Slashdot Mirror
Net Companies Consider the "Nuclear Option" To Combat SOPA
Atypical Geek writes "Alec Liu of Fox News reports that Amazon, Facebook and Google are considering a coordinated blackout of the internet to protest SOPA, the Stop Online Privacy Act being debated in Congress. From the article: 'Such a move is drastic. And though the details of exactly how it would work are unclear, it's already under consideration, according to Markham Erickson, the executive director of NetCoalition, a trade association that includes the likes of Google, PayPal, Yahoo, and Twitter.
With the Senate debating the SOPA legislation at the end of January, it looks as if the tech industry's top dogs are finally adding bite to their bark, something CNET called "the nuclear option." "When the home pages of Google.com, Amazon.com, Facebook.com, and their Internet allies simultaneously turn black with anti-censorship warnings that ask users to contact politicians about a vote in the U.S. Congress the next day on SOPA," Declan McCullagh wrote, "you'll know they're finally serious."'"
...not among politicians, but among all the kiddies who can not communicate anymore but via Facebook. Under-18 Doomsday guaranteed.
Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
And when they don't in fact do that, are we expected to be at all surprised?
"Alec Liu of Fox News reports that Amazon, Facebook and Google are considering a coordinated a coordinated blackout of the internet to protest SOPA, the Stop Online Privacy Act ... *SNIP*
PIRACY act, it's the Stop Online PIRACY act. Talk about a grammar failure. /GrammarNazi.
If you believe in privacy, and believe you have "nothing to hide" at the same time, you're a goddammed idiot
I'd love to see it. I could believe it from Amazon and maybe Google, but also Facebook? That's tougher.
Paranoia check, am I the only one whose links fail to post to their failbook wall only when they're political speech, and never just some vapid crap?
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Let people access facebook, etc, but only in a tiny little window. Have the rest black with a message "Call your politician right now to remove this".
Google, Facebook, Amazon,Yahoo, etc should continue as normal but show the supports of censorship just how much fun being censored can be!
Google/Yahoo can simply don't return any results that include the names of Senators, and Representatives that supported the act, bonus points if you can still detect NEGATIVE news about them and return those results, don't return listings for products from companies that support the ACT on Amazon/Google/Yahoo, Facebook stop having the profiles come up in searches and don't let any posts hit news feeds even to people who are all ready friends or followers.
Frankly after such a black out of those organizations I'd be real surprised if the thing passes, and if it does is not repealed in a week. It would also give a big boost to those who don't support this stuff as it will put them front and center before the consumer for a change.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
You want panic? That'll be panic the likes of which you've never seen.
Have gnu, will travel.
... and do it. Either you have a backbone or you don't. Pick a day, middle of the week, say Jan 12th, and just do it. Announce you're doing it, and watch the others fall in line. True leadership doesn't wait.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Not really. A private company can decide to shut down at any moment, there is nothing inherently wrong with this. When a government decides to shut down private companies at will though, that's when shit hits the proverbial fan.
What's interesting is that despite their size and financial power, the technology companies are very poorly organised and do very little lobbying when you compare them to the media companies. Which is why we get such horribly lopsided legislation such as SOPA.
If the tech. companies actually got themselves organised in Washington instead of pulling silly stunts, they might actually find they can get a lot more done.
... and underlines the travesty that democracy has become. It's bad enough corporations write the legislation now they're going to effectively start voting on them by themselves.. this should scare the living daylights out of us and not be some kind a source for celebration.
"...and their Internet allies simultaneously turn black with anti-censorship warnings that ask users to contact politicians about a vote in the U.S. Congress the next day on SOPA."
Are they going to geo-locate IP addresses so those of us that don't have a congress-critter to talk to don't see what, to us, is a pointless message?
http://harridanic.com
A simple splash screen is fine.
Except that, once SOPA is enacted, you will be greeted with a 404 when you try to login to your favourite site...forever.
The point being that once SOPA is enacted, everybody becomes hostage.
cheers,
What will most likely happen is you'll get a black box on the page with the message, then a button to click to continue on with your search/purchase/whatever.
I would fully support complete uavailability from these websites for a day/set time period - it would really be effective. But it'll never happen as long as there's money to be made/lost.
replacing DNS. With browser manufacturers onboard, it wouldn't be nearly as disruptive as one might think - particularly as nothing more than a new, preferred method that lived alongside the old method. Or another nuclear options is some combination of this and encrypting/onion-routing the entire Web, so that no one can tell where content is actually coming from.
