Slashdot Mirror
US To Release International Cyber Strategy Today
vivIsel writes "Today, the Obama Administration will be releasing its first-ever strategy for 'international cooperation in cyberspace.' Following on Friday's release of the White House domestic cybersecurity proposal, this strategy document will govern how the US behaves on the international stage — including around big issues like internet governance and internet freedom. The strategy's unveiling, which will be keynoted by Hillary Clinton with remarks by Secretaries Holder, Locke and Napolitano, will be streamed live on whitehouse.gov starting at 3:00PM EDT today."
It will include yet even more revenue, and assume yet even more power over the people, all the while making the business of government more lucrative for those at the top of the pyramid.
I can't put my finger on it, but this all seems very, very familiar, as if this cyclical expansion of government has been repeating for 200 years.
The US strategy will be:
1) Look for copyright infringement (or poker, maybe even porn)
2) Seize domains
3) Profit
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Let me summarize: "We'll use a bunch of flowery language like "freedom" and "democratic," but in the end, we'll do WTF we want, while you'll bend over and like it."
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
I bet you look really cute in your blue cheerleader outfit.
1. "violate the common sense rights of everyone we can find a legal loophole for or write a new law to allow"
2. "also do anything else we think we can get away with"
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
Our campaign contributors and special interest lobbies^H^H^H^H^H^Hintelligence agencies have indicated that pirates^Hterrorists are causing massive profit losses to our chief campaign supporters^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hinfringements on our patriotic American freedoms, so therefore we decided we now have the power to confiscate any domain name for any reason without due process. GOD BLESS AMERICA!
No doubt this is one of the things the US Government is pushing (just like they did before) as part of their strategy to "unify" cyber strategy.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
FTA: It said the document outlines the US agenda "for partnering with other nations and peoples to ensure the prosperity, security, and openness that we seek in our increasingly networked world."
And the |-|4c|3r$ will be right there reading the strategy and figuring out more ways to exploit the net and make money or engage in other activities (terrorism, etc.). This sounds like a useless document.
FBI should really put up ads on the seized domains. The more high value sites they seize, the more money they would make.
That way we wouldn't have to see this story twice, and all the foolish speculation that's filling this submission.
For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
"US To Release International Cyber Strategy" - don't people get busted for releasing US strategies? Isn't that what all the fuss about Wikipedia is for?
So now they're just saving the leakers some (jail?) time, or does this mean something else?
This tagline was transcoded to result in at least one smirk. If you experience failure to smirk, please consult your Gen
Whatever the politics are, I'm glad that things like this are being streamed over the Internet. I wish that there was more streaming (like a 24/7 stream of the floor of the House and Senate), hopefully that will happen in the future.
Love sees no species.
Shame, I can't afford the bandwidth to watch the internet stream live because my country's internet infrastructure is so backwards. Oh, well.
Your ridicule is inappropriate, and you appear to be part of the problem.
Caveat Utilitor
Clinton's remarks "will address the role of cyberspace in advancing the full range of US interests and the importance of international cooperation in advancing cyberspace as a foreign policy priority."
The 'full range of US interests' include, but are not limited to, a two-tiered internet, painfully slow transfer speeds, and uncontrolled spying and invasions of privacy.
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
Comment removed based on user account deletion
"1. Pull the plug on Grandma, as per Republican Budget plans
2. Tax cuts for the rich paid for by pulling the plug on medical care for the poor
3. Transfer of American natural resources to oil companies, who will sell us back these resources at a 500% markup
4. Vote for the same Republicans that just ruined the country
5. Lose the Senate in 2012 (enables moneygrab/poormurder)
6. Censor the internet on behalf of the MAFIAA"
You seem to be buying the stagecraft. The Democrats are just playing Dean Martin to the Republican's Jerry Lewis. There has to be a remotely credible opposition to facilitate the transition to oligarchy without the frog jumping out of the pot. As long as a significant portion of the populace thinks the Democrats present a realistic threat to corporate integration into government, Democrats (and Republicans) will keep getting elected, and keep approving corporatist handovers like the health care package.
People need to believe there is a balance struck by opposing forces, so they imagine that Democrats and Republicans are not on the same side. The CItizens United ruling (and most critically its affirmation of the utterly antithetical-to-American-democracy concept of corporate person-hood) put a bullet in the head of that dying notion.
I completely understand, and agree, that there is at the moment no more credible opposition to the oligarchy than the Democrats. But that is only because it is a two-man show and their role is meant to be less obviously hostile to We The People, not because they are dancing to a different piper's tune.
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
6. [Democrats] will censor the internet on behalf of the MAFIAA
Fixed that for you.
I noticed your negativeity was directed toward the R's, but both D's and R's are basically the same. They are simply two branches of the same big government party. Both have pledged to sell-out the citizens to the money-holders (i.e. the corporations). Both have proven themselves to be warmongers, power-hungry, and untrustworthy.
IMHO
Remember COICA came from *this* administration. The copyright czar came from *this* administration. And so on. Right now I'm not seeing much difference between the current president and the old Shrub (junior).
