Slashdot Mirror


Russia Adopts Bill That Would Expand Government Control Over the Internet (go.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from ABC News: Russia's lower chamber of parliament has adopted a bill that would expand government control over the internet, raising fears of widespread censorship. The State Duma on Tuesday overwhelmingly voted to support the bill, which still has to be approved by the upper chamber of Russian Parliament and signed into the law by the president.

The bill requires internet providers to install equipment to route Russian internet traffic through servers in the country. That would increase the power of state agencies to control information while users would find it harder to circumvent government restrictions, and the quality of the connection may suffer. Proponents of the bill say it is a defense measure in case the United States or other hostile powers cut off the internet for Russia.

96 comments

  1. a legitimate concern.. by edris90 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Having grown up with the internet and watching it degrade from a place of uncensored anonymous sharing of information where the reputation means nothing and the idea is what holds value, To the e-commerce slums , carefully curated and censored propaganda machine, it has become,. It would be naive not to expect the US to break the internet on purpose, for governmental interests.

    1. Re:a legitimate concern.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And yet you signed in with a facebook account? Seems to me you're contributing to the problem.

    2. Re: a legitimate concern.. by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      It would be naive not to expect the US to break the internet on purpose

      And it'd be even more naive not to expect the US to keep it working... after all, it's only the most useful propaganda and intel-collection tool ever made.

    3. Re:a legitimate concern.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like FaceBook 2.0

    4. Re:a legitimate concern.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Though the reasons you cite for more supervision of the Internet are legit, this is probably about something else. Putin has been using his intelligence services to attack numerous other countries through the Internet in various ways, including the USA, and since he is widely recognized as a "smart guy" it seems likely that he knows retaliation is coming. There was a first taste of this in the 2018 mid-term elections when Russia's access to the rest of the Internet was largely blocked for several days by US intelligence services. He is right to expect much more retaliation, and not just from the US. Most of Western Europe is also getting fed-up with Russian activities designed to stir up strife and conflict in their respective societies.

    5. Re: a legitimate concern.. by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      Yeah, they can't break the "internet," but they're welcome to install firewalls on their side and screw up their intranet as bad as they want.

      I don't really care if they use routers for firewalls, or if they just throw their people in a gulag for PEBKAC. My packets route the same.

    6. Re:a legitimate concern.. by roman_mir · · Score: 1

      regardless of what you believe the USA will or will not do, may or may not do, what putin's regime is doing is making it possible to remove and block content that putin and anyone in power in that regime finds dangerous for their power, that is all it is.

      For example hundreds or thousands of pieces of content and sites have been blocked simply because they report this story - Andrey Kostin and his much yonger lover Naili Asker-Zade, they have a daughter out of wedlock obviously because he is married to a woman he paid 6000000usd to keep quet, he has multiple yonge lovers and has kids with them and he is a givernment worker, who is paying tens of millions of dollars to his lovers. That would be millions of dillars he is stealing from the government bank he is working for.

      putin doesn't care about that, his concern is holding on to power and he owns all of the main stream media outlets in the country (by proxy), so the tv and the radio is under control. What is *not* under control yet is the Internet and it is super dangerous to putin's power since millions of people can now tune into opposition channels like that of Navalny for example and they can get a dissenting point of view about putin and his puppets in parlament (duma) and his puppets in the justice system, etc. Russia is a sham of a country today and it should in fact be treated as a rogue state, because it is one. putin supports every terrorist and dictatorial regime out there, point a finger at a terrorist organization anywhere in the world today and you can be certain putin is dumping money into it and giving them weapons, providing them with infrastructure and other types of help.

    7. Re: a legitimate concern.. by mSparks43 · · Score: 0

      utter rubbish.

      Putin doesnt need to mess with the internet to maintain power.

      All he has to do is keep rebuilding Russia and making more and more russians mega rich, while at the same time not allow amerifags to stop him.

      This is about sovereignty. why should a Russian citizens packets visiting Russian social media need to be routed through virginia?

      Russian websites english and russian are orders of magnitude less censored than western site.

    8. Re:a legitimate concern.. by Etcetera · · Score: 2

      Having grown up with the internet and watching it degrade from a place of uncensored anonymous sharing of information where the reputation means nothing and the idea is what holds value, To the e-commerce slums , carefully curated and censored propaganda machine, it has become,. It would be naive not to expect the US to break the internet on purpose, for governmental interests.