What TFA mentions is an attempt to barter by threatening suicide - not war.
What a bizarre thing to say. A blackout of a handful of websites, especially when self-imposed, is hardly "blocking the internet." It's not in the same league as the government fucking up DNS for everyone whether they consent or not.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
And that attitude is why we are in this mess in the first place. You are all for it, as long as you are not inconvenienced.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Yes, exactly! Getting the people involved is NOT the solution! The real solution is that they just have to offer a bigger bribe than the media companies!
Isn't a collusive action like this no better than the legislation these corporations are trying to stop? Blocking the internet is blocking the internet, regardless of who does it and why.
There's a difference between a protest a few hours long and a law that will change the landscape for decades to come.
When the politicians admit
a) they don't understand the tech
b) are willing to take the positions of the media companies that donate to them
So the US is led by ludites who have sold their favor to the corporations. And this (the US) is the self descibed "leader of the free world".
Where is the power of the people in this process? Where is the representation of the taxed?
Where is the educated and informed action that is supposed to happen in a democracy?
Do we need more proof we are living in a corporatocracy ?
It is a good idea, if the block shows a notice about the issue at hand. Wikipedia Italy did the same to protest something similar.
SOPA/PIPA in the end forces self-censorship, Americans might as well try an early taste of it. Also, nobody in their right mind should keep their e-business there, and its about time the world breaks with ICANN and switch to alternatives like OpenNIC.
I don't agree with that "nuclear" wording made by CNET. For a moment i though either the nuclear power industry was involved and would agree to a literal "blackout" or something unlikely involving weapons of mass destruction...
Also i hope they make clear this is something concerning USA legislative branch, aka Congress, and its their citizens the ones getting the worst. Might be painful at first, but The World will learn to route around America. So the "blackouts" should be limited to American IPs.
The notice might also show a list of who are supporting this bill, and call for boycotts, go daddy style; an action which seems to have gotten some people nervous.
Artix
Your Linux, your init.
No. In this case you havecompanies who ownthe resources in question deciding to make them unavailable. In the other case you have the government deciding to make the resources it does not own or control unavailable based onthe say-so of any given third party and a judge's approval.
What's the difference between Facebook, Google, et. al. taking themselves offline compared to the government doing it for them? From an end user's perspective, there is no difference.
This is the most idiotic thing I've heard anyone say in a while.
Your minor inconvenience is a small price to pay if we can avoid the major catastrophe of SOPA.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
I have to second what the AC said below. That is the most idiotic thing I've heard in a long time.
You're really asking us what the difference is between choosing not to say something or having your government making sure you don't say a given thing? If you are a US citizen AND you would say such a thing, I suggest you print out your Constitution and Declaration of Independence and henceforth use it to wipe your ass with.
Wow.
I'm not "oh shit"-ing because there might be a global demonstration against what the US government is attempting to do. I'm "oh shit"-ing because many businesses are willing to interrupt their business to get notice and make a stand. Of course, this is so they can preserve what they have now, but this is also "oh shit" because they are seeing the future beyond tomorrow or the next quarter.
It's getting serious.
instead of blocking everyone, why not send requests from .us or gov domains to a custom page or block entirely.
--
It's worth noting that the Italian Wikipedia actually did shut down for a few days, in response to a proposed law in Italy that they thought would have made it basically illegal for them to operate (apparently, it would have allowed anyone to force a website to publish a retraction of anything said about them with minimal judicial oversight). Here's the Slashdot story on the issue. They hid all content on the site while they were opposing the proposal. So not only has this happened, on Wikipedia, but at least one major website's actually gone through with a threat like that in the past. I guess it makes it more likely that they'll go through with it again, if necessary.
(1)DOCOMEFROM!2~.2'~#1WHILE:1<-"'?.1$.2'~'"':1/.1$.2'~#0"$#65535'"$"'"'&.1$.2'~'#0$#65535'"$#0'~#32767$#1"
Alec Liu of Fox News reports that Amazon, Facebook and Google are considering a coordinated blackout of the internet to protest SOPA
Even if Congress relents, they should do it. It would be just too cool of a spectacle not to!
It would also be fun to read the next day in the news how American office worker productivity had a temporary spike upwards.
