi-private. A quasi-private organization is not part of the free market. A quasi-private organization uses the initiation of force to operate.

You are going to find no sympathy here for that kind of thinking.

"Hey guys we stepped in shit lets now smear it all over out selves!"

Dieseler
10-29-2009, 10:25 AM
I agree but I also wonder if they'll try to block chat features so people can't communicate.

Oh yes, most definitely.
That's the whole point behind this.
It's going to be hard to fine tune this the way they want it though.

Galileo Galilei
10-29-2009, 10:48 AM
You are going to find no sympathy here for that kind of thinking.

"Hey guys we stepped in shit lets now smear it all over out selves!"

That kind of thinking leads to the idea of auditing the Fed. In a free market, private bankers should not be audited by the government.

LibertyMage
10-29-2009, 11:07 AM
Good post. Just another reason why we need to keep a free Internet with Net Neutrality.

It is much easier for a quasi-private telecom cartel to shut down the Net, than the government.

It is both insane and hilarious that you still tout the idea that it is more likely that private industry would shut down parts of the internet after reading an article where the government specifically says "the Federal Government will actively block and shut down sites and parts of the country".

Oyate
10-29-2009, 11:12 AM
You have been duped by an illusion.

Help, I've been duped by an illusion and I can't get up!