      What you're overlooking is that it was grown out of US governmental interests to begin with, and exploded under American tutelage. Russian, Chinese, and other bad-state actions in the last 5-7 years really highlights how horrible a decision it really was for the Obama Administration to allow ICANN to be moved out from the under the ultimate authority of the Department of Commerce.

      The Internet has been a battleground for years, and the history of the last century points to Americans being better Guarantors of Last Resort than facially neutral entities like your average UN commission when it comes to being a force for liberty in the world.

    9. Re:a legitimate concern.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [...] It would be naive not to expect the US to break the internet on purpose, for governmental interests.

      Yep. Breasts bumping into patch panels, for example...

    10. Re:a legitimate concern.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Having grown up with the internet and watching it degrade from a place of uncensored anonymous sharing of information where the reputation means nothing and the idea is what holds value,

      To the e-commerce slums , carefully curated and censored propaganda machine, it has become,. It would be naive not to expect the US to break the internet on purpose, for governmental interests.

      The Internet, curated and censored? WTF bro, shit you find on 4chan, 8chan, gab, incel forums and all that jazz did not even exist when I grew up with the Internet. You have the BIGGEST uncurated uncensored garbage buffet in the history of the Internet right now. The thing is, reputation matters, it should matter, and it's catching up with all the slime bags out there.

    11. Re: a legitimate concern.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The usual apologists that you'll get around here. Followed by whataboutism that isn't even true.

      When Russian websites don't censor themselves as far as Kremlin criticism goes worse things happen.
      For example I liked to read RBC.ru because there you get a way better perspective than with that RT.com bullshit that all the idiots here in the West gobble up like it's fried bacon. That was until 2016 when the Kremlin forced a change in leadership there because they investigated things that were too inconvenient for Putin and his oligarch friends.
      Now I know that they likely installed their Kremlin/Oligarch puppets there.

      Anyway the problem is that if we're arguing that way then Putin doesn't need to do most of the oppressive things he does to stay in power. Yet he does them. And they all bear the dangers of him tightening the grasp he has on the nation. But no, no, no, that won't possibly happen. Faggots like you will suck his dick nonetheless while gladly blaming Westerners.

    12. Re: a legitimate concern.. by mSparks43 · · Score: 0

      but seems like a really good way to actually run a country.
      rather than attack leadership and destroy things.

      only way to win hearts and minds is to do better.

    13. Re: a legitimate concern.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The way to win hearts is to know what hopes and fears win the hearts, and then create a narrative that plays exactly those things. Whether it is true or a lie does not matter. It's the feelings of the people that matter.
      And thanks to all the things the Kremlin learned during the Soviet Union they know how to pull the strings of those under their thumb.

      For you it's lies like that two wrongs make a right and that the wrongs of the others are morally worse than those that your leaders commit.
      This seems to work very well on people lacking basic rational thinking skills. That is probably why it is a favourite tool of Religion as well.
      It's also very common in children's logic, where a stupid action is justified by someone else having done something stupid as well.
      My parents used to teach me by asking if XYZ jumps off a bridge, would I do the same? Showcasing that I did not have to commit stupid things just because someone else does stupid things. We make our own decisions and unless we were forced it is our own fault.

      Of course there's also plenty of lies in other countries. Russia has been the scapegoat of the US for a long long time. The only difference being that they're no longer the scapegoat for Trump supporters. But that may only last until Trump (maybe) completes his second term.

    14. Re: a legitimate concern.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And if you're interested from what circumstances I come. I'm from Romania. I witnessed the country turning from a more liberal time in the 70's to a totalitarian fascist state in the 80's. Subsequently I witnessed the fall of the Eastern Bloc and was in the violent Revolution in 1989 (didn't fight myself, but aided by bringing the soldiers on our side food while they protected us).
      We're not exactly westerners. But maybe we still are in the Kremlin's narrative? Since we joined NATO and the EU? Or maybe even before that when Ceauescu started to speak out against the Soviet Union?

      I know that most of our politicians are corrupt pieces criminal of shit that should have died together with Ceauescu instead of being allowed to rise to the political positions of power they have today.

      Unfortunately that's not how the world works. They were allowed to excuse themselves because they followed orders. This despite our historians tell us today that Ceauescu was in fact really dumb and that it was the Securitate who actually ran the country from behind the curtains. Ceauescu was only the figurehead that legitimised them.
      Yet they are still there in power because some idiots must be voting for them. And also because the EU fools give them money without really caring that they're corrupt as long as we buy German cars.
      And it will probably take another hundred years before we get rid of this cancer in our own country.