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
Buy all brand name products and OS's, plug ears, wear rose colored glasses and pray... Lighting hair on fire and running around option required.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Yeah, because the (D) can do no wrong, and the (R) can do no right. Here's a summary of counter points ...
1) Grandma's plug is being decided Obamacare Death Panels due to lack of unlimited government funding to keep 85 year olds alive.
2) Poor don't pay taxes, therefore all tax cuts come from the "rich".Can't give tax breaks to those who don't pay any.
3) And the Government makes 10 times what Big Oil does, off Big Oil. And I suggest you don't drive your car ever again. Ride your bike, in the snow, uphill both ways.
4) It was (D) and (R) that ruined the country. Collaborative Effort my friend.
5) That is entirely possible. After the Obamacare debacle the (D) should lose the senate. The problem is that it will be (R) that replaces them. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
6) MAFIAA is one of the (D) party sponsors. It is Hollywood, who are hardly big sponsors of the (R) party.
The solution is not (D) or (R) but yourself. If we only took responsibility for ourselves, we would need a whole lot less governance. People who want more government usually don't want to be responsible for themselves and want big brother or momma' s teet .
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
They do. http://www.pokerstars.com/ Here's an example. There's an ad for the FBI :)
And, make sure that the US is allowed to do things which if "certain governments" tried to do, the US government would talk about how those governments are suppressing freedom and democracy. (Syria, Iran, China for instance)
I really do fully expect to see a bit of a blatant double standard as the US proclaims they need to be able to do this, while at the same time saying governments they disagree with shouldn't.
Of course, it will be justified as serving the cause of Truth and Justice and that we should never worry about the intentions or actions of the US government.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
From the Article: 'It said the document outlines the US agenda "for partnering with other nations and peoples to ensure the prosperity, security, and openness that we seek in our increasingly networked world."'
Let's see: Prosperity, Security, and Openness.
Let me guess -- in that order, right?
Here's how it plays out:
"What's first on the agenda today, gentlemen?"
"Prosperity"
"All-right, I asked around, and all the lobbyists in my outer office agree on how to maximize prosperity. We should give total control of popular content to the MAFIAA and the Cable and Telcos. Next?"
"Security"
"Right; absolute authority to shut down anyone, anywhere, anytime, for any reason, without having to document anything goes to National Cyber Command. Next?"
"Oppenness"
"Perfect -- nations we don't like, and which are small enough that we can kick their ass, have to allow their people to speak freely on the Internet."
"Awesome, I think we're done. Who's up for a round of golf?"
"Now hang on, there -- we have to make this look like it was a challenging struggle between opposing voices interested only in the best principles of American democracy."
"Right, let's get a couple of the spin doctors to rewrite the health-care debate script. Most of the public bought that."
"Hahaha, that's awesome. Make it so."
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
1. Pull the plug on Grandma, as per Republican Budget plans
But it was fine when the Dems were going to do it with health care reforms I suppose. But those evil Republicans are just horrible for doing it now. In the end, "we the people" are the ones that are going to be screwed by people with both D and R after their name.
2. Tax cuts for the rich paid for by pulling the plug on medical care for the poor
It's a good thing we have other altruistic parties that want to give ponies to everyone.
3. Transfer of American natural resources to oil companies, who will sell us back these resources at a 500% markup
It's probably even more than that, but to be fair Amazon stopped selling that do-it-yourself oil refinery kit.
4. Vote for the same Republicans that just ruined the country
And the Democrats that did before that, and the Reps before that, and the... ad nauseum. Until enough people in this country wake up, we will keep going down this spiral until then, or it all collapses.
6. Censor the internet on behalf of the MAFIAA
It's a good thing we have Joe Biden to fight those MAFIAA bastards.
Bingo. Classic good cop/bad cop, with the roles being reversed every other generation or so....
Their target is wikileaks.
The US has become a second URSS.
I don't mind having an overlord... as long as he does the job right. I'm sick of our current incompetent ones.
The rest is history.
You have to play by our rules, we don't, and we can change them whenever we like.
The end of the beginning of the end for the Internet.
This is the beginning of the middle of its long slow death by a thousand cuts.
Indeed, it's the same everywhere. Here in the UK, 25 years ago the left was socialist, now the left has moved so far over to the right, they can't even see where the middle ground used to be (interestingly most of the freedoms that were granted to the banks to screw us all over in the 90's/00's were granted by the "left"). There is no real choice left any more and there are no checks and balances on the excesses of either party because they both seem to have the same goals.
Small note of interest - China approached the US a few months ago and asked permission to translate the Guidelines for Smart Grid Security into Chinese (which was granted). If you haven't looked at it before, at least look at the introduction - it's pretty comprehensive, and comes from the NIST Smart Grid Interoperability Panel (SGIP), which is a partnership between NIST, academia, and private and public companies (yes, Google too).
>>>There never were any death panels in the healthcare reform package, even Fox news has admitted to the fabrication.