>Ah, more fearmongering. No, my personal site will never be affected by SOPA because I generate all its content myself. My own photography, videos, thoughts and data feeds.
Someone, maybe me, maybe someone else accuses you of infringing, whether true or not. Your upstream gets 100 percent protection from liability if they cut you off and none if they don't, because that's how "good faith" is defined in the bill.
And I, as the accuser, do not suffer any consequences for false accusation.
Guess what happens to your site.
Go ahead, guess.
--
BMO
Google, Facebook and Amazon should block access from their public IPs, Facebook should shutdown accounts of SOPA supporters and Google should remove search results for them. This includes government IPs and accounts.
Stop playing nice. Make life troublesome for them.
Fearmongering?
Let's suppose someone from Time-Warner decides that "your own photography" resembles theirs? "your own videos" resemble theirs (how could *anyone* possibly have the same or similar ideas as anyone else?)
Once *someone-with-more-pull ($$)* than you decides that you're infringing on their widespread copyright/trademarks/patents, you're doomed.
You may feel that you're immune, but you won't be; there simply aren't enough checks and balances to ensure you're immune. The dollars win every time.
cheers,
because I generate all its content myself. My own photography, videos, thoughts and data feeds.
Prove it. Prove that it isn't owned by someone else. Then take that evidence proving a negative to a court, fight the district attorney, convince a judge that your personal site was wrongfully blocked. And then your site will be unblocked.
Until they do it again.
(Also, the parent said "favorite sites", not "personal site". With SOPA, the DA, at the behest of content owners, could block any site that they deem is infringing their copyrights or is aiding infringement. Like if Slashdot linked to a site that explained how to bypass SOPA blocks.)
You can't combat piracy. Externalities are a cost of doing business. Anyone who thinks otherwise is kidding him/herself.
There's exactly one way to maximize profit, and that is to deliver a product that people are willing to pay for at a price that they are willing to pay. The pirates were never your customers and never will be, and the sooner the companies accept that and focus on the real problems (massively overpricing everything when first released, delivering products that can't easily be moved between devices because of the restrictive/broken DRM, and the declining quality of entertainment products in general), they'll have better profits. That's not what SOPA/PIPA and similar legislation are about, however. They're about eliminating legitimate lower-cost competition.
What scares the industry most is that these days, any jackass in his home could make a movie of comparable quality to most of the non-SFX Hollywood films. Moderately high-end HD cams cost a couple of grand or three—well within the price range of most people if they are willing to save up for a bit. You can buy halogen lights at Home Depot for fifty bucks, then rebuild the reflectors yourself and build your own barn doors for just about nothing. And there are millions of people out there who can act, not just a few dozen in Hollyweird, so there's no shortage of available talent.
In effect, this means that commercial movies are too expensive by about a factor of a thousand. But instead of finding ways to take advantage of new technologies to cut their production and distribution costs, they are instead focusing on destroying new means of distribution to prevent competition. You see, YouTube is in a great position to deliver paid content from independent producers to consumers. The studios know this, and they know that if the Internet turns into anything approaching a free market, they're basically out of business. For this reason, they do everything within their power to kill such sites—not because they can be used to pirate Hollywood movies, but because they can be used to sell non-Hollywood movies without having to spend millions of dollars in infrastructure. That ability of the general public to do what the major studios do is the greatest threat to their power.
Game studios are similar. There's no reason why people who want to write games should go work for one of those sweatshops, working unholy hours for terrible pay. You can go off on your own and work with a handful of people and write a great game, sell it, and make a fair amount of money. If everyone did this, the sweatshop game studios of the world would collapse, and the Internet makes that not only possible, but downright easy. They know this, and it terrifies them. So they do what they can to create liability for any ISP that might dare to distribute software, thus discouraging the practice.
And so on. It's not about piracy. It's about control. They want to control the entire content production industry, and our Congresspeople are almost all too fucking stupid to realize that these laws only serve to turn the big studios into a state-protected oligopoly and thwart small businesses' attempts to compete. And this is why we don't have jobs in this country.
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
Simple: Each one of the major players, put up a black splash page with info about SOPA and WHAT to do about it... That's all, No Google searches, no Facebook statuses, No buying on Amazon/eBay. If you go to one of these sites ALL you get is the black splash page... EasyPeasy...
