Better Have Four Months of Income Saved Up

14 years ago

Dan,

Shutting down the internet would be a last ditch drastic effort by BO.

It would also most likely disrupt electric power supplies and a host of other necessary infrastructure such as the IRS and all goverment communications on the county and city level assuming the fedral gov and state govs had some kind of back-up network.

Remember, he can also declare Marshall law, and drop nukes at his discretion, and he isn't likely to do those things, either.

At least not before the mid term elections...

~Bill

[ 4 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2272038].message }}

Steven Wagenheim 14 years ago

I don't worry about things where the chances of them happening are so
astronomical that worrying about them is pointless.

This is one of those things. As Bill said, too much is involved.

If it DOES happen, then let me tell you, we have worse problems than just
losing 4 months of income.
- [ 1 ] Thanks
Signature

My Soundcloud Music Channel
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2272090].message }}

John Henderson

14 years ago

How would Obama "shut down the internet"?

He might be able to shut down routers, web servers, name servers, etc. in the United States. But the internet would continue to run in the rest of the world.

American Warriors could always move to Canada...

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2272356].message }}

Kurt

14 years ago

Originally Posted by John Henderson

How would Obama "shut down the internet"?

He might be able to shut down routers, web servers, name servers, etc. in the United States. But the internet would continue to run in the rest of the world.

American Warriors could always move to Canada...

You still won't be able to access sites hosted in the US like Google, Amazon, ebay and Paypal, CB, Adwords, Aweber, etc, or sell to Americans.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2272370].message }}

HorseStall 14 years ago

Originally Posted by Kurt

You still won't be able to access sites hosted in the US like Google, Amazon, ebay and Paypal, CB, Adwords, Aweber, etc, or sell to Americans.

I think it would be very unlikely that those types of sites would not have servers hosted in other countries as a contingency.
- Thanks
Signature
Horse Gifts :: Dog Gifts :: Wild Animal Gifts :: Mythical Creatures
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2272931].message }}

Kurt

14 years ago

The motive for this is to be able to protect us from terrorist-type attacks via the Net. And this is a HUGE concern.

If a virus is created that could wipe out all the data on the web, our only defense may be to shut down the Internet until it can be taken care of and in an emergency like this, we can't wait for Congress to act.

OB isn't going to shut down the Net except in a rare emergency, he likes his blackberry as much as the rest of us.

Thanks

Signature

Discover the fastest and easiest ways to create your own valuable products.
Tons of FREE Public Domain content you can use to make your own content, PLR, digital and POD products.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2272363].message }}

solardave

14 years ago

At this point nothing would surprise me. I mean nothing.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2272373].message }}

HorseStall

14 years ago

The Internet is global and not "owned" by the US. I think it would be difficult for any country to "shut it down".

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Horse Gifts :: Dog Gifts :: Wild Animal Gifts :: Mythical Creatures

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2272925].message }}

TLTheLiberator

14 years ago

Originally Posted by HorseStall

The Internet is global and not "owned" by the US. I think it would be difficult for any country to "shut it down".

I thought the US was in charge of the domain names & urls.

I have heard that whomever controls the domain names & urls controls the internet.

TL

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2275825].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

I thought the US was in charge of the domain names & urls.

I have heard that whomever controls the domain names & urls controls the internet.

TL

GOOD POINT! The US is in charge of SOME domain names, of course, that includes .gov, .net, .org, .edu to mention only a few. Ones like .uk are run in the UK, etc...

URLs are controlled by the site owner, but a key part IS the domain name, which is controlled by verisign.

Can you imagine? Some hacker could hack another site and maybe get people to go to another site if they typed amazon.com, and wipe out amazons reputation, as if they wouldn't have enough trouble with being out of business for so long. They can't easily do it today, because every system knows verisign is THE system, and they can communicate with it.

SOMEONE thinks this IS likely, since they passed the bill, and plan to spend possibly BILLIONS for it!