      Now I could point out that there are worse places to live all day. I could say that it is still not as bad as North Korea. But you see, in reality even if it is not as bad as North Korea it can still be pretty bad and get a lot worse for my people and me.
      That's why such deflections don't really help anyone but those assholes in their ivory towers.

    15. Re: a legitimate concern.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but seems like a really good way to actually run a country.
      rather than attack leadership and destroy things.

      only way to win hearts and minds is to do better.

      Dictatorship sounds like a good way to run a country? How has that worked for anyone else? Lol, good luck dude, enjoy your bread lines?

    16. Re:a legitimate concern.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I certainly see both sides of this issue, yes, requiring Russian servers makes it easier to spy, but it does also make your internet more resilient to outside influences. There is a reason that there are 3 (or is it 4) GPS constellations up there, people in other countries didn't trust the US to keep their devices working in all situations. The internet is little different.

      This law doesn't seem to require these servers to be open to spying, but that doesn't mean that this couldn't be handled by other laws (in place already, or in the future).

    17. Re: a legitimate concern.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I doubt they are less censored. You also didn't mention that they are 100% monitored. They are required to register with Putins goons.

    18. Re: a legitimate concern.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "cyber troll army poisoning any forum and conversation online"
      This is the most salient point that's missed on us: the message is heavily pushed that it's all about the elections ONLY. It's much, much bigger than that. Putin wants to tip us over into kinetically fighting each other on the streets all across the western world.

    19. Re: a legitimate concern.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please keep posting here. You bring a valuable counterbalance to the russian troll armies trying to blur and disinform.

    20. Re: a legitimate concern.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It appears that one of Trump's tweets somehow got posted to slashdot as a comment.

    21. Re: a legitimate concern.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I second that

    22. Re: a legitimate concern.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Vladimir Putin defeated the Islamic State and most of the Free Syrian Army / Al-Nusra Front / Jaish-Al-My-Balls so I don't think he can be behind all terrorism.
      I don't know about internal Russian issues, all I can reason about is the international politics. Georgia attacked first everyone knows that, Western MSM showed rocket artillery being fired into whatever Ossetia they have there.

      he knows what it means to poison literally and figuratively

      Are you referring to UK conspiracy theories? You just can't believe anything that's said of the UK or its controlled media. See, the UK invented modern "fake news" basically. Iraqi WMD, Syrian "peaceful opposition", "White Helmets", Integrity Initiative, Skripal poisoning - why would they tell the truth regarding the latter when everything else is bullshit?

      Someone will call me Ivan, I don't care. Everyone knows who did the war in Syria. Putin should get a Nobel peace prize if it ends within the next 5 years.

    23. Re: a legitimate concern.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *said by the UK or its controlled media

    24. Re:a legitimate concern.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Internet has been a battleground for years, and the history of the last century points to Americans being better Guarantors of Last Resort than facially neutral entities like your average UN commission when it comes to being a force for liberty in the world.

      You think the UN is facially neutral?

      Wow.

      Less then half the UN nations are theoretically democracies. To make matters worse, many of these so-called 'democracies' are not particularly free, and are not actually controlled by anything resembling the public, but rather are controlled by a small special interest group.

      But every nation gets one vote. And most of them have agendas that are nowhere near being facially neutral.

      The UN is not a place to look for neutrality.

    25. Re: a legitimate concern.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you want to phrase it like that. Why not?
      Most of the world are still monarchies and most of the world's dictators got their power with American help.
      Only reason Putin is the devil incarnate to American media is he cares more about Russian citizens than for American imperialism.

  2. requires internet providers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well! Obviously it is necessary to get around the ISPs then!

  3. Russia, USA, EU, China, ... a common goal. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We have clear evidence that they all act in near-unison, adding more and more totalitarion control and surveillance/spying and warfare, removing more and more rights, like privacy and individal thought.

    I think at this point, it is delusional, to believe that they are separate entites, let alone enemies.
    Might as well still believe that earth is flat.

    1. Re:Russia, USA, EU, China, ... a common goal. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They can be separate entities that share common ideas. Just like in 1984.

  4. Add their vassal states to that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So pretty much the rest of the world.

    Is there even still a sovereign contra-surveillance anything on this planet?

  5. How do we escape it? How do we route around it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I don't want to depend on a "benevolent" government to do the right thing.

    We've interpreted this degradation as damage; now, how do we route around it? How do we set up an alternative channel for at least text communications

    * Point to point directed WiFi with mesh networks?

    * Uber for hard disks, so we can drive data around, slowly but surely?

