Slashdot Mirror
Clinton Calls For "Ground Rules" Protecting Internet
dbune writes "Hillary Clinton has called for ground rules to protect the World Wide Web against wrongdoing and harm after the world watched as Egyptian authorities cut Internet access during its recent political crisis. She said 'For the United States, the choice is clear; on the spectrum of Internet freedom, we place ourselves on the side of openness.'"
Hillary,
Talk to your boss and let him know that a "kill switch" is a bad idea.
Thanks,
The Internet
--- What parts of "shall make no law", "shall not be infringed", and "shall not be violated" don't you understand?
'For the United States, the choice is clear; on the spectrum of Internet freedom, we place ourselves on the side of openness,'
Good. Now tell the RIAA and MPAA to leave us the hell alone.
> "For the United States, the choice is clear; on the spectrum of Internet freedom, we place ourselves on the side of openness"
Oh that's good - I'll let Julian Assange know.
we place ourselves on the side of openness
Horsepuckey. They're just jealous that the same shutdown ability doesn't exist here in the Untied States.
"Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
For the United States, the choice is clear; on the spectrum of Internet freedom, we place ourselves on the side of openness
That's quite rich considering your government just shut down 84,000 websites "by mistake": http://torrentfreak.com/u-s-government-shuts-down-84000-websites-by-mistake-110216/
...is to allow the private entities which own the servers, networks, technology, and businesses to manage it themselves.
For many organizations, the internet is about profit, growth and accessibility. Those organizations have an obligation to ensure the functional operation and security of their systems, if they'd like to say doing what they do. No connection = no revenue. Having government involvement with the internet will hinder one or all of those facets, even if the intent is for the betterment of society and the world. Just like the economy -- eventually it will right itself without too many dicks stirring the pot.
In short, Secretary Clinton, GTFO of its business.
What else can happen when an unstoppable force collides with an immovable object?
Yes, nothing to see here...it's "openness" as long as it is in the best interest of the United States. What a load of bs. DNS records all over the world taken over by force, Julian Assange threatened with assassinations, kill switches, patriot acts...just a plantation with a different name.
I read in the newspaper that the US will help the citicens of Iran to keep the internet running. Obama and Clinton promised that. I find that extremely hypocritic behaviour. Where was the US when Egypt's internet was shut down? Oh yeah, they liked Mubarak so they did nothing. But they don't like Ahmadinejad so now they help the Iranian people. And in the meantime Obama wants a kill switch so he can switch the internet off whenever he wants.
-- Cheers!
Hmmm meanwhile at home they are pressing an anti-piracy law spending millions of $$$ for corporate benefit..meanwhile unemployment is a record levels (15-20 %). Is this how we want our tax money spent? Not me. RIAA and MPAA you enforce your IP, not the American public.
"The Brady Bunch is back...working homicide"
From Wikipedia:
In baseball, ground rules are special rules particular to each baseball park (grounds) in which the game is played. Unlike the well-defined playing field of most other sports, the playing area of a baseball field extends to an outfield fence in fair territory and the stadium seating in foul territory. The unique design of each ballpark, including fences, dugouts, bullpens, railings, stadium domes, photographer's wells and TV camera booths, requires that rules be defined to handle situations in which these objects may interact or interfere with the ball in play or with the players.
So a "ground rule" that warrants an Internet kill switch in my ballpark, doesn't necessarily mean that you can hit the kill switch in your ballpark.
In other words, the US is allowed to hit the Internet kill switch in their ballpark (ground rule). Egypt isn't (no ground rule).
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
Damn! The first time I read Clingon instea of Clinton. That would be newsworthy alright! ( I need more coffee )
Let's be real for a minute indeed. I suppose you're talking about the "protection" the USA offered to other countries against the evil USSR, even though both countries had enough cumulative fire power to blow up the planet ten times over. How much do you think such a promise was worth? Sorry, but "In case of a global thermonuclear war we'll make sure the planet will be blown up only twice over" still doesn't sound very safe to me.
Rest assured, the real reason it became fashionable to bash the US is all the freedom people lost worldwide due to the politics of W. post 9/11. USA may get a thumbs up from me for finally ending the cold war, but two thumbs down for the 9/11 aftermath.
Visit http://ringbreak.dnd.utwente.nl/~mrjb/growingbettersoftware to download your free copy of the book
I firmly believe the revolution in Egypt was aided by closing the internet. People walked away from their keyboards and got outside. If they wanted to see what was happening they had the Al jazeera sattelite at a freinds house. But without communncation their imaginations could soar a bit and they could look awayf from the screen.
Circuses are well known to keep the roman masses happy.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
Hillary, via her official position as Sect. of State was advocating not just for the security of the internets but was also encouraging dissent and the tolerance of it by all governments. How about Hill you go talk to the Justice dept. about tolerating dissent in this country too? Or is it ok for the US to harrass, track and arrest those who dissent and wish (insert # of elected officials here) removed from power and/or the actual form of government changed? This applies to those on the left/middle/right who at any given time in the past 20 years have advocated peacefully for such ideas.
Frankly, I do not believe the US (federally or at state/local level) would tolerate the kind of events which took place in Egypt or Tunisia.
However, let's be real for a minute. The kill switch is a bad idea, but we all should know that the government would only use it in the case of massive attacks from a foreign entity
Which 'reality' do you live in where the government would never abuse its power for its own ends?
And I applaud them. But will you back them with equally bold actions?
93rd rule of Slashdot: No matter how obvious my sarcasm is, my comment will be taken seriously by someone.
"I'm from the Government and I'm here to help."
What a load of crap.
First, the House was controlled by Democrats for 4 years (2 under Bush, and 2 under Obama). If the Democraps really wanted to push something through, they had 2 years to do it while they had control of both Congress and the White House.
Leaving Afghanistan is NOT a bad idea, just like it was not a bad idea to pack up and leave Vietnam. It's a quagmire, and we're doing nothing but propping up a corrupt government, while the insurgents hide just over the border in Cambodia^HPakistan.
Closing Guantanamo is a matter of Constitutionality. They haven't been charged with a crime, so keeping them is unconstitutional. The President took an oath to uphold the Constitution, and he's breaking that oath. Whining about a lack of support from Congress is just that, a lame excuse.
Propping up a dictator in Egypt is OK because we "need to play nice with Israel"? WTF? It's very simple: do we, or don't we, approve of dictatorships? In my book, dictatorships are always bad. If they aren't, then why don't we have one here?
How is France's treatment of immigrants shameful? Their immigrants aren't assimilating, and the French people are free to make whatever laws they want to deal with that. If the immigrants don't like it, they can go home to their wonderful home countries. Remember, they don't have freedom of religion built into their constitution like we do, and there may be a good reason for that: our freedom of religion gets us crap like the FLDS and Scientology, and a culture where fundamentalism runs rampant (about half the US population is fundamentalist--how does that compare to Afghanistan?).
See, it applies to both sides. heh.
That was actually my point and why I have no hope of ever trying to convince anyone of anything discussing politics. It's impossible to compete with self-inflicted brainwashing via tv and radio.