As for blackberry, this might not affect blackberry AT ALL! THEY insist on running email, except under SOME circumstances, and they are CANADIAN! The connection to them is probably through the phone systems. If THAT network were shut down, together with the internet, most of the US would be plunged practically into DARKNESS!

But what about people like me with VOIP type phones? Where I am working, they have VOIP phones. Disabling them could LITERALLY mean PEOPLE DIE!!!!!!!!!! SERIOUSLY, if a hospital is unable to communicate with staff, etc... if a patient like KIMW can't communicate with the hospital.... WHAT HAPPENS!?!?!?!?

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2275912].message }}

Dan C. Rinnert

14 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

Can you imagine? Some hacker could hack another site and maybe get people to go to another site if they typed amazon.com, and wipe out amazons reputation, as if they wouldn't have enough trouble with being out of business for so long. They can't easily do it today, because every system knows verisign is THE system, and they can communicate with it.

SOMEONE thinks this IS likely, since they passed the bill, and plan to spend possibly BILLIONS for it!

It is a known vulnerability: DNS spoofing.

But what about people like me with VOIP type phones? Where I am working, they have VOIP phones. Disabling them could LITERALLY mean PEOPLE DIE!!!!!!!!!! SERIOUSLY, if a hospital is unable to communicate with staff, etc... if a patient like KIMW can't communicate with the hospital.... WHAT HAPPENS!?!?!?!?

And what is the likelihood of politicians considering all those possibilities before "flipping the switch"? I know that people think that they will act responsibly and rationally but history shows that politicians often do not.

Thanks

Signature

Dan's content is irregularly read by handfuls of people. Join the elite few by reading his blog: dcrBlogs.com, following him on Twitter: dcrTweets.com or reading his fiction: dcrWrites.com but NOT by Clicking Here!

Dan also writes content for hire, but you can't afford him anyway.

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2275952].message }}

John Henderson 14 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

I thought the US was in charge of the domain names & urls.

I have heard that whomever controls the domain names & urls controls the internet.

Hmm, the URLs give control of the web. But the rest of the world could still use the internet. Now, where's that copy of Telnet?
- Thanks
- 1 reply
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2279105].message }}
- ledbeauty 14 years ago
  
  What a bad news!
  On the other hand, we should save 40% of our income when we get it. So if any emergency happens, we can react calmly. :p
  
  Thanks
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2279378].message }}

garyv

14 years ago

All 13 of the Root Name Servers are under the supervision of ICANN, which is out of the United States. So while you might have your connections, if those 13 Name Servers are offline, then your connection is useless unless you know the ip address of all of the websites you like to visit.

But like others have said. The chances of that happening are extremely unlikely. Doing it without a very good reason would be tantamount to political suicide.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2275908].message }}

HeySal

14 years ago

Wow - I could have sworn I answered this thread. Bad connection - so I write longer posts on WP then paste and forget to paste it sometimes if I'm busy, LOL.

I don't know anything about the technology involved in what it would take to shut down the Internet -- so I can't speak on that level about it, but I do know that most businesses are now on the Net - some are even dipping into social networking. Some businesses are Internet extant only. There are several other major factions of society which are Internet dependent as well - look at remote classes for Universities for one instance of that.

To shut down could be extremely economically disruptive. I don't think anyone in their right mind would shut it down unless it was a matter of life, death, and survival. Not knowing the technology, I really can't imagine a scenario that they would ever need to do it.

I was at one point thinking that maybe if a war hit our shores, but now that I've thought about that one -- I don't think it would be completely shut down even in that event. It's got to be a technological threat thing - I can't think of one other reason anyone even slightly sane would EVER completely shut it down.

I think the whole legislation just centers around some "what if" conjecturing after the google/china thing recently. Makes the leaders feel safe, but is something I doubt we will ever see being contemplated other than in an instance SO extreme that most savvy users would probably be in agreement.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2276084].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

Wow - I could have sworn I answered this thread. Bad connection - so I write longer posts on WP then paste and forget to paste it sometimes if I'm busy, LOL.