Actually there are death panels (just set-up two months ago) but of course they are not called that. They are "life advisement panels". Kinda like how the Libyan War is not a war, but "ballistic peacekeeping" (or something like that). These panels advise people they should accept 80 years as long enough, voluntarily pull the plug, and save the government money.
"There will necessarily be rationing of healthcare." - Ezekiel Emanuel, new czar of health
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
will be "ICE, ICE, Baby."
Yes, how dare he not provide footnotes. After all, you provided citations and references for each of your carefully-researched, exhaustively studied counterpoints, relying on hard facts and numbers, rather than appeals to emotion and "common sense" that you no doubt picked up from some politicians' talking points.
From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilization#Fall_of_civilizations
"Joseph Tainter in "The Collapse of Complex Societies" suggested that there were diminishing returns to complexity, due to which, as states achieved a maximum permissible complexity, they would decline when further increases actually produced a negative return. Tainter suggested that Rome achieved this figure in the 2nd Century AD."
The suggestion is that civilizations tend to refuse to accept going down any path to a more sensible solution than collapse because every move towards better social health would be more painful than just business-as-usual. Of course, ideally, that is what political leadership (not political followership?) is for, to get people to make the hard choices and improve overall social health.
More on social pyramids and economics:
"The Mythology of Wealth"
http://www.conceptualguerilla.com/?q=node/402
As long as there is a huge and growing rich/poor divide in this world, driven in part by increasing automation decreasing the value of most human labor, and we fail to do anything about that overall situation (like institute a basic income), our country will be at increasing risk for all sorts of different directions, of which cyber threats are only one set of issues. Here is a document prepared for President Kennedy and delivered to President Johnson in 1964, that is only more and more true in some ways:
"The Triple Revolution Memorandum: Cybernation, Weaponry, Human Rights"
http://educationanddemocracy.org/FSCfiles/C_CC2a_TripleRevolution.htm
"The fundamental problem posed by the cybernation revolution in the U.S. is that it invalidates the general mechanism so far employed to undergird people's rights as consumers. Up to this time economic resources have been distributed on the basis of contributions to production, with machines and men competing for employment on somewhat equal terms. In the developing cybernated system, potentially unlimited output can be achieved by systems of machines which will require little cooperation from human beings. As machines take over production from men, they absorb an increasing proportion of resources while the men who are displaced become dependent on minimal and unrelated government measure -- unemployment insurance, social security, welfare payments. These measures are less and less able to disguise a historic paradox: That a substantial proportion of the population is subsisting on minimal incomes, often below the poverty line, at a time when sufficient productive potential is available to supply the needs of everyone in the U.S.
The existence of this paradox is denied or ignored by conventional economic analysis. The general economic approach argues that potential demand, which if filled would raise the number of jobs and provide incomes to those holding them, is underestimated. Most contemporary economic analysis states that all of the available labor force and industrial capacity is required to meet the needs of consumers and industry and to provide adequate public services: Schools, parks, roads, homes, decent cities, and clean water and air. It is further argued that demand could be increased, by a variety of standard techniques, to any desired extent by providing money and machines to improve the conditions of the billions of impoverished people elsewhere in the world, who need food and shelter, clothes and machinery and everything else the industrial nations take for granted.
There is no question that cybernation does increase the potential for the provision of funds to neglected public sectors. Nor is there any question that cybernation would make possible the abolition of poverty at home and abroad. But the industrial system does not
A 21st century issue: the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those still thinking in terms of scarcity.
The incredible thing is, that the british electorate just gave away the chance to end the corrupt two party system. They rejected the voting law reform which would have led to more coalition governments that are usual in most north & central european democracies.
More party systems give more parties and new parties a realistic chance of getting to power and thus are a very good balance against the corruption of power.
This seems slightly different than the commercial death panels that stop the checks and advise you to prove it wasn't pre-existing, and save themselves money.
I think you underestimate just how much I just dont care.
I feel so guilty
I was away from Pokerstars for a few years, and earlier this year I used it to make a little extra cash. I cashed out some money, and a few days later wham!
When people ask me why I am a Libertarian, I tell them that all I want to do is play poker online and maybe not wear my seatbelt at certain times if I don't want to. Seriously, is that too much to ask?
Someone flopped a steamer in the gene pool.
Would it be more humble if he were to pick a side and defend the position with extremism like the majority of the vocal do?
Anyhow IANAD but you might want to get that raw nerve looked at.
I think you underestimate just how much I just dont care.
True. The ONE good thing to come from Pelosicare Bill was denying insurance companies the ability to refuse service for pre-existing conditions.
Anyway: I'd rather deal with neither of them (government or insurance) and just pay my dentist or doctor directly with cash. The only insurance I have is for major illness, when it exceeds $25,000 cost. There's nobody, not congress nor nationwide, that can say "no" when I'm paying directly.
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
H is not necessarily "humble", of course; H itself is a term.
Cite a specific instance of this happening, or admit that you made it up. Those are your only possible choices.