    How do we get something going that allows us to thumb our digital noses at these authoritarians?

    1. Re:How do we escape it? How do we route around it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Dude have you been living under a rock these last 20 years ? The US government has never been benevolent or respectful of privacy (pre or post 9/11). The only thing that changed is that the curtains were swept away and you can see all the rot and the "lets pretend " as the fuck you it really is.
      Russia is quite late to the internet control party actually.

    2. Re:How do we escape it? How do we route around it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How do we get something going that allows us to thumb our digital noses at these authoritarians?

      1. Encrypt everything. This is important, since it makes the cost of finding the needle harder, when you have billions of needles.

      2. Use multiple certificates signed in countries that hate each other to create the session keys, such that you would have to compromise all of the signers to recover a session key.

      3. Find ways to route around problems, which is pretty much part of the internets basic design. Any channel you can communicate on can work, that includes things like mail and shipping. Steganography is still a thing. The secondary channels do not have to be high bandwidth or fast for two (or more) factor communication.

      4. Public Identities are likely required, which are also signed. In theory these could be semi anonymous, as long as you have some large organization attesting basic information about a person, and that they have only one id, etc. The reason public identities are required, is because its likely the only practical way to limit bots and troll farms. I'm of course saying this as a AC.. *sighs*

      5. Where possible, cache previous session keys for conversations. They can be reused as an additional layer in the next conversation to negotiate the new keys. Basically, make the problem one layer harder, so to decode any conversation you first must break the key to the first conversation.

      I normally think twice when giving out encryption ideas, but it truly is a dual use technology. You take the good with the bad, and right now nation states that are bad actors are the greater threat.

      Eventually nation states are likely to outlaw non approved encryption, or at least the worst are likely to try. It's been discussed in the US before, but that is a blade that will cut both ways.

      I suppose it would be nice if people would wake up and stop supporting criminals and con men for their leaders, but well, see 2016.

    3. Re:How do we escape it? How do we route around it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The reason the internet is becoming controlled and censored is not because of physical barriers, but because of soft inducement and nudging for people to spend their time on places like that.

      At any time there is a) no money to set up a free-speech alternative, and/or b) not sufficient interest to set up a free-speech alternative.

    4. Re:How do we escape it? How do we route around it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kim Dotcom screwed the pooch by not security encyrpting files on his service; if he had done that at the get-go, he would have no legal troubles today and no capacity for the courts to proove one way or another his service is used for anything other than file sharing. He'd be a total storage kingpin.

      Similarily, if you want to build a great news site with great comments, you have to curate the discussion that ensues due to state actors and a whole host of other reasons, but do so in a way that allows the public to trust you without faith.

      The reality of the situation is the reason you encrypt the data is to enable the public to feel safe using the service, and to keep the government from misleading themselves and believe in whatever they want to believe in.

      Our existing political system is very much so a response to technology, and if a technology doesn't fit in cleanly, there's an arguement it is bad for society in general from the get-go. You have to build systems that resist the tendancy of technology to injure the public and the threatened to stop real progress. That takes serious planning and research and is not something capitalism and bankers in general are good at fostering.

      Do that however, and the system you built will survive you and the next 10 generations of your family.

    5. Re:How do we escape it? How do we route around it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Satellites in orbit, or Moon-based - but the latency would be pretty high

    6. Re:How do we escape it? How do we route around it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Encryption. That is unless your government is like the US government which tries to label encryption an act of terrorism.

  6. at least they're up front about it. by rogoshen1 · · Score: 1

    Not that either approach is 'good' or anything less than sheer evil; but if a government is going to actively snoop on its citizens, is it better to do what the rooskies are doing, or what the NSA did (15 odd years ago I might add.)

    case in point:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    1. Re:at least they're up front about it. by quenda · · Score: 1

      And it is good that the Russians feel the need to legislate this. At least they are giving lip service to rule of law.
      The US is heading the other direction, and increasingly ruling by presidential executive order, and misused "emergency" powers, in place of laws passed by congress.

      And no, this did not start with Trump. It has been getting worse over recent administrations.

    2. Re:at least they're up front about it. by rtb61 · · Score: 0

      How about Amerikanski news as bullshit, how about a bit more information, https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/..., specifically, "Twitter and Facebook have nine months to comply with the law by moving Russian user data onto servers in Russia". The Canadians still heavily tied into anti-Russia propaganda but still more bound to the truth than blatant US propaganda.