I don't know anything about the technology involved in what it would take to shut down the Internet -- so I can't speak on that level about it, but I do know that most businesses are now on the Net - some are even dipping into social networking. Some businesses are Internet extant only. There are several other major factions of society which are Internet dependent as well - look at remote classes for Universities for one instance of that.

To shut down could be extremely economically disruptive. I don't think anyone in their right mind would shut it down unless it was a matter of life, death, and survival. Not knowing the technology, I really can't imagine a scenario that they would ever need to do it.

I was at one point thinking that maybe if a war hit our shores, but now that I've thought about that one -- I don't think it would be completely shut down even in that event. It's got to be a technological threat thing - I can't think of one other reason anyone even slightly sane would EVER completely shut it down.

I think the whole legislation just centers around some "what if" conjecturing after the google/china thing recently. Makes the leaders feel safe, but is something I doubt we will ever see being contemplated other than in an instance SO extreme that most savvy users would probably be in agreement.

Well, realize one VERY important thing! Some might say "This thing didn't even exist when I was a kid! We got along FINE! WHO CARES if the WWW is down!? We still have phones, etc...." And YEAH, I have known MANY that have thought that way, EVEN about the internet in particular.

The problem? Point 1 is technically RIGHT! Point 2 is CORRECT! Point 3 is a bit short sighted on its face, but that is not the whole reason for the internet. Point 4 is now so mingled with the internet that things start to blur!

The FACT is that the internet is SO interconnected that EVEN a lot of brick and mortar places, that only have people that have NEVER used a computer and never touched the internet could see their income drop by over 80% EVEN if no customers lost money, and their traffic increased by 100%!!!!!! HOW? ALL they need is to have LARGE sales(say over $100), and a CC machine that runs via an internet connection SOMEWHERE. Some places don't even have the old draft machines, old drafts, etc.... SO, if the internet is down, THEY ARE!

It is UNREAL how much the internet has invaded the planet. HECK, around 1995 or so I had to tie a system in because the US government was going to outlaw the sale of CMOs outside of a system that, YOU GUESSED IT, used THE INTERNET! They sell in chunks of about $1,000,000 USD!

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2276159].message }}

HeySal

14 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

Well, realize one VERY important thing! Some might say "This thing didn't even exist when I was a kid! We got along FINE! WHO CARES if the WWW is down!? We still have phones, etc...." And YEAH, I have known MANY that have thought that way, EVEN about the internet in particular.

The problem? Point 1 is technically RIGHT! Point 2 is CORRECT! Point 3 is a bit short sighted on its face, but that is not the whole reason for the internet. Point 4 is now so mingled with the internet that things start to blur!

The FACT is that the internet is SO interconnected that EVEN a lot of brick and mortar places, that only have people that have NEVER used a computer and never touched the internet could see their income drop by over 80% EVEN if no customers lost money, and their traffic increased by 100%!!!!!! HOW? ALL they need is to have LARGE sales(say over $100), and a CC machine that runs via an internet connection SOMEWHERE. Some places don't even have the old draft machines, old drafts, etc.... SO, if the internet is down, THEY ARE!

It is UNREAL how much the internet has invaded the planet. HECK, around 1995 or so I had to tie a system in because the US government was going to outlaw the sale of CMOs outside of a system that, YOU GUESSED IT, used THE INTERNET! They sell in chunks of about $1,000,000 USD!

Steve

Steve, you know I study situations like this pretty solidly including reading bills themselves - looking for other countries who have adopted measures and how it's working/worked for them.

This whole kit and kabootle is actually frightening as hell. But - my last post was deleted so I came in with a smarmy "what's the worry - you must be paranoid post" so everyone will be happy with what I said........it was sarcasm dude.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2280268].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

Steve, you know I study situations like this pretty solidly including reading bills themselves - looking for other countries who have adopted measures and how it's working/worked for them.

