Slashdot Mirror


Government Finishes Internet Study -- 7 years late

djp928 writes "A study commisioned by Congress in 1998 to report on internet traffic has finally been published -- 7 years, two presidents, and one internet boom/bust later. Some of their findings include "DNS is good" and "We should probably have some more TLDs""

7 of 444 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Here's another study 7 years to late... by RiotXIX · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Wow, a typo ('too' not 'to') and offtopic, and replying to the wrong parent (should have been to "Typical government study...")!! Looks like I'm burning through my karma today...

    --
    "You know you don't act like a scientist, you're more like a game show host." Dana Barret
  2. Wrong topic by Lispy · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    This should be part of "It's funny, laugh!".

  3. Internet died yesterday? by DagNasty420 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I know this is off topic, but I've been searching the web since it happened hoping for a news article. Last night at about 1 AM eastern the gaming server I was in died, XFire (gaming chat) died, AIM died, and my web sites which were on 1and1.com servers were down, yet google and tons of other servers worked fine. I know it wasn't my connection because the aim servers went completely down for about a minute, as well as the xfire servers because I signed back on as soon as it all came back up and noone else on my buddy list was on out of the 12 or so that was on before it happened. i asked them all and they said they got disconnected. They all live in different states and have different ISPs. I checked my modem logs and nothing had happened with my connection. I went back to the game server and everyone said it "crashed" not realized what I had realized. Something weird happened, and I'm curious as to what it was. Oh, and the game server was in Texas.

  4. Re:The results are in: by abigor · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Bah! IP addresses are just DNS for MACs. 0x2004F200696d for me!

  5. Re:$1 million by kz45 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    And Congress seemed to care more that Clinton got head from a fat girl than they care about Bush starting a war on deceit (WMD's anyone?)

    well, if he wasn't so busy getting head from a fat girl, maybe we wouldn't have had 9/11.

  6. Re:$1 million by bombadillo · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Or maybe if the Republican controlled congress wasn't squandering so much time and attention over the fat girl in Clinton's Second term we wouldn't have had 911. Oh wait 911 happened under Bush. Considering that we now know that Bush was more concerned with Iraq and didn't listen to his number 1 terrorism advisor. An advisor that happened to server under 4 presidents both Republican and Democrats. It's quite clear that Bush is the one who "blew it" and not the fat girl.

  7. Re:$1 million by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I'm not going into the Clinton deal, but on Iraq and WMDs. Congress isn't going to go after Bush on Iraq because Congress voted to support beating the hell out of Iraq with a B-52 for a wide variety of reasons, WMD wasn't the only one.

    It's the Joint Resolution to Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq from 2002 or PUBLIC LAW 107-243--OCT. 16, 2002. Some highlights

    "Whereas in 1998 Congress concluded that Iraq's continuing weapons of mass destruction programs threatened vital United States interests and international peace and security, declared Iraq to be in "material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations" and urged the President "to take appropriate action, in accordance with the Constitution and relevant laws of the United States, to bring Iraq into compliance with its international obligations" (Public Law 105-235);

    Whereas Iraq both poses a continuing threat to the national security of the United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region and remains in material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations by, among other things, continuing to possess and develop a significant chemical and biological weapons capability, actively seeking a nuclear weapons capability, and supporting and harboring terrorist organizations;

    Whereas Iraq persists in violating resolutions of the United Nations Security Council by continuing to engage in brutal repression of its civilian population thereby threatening international peace and security in the region, by refusing to release, repatriate, or account for non-Iraqi citizens wrongfully detained by Iraq, including an American serviceman, and by failing to return property wrongfully seized by Iraq from Kuwait;

    Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its continuing hostility toward, and willingness to attack, the United States, including by attempting in 1993 to assassinate former President Bush and by firing on many thousands of occasions on United States and Coalition Armed Forces engaged in enforcing the resolutions of the United Nations Security Council;

    Whereas members of al Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq;

    Whereas Iraq continues to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations, including organizations that threaten the lives and safety of American citizens;"

    And the big point

    "SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.

    (a) AUTHORIZATION. The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to

    (1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and

    (2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council Resolutions regarding Iraq."

    Bush didn't start the War in Iraq on deceit, Congress laid out a list of reasons for the United States to go to war.

    http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20 021002-2.html

    http://www.c-span.org/resources/pdf/hjres114.pdf