      So this is a somewhat old story, written in a blatantly propagandistic way. So the Russian government is demanding that social media sites they allow Russian users must have that information stored on that social media companies servers inside of Russia and that ISPs should direct that traffic to social media web sites that have their servers in country.

      Really sounds a whole lot different that way doesn't it. I want the Australia government to do the same, demand social media companies anywhere in the world that sign up Australian users have all that data stored in Australia, why trust what foreign fucking governments will do with that data. You all know full well, the US government will have no qualms about abusing foreign citizens data stored in the US, in all sorts of corrupt ways.

      How else can any government possibly ensure corporations adhere to data privacy laws, it is inevitable that all countries do this. Not like the Amerikanski article implies on government servers, lame, seppos, really bloody lame.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    3. Re:at least they're up front about it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry but I trust a government less than a corporation. Corps want to sell you shit. Governments want to tax you or imprison you. One is clearly worse than the other.

  7. It's Russia. They keep voting for Putin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    (Or do they?)

    I guess they get what they deserve.

    It's hard to feel sorry for them.

    Definition of Insanity and all that.

  8. OK. Nobody said it was. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You need moar straw, bro?

    1. Re:OK. Nobody said it was. by Stolovaya · · Score: 1

      Five Eyes? NSA? Not a strawman.

    2. Re:OK. Nobody said it was. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Five Eyes? NSA? Not a strawman.

      Yah... you just said Five Eyes and NSA like the existence of intelligence gathering organizations... or alliances even... is proof of disrespecting privacy, and THAT is a straw man. NSA has a tough thankless job to do, but I expect them to keep doing it in a civil manner, while respecting everyone's privacy to the greatest extent they can. Maybe by not dumping whole chat/email/file server leaks on the Internet like certain other organizations.

      The only person watching you wank off to kitten stomping videos is a fat Russian man named Leonard, and he's uploading it to a file sharing site when he finishes.

    3. Re:OK. Nobody said it was. by Stolovaya · · Score: 1

      Covert spying on citizens...disrespecting privacy...I'm not sure why you don't see these as the same thing. Nice that you seem to think that as long as the privacy is invaded by a different country, but then shared, well, that's okay (at least with Five Eyes).

      The NSA wholesale spies on citizens of the US. Period.

      So, nope! No strawman.

  9. Yeah... right. by rnturn · · Score: 1

    ``Proponents of the bill say it is a defense measure in case the United States or other hostile powers cut off the internet for Russia.

    Uh, huh. Whatever you say. It might help in sucking up to Vlad, though.

    --
    CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
    1. Re:Yeah... right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you're not a technician are you?

      the US control of DNS root servers is a threat to all other internet connected countries.

  10. Neo-Fascism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fascism may be defined as a form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation, or victim-hood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy, and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    1. Re:Neo-Fascism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You just described the direction the Democratic Party in the US is headed, and the Socialist Democrats' Green New Deal in particular.

  11. real wedge issue for slashdot LOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Internet or white supremacist Putin? such a tough choice.

    1. Re: real wedge issue for slashdot LOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah. Old white man who worked hard to get into power and wealth.

      Poster child enemy for communists.

    2. Re: real wedge issue for slashdot LOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice desinformatiya comrade. Putin *is* a communist.

    3. Re: real wedge issue for slashdot LOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      White supremacy and communism aren't mutually exclusive.
      Both worked a lot of innocent people them to death in their labour camps.

  12. big surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Of course putin made it illegal to seize power using the same mechanisms he used. I mean DUH.

    ANd whatever big daddy putin does, his slobbering p00sy boi trump is sure to follow. So look for similar measures here, just as soon as trump finishes urinating on his own shoes and getting fscked by big daddy putin with his little pink panties down around his ankles. Daddy putin likes an obedient gurl.

    1. Re: big surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The great thing for Russia is: as long as Americans parrot this conspiracy theory, they will not understand Russia.

      A dumb opponent is the best thing you can have ..

  13. OK. NOBODY SAID IT WAS BENEVOLENT. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You are building up a fake opponent out of straw and then knocking him over with extreme force.

    1. Re:OK. NOBODY SAID IT WAS BENEVOLENT. by Stolovaya · · Score: 1

      Do you have an actual refutation of Fives Eyes or the NSA? Or are you just going to quote an inaccurate logical fallacy?

    2. Re:OK. NOBODY SAID IT WAS BENEVOLENT. by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      Nobody can refute Ceiling Cat.

      Ceiling Cat knows how many eyes you have.

      Ceiling Cat knows what you did with that cheeseburder.