This whole kit and kabootle is actually frightening as hell. But - my last post was deleted so I came in with a smarmy "what's the worry - you must be paranoid post" so everyone will be happy with what I said........it was sarcasm dude.

OK, but what I said above is right, non the less.

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2280306].message }}

HeySal 14 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

OK, but what I said above is right, non the less.

Steve

You know more about technology than I do, Steve - one hell of a lot more. I'm not idiot enough to debate you on that level. :rolleyes:
- Thanks
Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2280367].message }}

R Hagel

14 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

Wow - I could have sworn I answered this thread. Bad connection - so I write longer posts on WP then paste and forget to paste it sometimes if I'm busy, LOL.

Bad connection? Me too! OMG... It's starting right now, even as I type this!

Please, everyone, single file. Don't push. We may just have a few minutes left before everything shuts down. That's why it's very important for everyone listen closely to what I'm about to say, cause it may determine whether you sink or swim for these next four months.

First things first. I want you to visit a secret website that will explain everything to you (I'll give you the link in just a second.) Go now, because we could get shut down at any m

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2280976].message }}

HeySal

14 years ago

Originally Posted by R Hagel

Bad connection? Me too! OMG... It's starting right now, even as I type this!

Please, everyone, single file. Don't push. We may just have a few minutes left before everything shuts down. That's why it's very important for everyone listen closely to what I'm about to say, cause it may determine whether you sink or swim for these next four months.

First things first. I want you to visit a secret website that will explain everything to you (I'll give you the link in just a second.) Go now, because we could get shut down at any m

Don't worry, Becky - it's just YOU. You can come out of the basement now.

Thanks

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2308346].message }}

KenThompson

14 years ago

The original bill puts the responsibility and power for this with DHS, dept of
homeland security. I read that a similar power has existed since the early
days of dubya-dubya 2. The similar power meaning to take control over national
communication networks in the event whatever happened.

An opposing bill is being proposed to remove the burden from DHS and put it
with the defense dept. Also, there are about 20 competing pieces of cybersecurity
legislation floating around. (Turf battles)

So nothing's written in stone, and it ain't over yet. The second referenced bill
seems to be more practical to me and makes provisions for allowing critical national
infrastructure to continue to operate online, etc.

Some of you have asked how service to regular civilians can be interrupted. One
thing being considered is to have provisions basically stating that a 'request' would
be made to all US ISP's to shut down - or turn the key to standby = no internet
service in the event of whatever. Probably in the event Kurt has escaped online
and wreaking havoc and general mayhem. I served with a Gen. Mayhem back in
Nam in '66. Nice guy.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2276150].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by KenThompson

The original bill puts the responsibility and power for this with DHS, dept of
homeland security. I read that a similar power has existed since the early
days of dubya-dubya 2. The similar power meaning to take control over national
communication networks in the event whatever happened.

Well, the bill I read, admittedly some time ago, spoke of basically directing providers to have a member taught in a class that the government controlled. The network would have to be setup a certain way with software to allow the government to disable the system.

In short, it spoke of things that have never existed before. NO call would be needed to any person.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2276175].message }}

TLTheLiberator

14 years ago

The admin is supposedly entertaining sharing control of the internet.

I say no.

Here's a story...

Who Controls the Internet? | The Weekly Standard

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2279865].message }}

Kenster

14 years ago

We should have 4 months tucked away in our matresses (theoretical)and then a bunch more months tucked away at the bank.

Think about your money right now. Where is most of it? Probably at the bank in some form, be it investment or some kind of account. Its not physically there, its saved on a computer somewhere. Your cash is just 1's and 0's in cyberspace somewhere. This scares the heck out of me.