THANK YOU, Edward Snowden!! Americans owe you a debt of gratitude (whether they know it or not..)
If they're going to stop working and drag their feet on getting anything done, they should call it the "Republican option". Nuclear option implies a device that's working.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
Bullshit! Some robot will notice that your notice that your stuff looks "copied" and you'll be gone. And if they can shove SOPA down your throat, you can be sure that you'll soon have to have a permit to have a website. And your thoughts are build on other thoughts, by the way, so they are just blatant copy-monopoly infringement.
This is NOT fear-mongering. It's already happening! Youtube is deleting stuff that "seems" bad (like critique of SOPA) because of misuse by the entertainment mafia. Google's AdSense is removing from sites that MIGHT have copied stuff on them. With SOPA the mafia can also shut people up or at least make Internet at lot less useful.
It is very apt that they're referring to it as a nuclear option, because it harms much more than just the intended target. Every visitor to a site with blackout boxes or censorship warnings will consider for a moment what their other options are. This action would be to inform people of something they probably don't realize they care about. It will cost the participants real money as customers switch to alternatives and even those who don't switch will be a little more aware that they need alternatives.
There will be fallout.
You fear corporate action to influence behavior? Many people seem to think that they have a right to the services provided, rather than realizing it can be revoked or changed at whim, and I welcome the education of the masses.
B) Eliminate all the stupid users. This is frowned upon by society.
What's the difference between Facebook, Google, et. al. taking themselves offline compared to the government doing it for them? From an end user's perspective, there is no difference.
It's the difference between a dude in Tunisia setting himself on fire in political protest and the cops taking him away to be disposed of quietly. Choice. Freedom. Yes, if you get freedom to decide for yourself, that means the people running Google and Facebook get freedom too. It's part of the overall concept. And when people see that Google, Facebook, et al are willing to hurt themselves to stop this legislation, it might pique a little interest.
Better watch out. Your camera manufacturer may change the EULA on the software your camera runs, claiming copyright on all photographs taken with the camera that you are granted license to use (you didn't really think that you OWN the camera, did you? No no silly boy, you merely bought a license to use it! All you base are belong to us!), therefore anything you post online is an infringement on THEIR copyright. Don't worry, I'm sure they'll let you off with a warning -- and a royalty fee for every photo you post on your website. Oh, and you website hosting company may change their EULA to claim copyright on all content they're hosting -- merely to protect YOU, of course -- so don't go thinking you own any of that, either. As if you ever did: The EULA on the software you used to create your site? Same deal: they change the EULA, and viola! Nothing you create with it is really yours, you just have a limited license to it, revokable more or less any time they decide you did, and unless you have a zillion dollars to pay a lawyer to fight it, you're screwed. And so on, and so on. Welcome to the world of SOPA: You own NOTHING.
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
Are you dense?
What's the difference between a bunch of key employees of a company quitting at the same time, or that company laying them off? From the perspective of the customers of that company (who now can't get their products), there's no difference, but that's irrelevant. Employment is voluntary: if employees want to quit, they're allowed to, regardless of who it hurts. If the employer wants to fire everyone, they're allowed to (subject to employment law), even if it's shooting themselves in the foot. Same here: just because so many people use FB and Google services doesn't mean they're obligated to continue providing them in perpetuity.
It's starting to become clear why your US senators support this thing now.
Korma: Good
Yes, and the harmonization process involves negotiating treaty consent in a closed process, then bringing it back and claiming in the face of democratic opposition "we've already promised this" without any democratic consent in the first place.
I wouldn't complain about my life suffering a DOS day for these companies to band together and make a point.
No Google searches, no Facebook statuses, No buying on Amazon/eBay
It's not that simple. There are contractual issues in play, with third parties who pay places like Amazon and eBay to provide services that are part of their businesses. I doubt that those agreements have clauses in them that say things like "We retain the right to fail to provide you with these contracted-for services while we participate in a political protest." Lots of moving parts involved, here.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
"cheers" is used as a valediction.
What!? "Cheers" is a toast! You mean to tell me I've been getting slobbering shitfaced reading your posts, and you haven't even been trying to keep up? =(
Thank you, Edward Snowden.
"Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
They came after his planet ... and he started working to find a solution.
Then they came after his child.
Nobody comes after his child.
GORE
Summer, 2012.
Imagine if every Adsense ad changed to an anti-SOPA message for a day...
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz