Slashdot Mirror
Global Majority Backs a Ban On 'Dark Net,' Poll Says (reuters.com)
Alastair Sharp reports for Reuters: Seven in 10 people say the 'dark net' -- an anonymous online home to both criminals and activists fearful of government surveillance -- should be shut down, according to a global Ipsos poll released on Tuesday. The findings, from a poll of at least 1,000 people in each of 24 countries, come as policymakers and technology companies argue over whether digital privacy should be curbed to help regulators and law enforcement more easily thwart hackers and other digital threats.
good luck with that
...have some fucking clue about how the internet works.
..I..
This reminds me of the Penn and Teller BS episode where people sign petitions to "End Womens' Suffrage". They need to know what it is before they vote on it. This is the problem on getting your computer education from CSI Cyber.. .like getting your cooking education from the Chef on the Muppets
a poll can be bend to agree with anything the sponsor wants.
ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
This was probably a bullshit fucking push poll worded to elicit a certain response. But whether it was or it wasn't, here's a hearty disdainful BAAA BAAA BAAA to the fucking sheep who made up the 71%.
The findings, from a poll of at least 1,000 people hand-picked by the respective governments in each of 24 countries, come as policymakers and technology companies argue over whether digital privacy should be curbed to help regulators and law enforcement more easily thwart hackers, identify malcontents, whistle-blowers, criticizers of governments and government leaders/officials, 'undesirables', and other digital threats.
Emphasis mine, of course
The U.S. is far from being the only country in the world that has a problem with nosy government and 'law enforcement' (more like 'will enforcement' in some cases, to be honest). We're just (still, for the moment) allowed to actually talk about it (without [much] fear of being made to disappear).
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
Perhaps we should also ban all of the books in dark libraries? - that would be any book not found in a public library. After all there could be dangerous information in books that haven't been screened and approved for general public consumption by your local library staff.
Poll indicates that 9/10 people have no idea how technology works.
...7 in 10 people don't understand the Internet
Q. A part of the Internet known as the "Dark Net" is only accessible via special web browsers that allow you to surf the web anonymously. Journalists, human rights activists, dissidents and whistleblowers can use these services to rally against repression, exercise their fundamental rights to free expression and shed light upon corruption. At the same time, hackers, illegal marketplaces (eg. selling weapons and narcotic ...
"A majority of societies are ok with how societies work and don't care enough for protecting the freedom of expression and opinions of those who don't, at-least not if that also allow more extreme people who don't like their society to act as-well."
Such fucking news.
Maybe they can with correctness call it "for democracy" as long as that democracy mean "for the views we the majority has decided to be the only correct ones", if the idea of a democracy is to be able to spread various opinions and effect society however then I don't see how it's democratic regardless of what those views are.
"Do you agree that the government should be able to ban, monitor, or log all traffic on non-public networks, such as your home Wi-Fi or office?"
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
1. First, outlaw these darknets used by those pesky pedophiles and terrorists;
2. Then, interpret "darknet" to cover all anonymous and/or encrypted communication;
3. ???
4. PROFIT!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Outlaw encrypted connections. No more SSL, no more legal VPN services, no more standardized, general encryption for connections. If you see anything you can't inspect the packets for at the telco without decryption, you order telecoms to dump those packets into the bit bucket at the router.
Only exception: if you want to do business with someone securely, you have to register with them so you can receive the appropriate key which only works from your identity to their servers. That key is available to the government, and might even be already on file so they don't even need to ask the business for it. Maybe it is the government that issues your private key. Your packets have your ID number in the header, and the routing can only happen between your registered key and the IP address(es) of the merchant site.
Not likely to happen in the US, but a place like China could force it. They already force all sorts of registration. If it was a real program, they'd have to phase it in or their economy flounders, but I think China is moving in that direction. They just need to re-write some protocols and get a few more capabilities.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Your observation is accurate beyond mere criticism of the survey. The governments are deliberately raising the profile of this new "War on Darknets" because they don't dare call it what it really is, namely their War on Privacy . The deception created by tech-sounding wordplay which the majority don't understand is central to making their plan work, because otherwise they encounter pushback from the masses who value their privacy.
"Darknet" has no specific meaning in CompSci, and so it can be used to denote any communication which NSA, FBI and DOJ do not control. This is very much a "thin end of the wedge" issue, because their desire to see and control everything will end only when there is no privacy left at all. These people don't believe in limits on their power.
"The question of whether machines can think is no more interesting than [] whether submarines can swim" - Dijkstra
I noticed that you waffled on grey areas....
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!