If something happens to the banks computers or fed reserves computers, you may not have direct access to your cash, even if you have proof of how much you have.

Just something to think about. Maybe buy some bars of gold or something?

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2279897].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Kenster

We should have 4 months tucked away in our matresses (theoretical)and then a bunch more months tucked away at the bank.

Think about your money right now. Where is most of it? Probably at the bank in some form, be it investment or some kind of account. Its not physically there, its saved on a computer somewhere. Your cash is just 1's and 0's in cyberspace somewhere. This scares the heck out of me.

If something happens to the banks computers or fed reserves computers, you may not have direct access to your cash, even if you have proof of how much you have.

Just something to think about. Maybe buy some bars of gold or something?

You're right there! I spoke earlier here of how a bank STOLE a months income from me! LUCKILY, I noticed it, called them on it, countered EVERY objection, and moved my money out ASAP! STILL, they used a policy created by a federal law to try to explain away the dissappearance, and I was expected to just crawl away. ALL because they supposedly slipped up on microfiching my check.

And it is a good thing I DON'T trust ATMs for deposits! Their FIRST objection was that I deposited it at an ATM(and I couldn't prove I deposited anything). MY first counter was "NICE TRY, this was deposited at THAT tellers window RIGHT THERE, and THERE is the teller!" They INSTANTLY changed their demeanor and said "We'll issue you a provisionary credit, and investigate right away.". My next move was walking out of the bank with all my money, including what they stole!

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2280083].message }}

Kenster

14 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

You're right there! I spoke earlier here of how a bank STOLE a months income from me! LUCKILY, I noticed it, called them on it, countered EVERY objection, and moved my money out ASAP! STILL, they used a policy created by a federal law to try to explain away the dissappearance, and I was expected to just crawl away. ALL because they supposedly slipped up on microfiching my check.

And it is a good thing I DON'T trust ATMs for deposits! Their FIRST objection was that I deposited it at an ATM(and I couldn't prove I deposited anything). MY first counter was "NICE TRY, this was deposited at THAT tellers window RIGHT THERE, and THERE is the teller!" They INSTANTLY changed their demeanor and said "We'll issue you a provisionary credit, and investigate right away.". My next move was walking out of the bank with all my money, including what they stole!

Steve

Steve, that's why good record keeping is a must in business and banking and thats why its important to hold your ground and never give in when people try to screw you. Normally if you are a controlled and rational shark, you can get what you deserve 99 times out of 100. But you need to be a shark...just stay logical and rational.

good on you :p

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2280257].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Kenster

Steve, that's why good record keeping is a must in business and banking and thats why its important to hold your ground and never give in when people try to screw you. Normally if you are a controlled and rational shark, you can get what you deserve 99 times out of 100. But you need to be a shark...just stay logical and rational.

good on you :p

LUCKILY, it was only like 2 months, I was a packrat, and I kept track down to like $10. So when several $100 disappeared, I NOTICED! ALSO, they had to make their accounts balance, so they actually deducted the amount they stole.

There was a federal law that said values of $5000 or over had to be microfiched. Since that was too involved, they microfiched EVERYTHING! They claimed they couldn't find the microfiche of my check, and so it must not have existed. They had a hard time explaining how the teller, entry machine, etc.... saw it, and how it cleared the bank. Actually, they never did explain that. BTW the bank was security pacific national bank. Bank of america bought them. Security Pacific Bank - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2280704].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

The admin is supposedly entertaining sharing control of the internet.

I say no.

Here's a story...

Who Controls the Internet? | The Weekly Standard

It was MY understanding that countries were automatically given 100% free control of ISO 2 names relating to their government. in,pk,us,uk,ws,tv, etc.... BTW for those that don't know, there are some marketers trying to capitalize. WS=Western Samoa! TV=Tuvalu! IN=India!

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2280041].message }}

TLTheLiberator

14 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

It was MY understanding that countries were automatically given 100% free control of ISO 2 names relating to their government. in,pk,us,uk,ws,tv, etc.... BTW for those that don't know, there are some marketers trying to capitalize. WS=Western Samoa! TV=Tuvalu! IN=India!

Steve

Domain extensions are cute but who has the power to shut the net off period??

I don't believe we should share that power with any country.

TL

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2280132].message }}

John Henderson

14 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

Domain extensions are cute but who has the power to shut the net off period??

I don't believe we should share that power with any country.

TL, the United States doesn't have that power to share.

Obama could order everyone in the US to switch everything off from a Cray super-computer down to an Apple II. It still wouldn't stop the rest of the world from communicating with each other.

Remember that before the HTTP "URL" system was invented (by an Englishman! :p ) people used to e-mail each other, share files using FTP and access remote computers using Telnet. I know that IP addresses aren't as convenient as URLs, but the world could soldier on.

Do you honestly believe that Europe and the Far East would just sit here in the Dark Ages waiting for the POTUS to give us permission to use our own communication networks? :rolleyes:

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2280238].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by John Henderson

TL, the United States doesn't have that power to share.

Obama could order everyone in the US to switch everything off from a Cray super-computer down to an Apple II. It still wouldn't stop the rest of the world from communicating with each other.

Remember that before the HTTP "URL" system was invented (by an Englishman! :p ) people used to e-mail each other, share files using FTP and access remote computers using Telnet. I know that IP addresses aren't as convenient as URLs, but the world could soldier on.

Do you honestly believe that Europe and the Far East would just sit here in the Dark Ages waiting for the POTUS to give us permission to use our own communication networks? :rolleyes:

Ths DNS system could be replaced in less than a MINUTE! Companies do it EVERY DAY! Verisign and iana are special ONLY because some agency dictated THEY should be! The EU could pick a company in europe, and do the SAME! Verisign tried to get control of ALL invalid domains, some time back, and within a week or two their attempts were rendered USELESS!

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2280300].message }}

John Henderson

14 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

Verisign and iana are special ONLY because some agency dictated THEY should be!

Absolutely, and the rest of the world are probably quite content for Verisign and Iana to have this responsibility. This seems rational, since the first 4 nodes of the Arpanet were created in the United States (I'd have to grab my copy of "Where Wizards Stay Up Late" to remember exactly where they were).

Originally Posted by seasoned

The EU could pick a company in europe, and do the SAME!

Thank you, Steve! That's my point exactly.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2280578].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by John Henderson

Absolutely, and the rest of the world are probably quite content for Verisign and Iana to have this responsibility. This seems rational, since the first 4 nodes of the Arpanet were created in the United States (I'd have to grab my copy of "Where Wizards Stay Up Late" to remember exactly where they were).

Thank you, Steve! That's my point exactly.

YEAH, whatever the TLD, only ONE company can control it at a time. If MORE do, it gets too confusing. The ROOT DNS usually goes to ONE set of servers for a given TLD. Of course, a given group can change that for THEM! USUALLY, that group is a corporation. It COULD be a country or empire though.

Steve

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2280648].message }}

seasoned 14 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

Domain extensions are cute but who has the power to shut the net off period??

I don't believe we should share that power with any country.

TL

Frankly, I don't think the president even has a right to REQUEST it, let alone get it. So we shouldn't have that ability, PERIOD! That document speaks of running the name servers. It says that "The 'United States' could, in theory, set up a renegade, uncensored Internet. But there would likely be significant public distrust, substantial political acrimony, and a great deal of hesitation.". ****BULL****! It would NEVER take off! ALSO, it would cost a FORTUNE! And HOW do you get companies like amazon.com to join. I guess they may try though.

On the OTHER hand, people anywhere COULD do that sort of thing. People in the US HAVE setup renegade DNS servers! One agency DID do it, and got MAJOR networks, like AOL, to go along. I'm sure they are STILL around today. They provided NON sanctioned domain names on their OWN servers. Normally, this is effectively impossible, but there IS a file on name servers to control it, and they simply had several of the nations biggest networks add a few new records. They didn't use, infringe on, or bypass iana, they merely provided TLDs that didn't follow set standards and weren't approved. Of course, IANA is now breaking protocol so, if there hasn't been a conflict, there probably soon will be.

Steve
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2280291].message }}

TLTheLiberator

14 years ago

OK, can the US shut down the internet or not???

Who has control of the internet if anyone???

I'm not sure but I thought we could/did.

Someone correct me.

TL

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled. -- Mark Twain

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2280344].message }}

seasoned

14 years ago

Originally Posted by TLTheLiberator

OK, can the US shut down the internet or not???

Who has control of the internet if anyone???

I'm not sure but I thought we could/did.

Someone correct me.

TL

A few US government entities and companies have control of US TLDs and common TLDs(com, net, org, gov, edu, for example). A new bill supposedly passed that COULD allow the US government to disable the entire US portion of the internet. Outside of that, only phone companies, and some corporations really have the power. I can't speak for other countries. THEY TEND to almost mirror our TLD system in a way, and the systems are probably ALSO telco and company controlled, and that is IT. But EVERY unix system has a DNS server. Almost every computer today, INCLUDING windows, has a kind of poorman's DNS ALSO!

Steve

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2280638].message }}

John Henderson 14 years ago

Originally Posted by seasoned

A new bill supposedly passed that COULD allow the US government to disable the entire US portion of the internet.

Wouldn't it just be easier/less destructive/more realistic to cut all internet connections between the United States and the rest of the world? Surely, in the event of some kind of cyber-attack on the US, "raising the drawbridge" would be just as effective as "disabling the entire US portion of the internet"? :confused:
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2281159].message }}

Dave Patterson

14 years ago

If you'll pay attention to newsclips you'll see the Big O has a small silver satchel handcuffed to his OTHER wrist.

Inside that satchel is a black button.

THAT button shuts off the internet....

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Professional Googler

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2281025].message }}

Kenster

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Dave Patterson

If you'll pay attention to newsclips you'll see the Big O has a small silver satchel handcuffed to his OTHER wrist.

Inside that satchel is a black button.

THAT button shuts off the internet....

Haha, I thought you were talking about Oprah at first. I was like darn, I knew Oprah was powerful, but thats real powerful haha.

I Aint the sharpest tool in the shed :p

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2281076].message }}

Dave Patterson

14 years ago

Originally Posted by Kenster

Haha, I thought you were talking about Oprah at first. I was like darn, I knew Oprah was powerful, but thats real powerful haha.

I Aint the sharpest tool in the shed :p

It's OK....she probably has one too...

Thanks

Signature

Professional Googler

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2281092].message }}

Orator

14 years ago

If it DOES happen, then let me tell you, we have worse problems than just
losing 4 months of income.

The man has a point. I seriously think we would all have bigger issues to deal with. Steve cut to the heart of it.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2282758].message }}

birdfood

14 years ago

You'd see WoW addicts throwing themselves of buildings, bridges, park benches etc etc

You would not be able to move with out stepping over a dead or trying to die internet game addict

Thanks

Signature

Marketing Laser Glasses

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2282931].message }}

Rick B

14 years ago

Obviously, the right of the President to shut down the internet would be used only in an unlikely and severe situation.

The President also has the right to launch the U.S. thermo-nuclear arsenal. In that case you will probably need to save up 200 years of income!

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[2308152].message }}

Better Have Four Months of Income Saved Up

Trending Topics

Infographic: How B2B marketers on LinkedIn can maximise their efforts for better audience reach

Any thoughts on golf's latest phenom...Scottie Scheffler??

What's the Best IM-Related Skill to Learn Today That Can Help in the Future?

best high quality crypto traffic.

Some interesting stats about brand comms