      Ceiling Cat knows where you hid the pee-pee tape.

      Nobody can refute Ceiling Cat.

    3. Re:OK. NOBODY SAID IT WAS BENEVOLENT. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now that is a strawman.
      It's not about refuting the existence Five Eyes or the NSA. You acting like people claimed this is the strawman.
      While #58446382 may not know what they're talking about it's pointing out that throwing Five Eyes and the NSA into this is a deflection from the issue that is being discussed.
      The popular Russian tu quoque. Whenever someone points out something not nice about what happens there the all conquering rebuttal being: He who is without sin cast the first stone.

      We're tired of that shit.

      Of course tu quoque isn't always fallacious. It can be very valid when it comes to self defence.
      For example if someone accuses you of breaking their nose and you retort by saying that they first stabbed you with a knife, then you're right.
      But if someone accuses you of breaking their nose and you retort by saying that the other day that other guy stabbed another guy with a knife, you're an infantile moron.

      So does this happen in defence of the Russian people? Five Eyes and the NSA trying to fuck your people by spying on them somehow justifies your own government to join the party fucking you twice?

      Man, there's days where I really wonder how you guys managed to put the first man into space and have him return back alive. Well, I guess the people who actually call the shots in Russia aren't the usual gopniks we get here on Slashdot.

    4. Re:OK. NOBODY SAID IT WAS BENEVOLENT. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Applause to you Ivan for posting your own opinion. Slow clap.

    5. Re: OK. NOBODY SAID IT WAS BENEVOLENT. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Superkendoll should remember this fact and one other fact.
      Cieling cat remembers you very post you make and has super sexy database powers that are created to make superkendoll eat thier words like a faggot eats dick

    6. Re: OK. NOBODY SAID IT WAS BENEVOLENT. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hired professional cyberstalkers sure do love keeping creepy, illegal stalking databases in an effort to suppress protected political speech.

  14. Dude. Nobody is arguing with you. NOBODY. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nobody is trying to refute Five Eyes or the NSA (as though even makes sense).

    1. Re:Dude. Nobody is arguing with you. NOBODY. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Putin's Russia, Internet trolls YOU!

  15. Following Chinese model by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    except it won't reduce the number and types of attacks originating from Russia, unfortunately.

  16. No surprise. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So Russia joins China, Europe and Australia in censoring the Internet.

  17. Re: How do we escape it? How do we route around it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Raspberry Pi Zero W's only cost $10 and require very little power. If you paired it with a small solar panel and battery, you could throw these up all over the neighborhood and quickly build that WiFi mesh network you're thinking of.

    Problem is, what would you or your neighbors use it for that can't already be done on the Internet itself? Why would anyone bother connecting to your WiFi mesh network instead of connecting to the Internet proper?

  18. Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Look, I know Beau'n company like to spread propaganda but ffs, this is getting behond stupid. It is in Russia's best interest to do this because.. and wait for it, the so called Five-eye countries. They have especially in the last 10 years gone balistic in their attempt to create a cold war on the Internet as we know it.

    The organizations who could have stopped this, both public and private are not being held accountable, at all. What exactly did you expect other countries to do? People are fucking EVIL, greedy bastards. Without fear of being punished they are free to continue being evil. Instead we've given them more weapons, great job. IETF, Nanog, IEEE, Mozilla, GOOGLE, Facebook, MICROSOFT, Linux Foundation, Red Hat /IBM, the list of companies benifiting from this is quite astounding. There are smart people whom are part of these organizations, they are paid very well too.

    Downvote all you want mods, you can't keep trying to hide it. Hell you have another story right below this about India.

  19. If you doubt 5 eyes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Try doing socially disruptive (not illegal) activities via Tor and watch what happens to your hops and how often you seem to get 'bad nodes'.

    Besides passive surveillance, there is definitely active denial going on across the Tor network. I2P doesn't have that problem, but until the next LeaseSet project rolls out, I2P has a Sybil attack possible with 40-50 targetted nodes, allowing an attacker with active denial capabilities on network infrastructure to rapidly identify a specific hidden service if not client host. There is also evidence that similar capabilities may exist on Tor as well as statistically probably tunnel connections thanks to those 'quality of tunnel' service improvements from a few years back, which cause the majority of Tor traffic to go over the same 20-100 or so first hop, relay and exit nodes, allowing an adversary with lots of bandwidth on geographically diverse (but perhaps technically not) IP addresses to game the circuit creation algorithms and track the majority of traffic metadata directly instead of having to infer it by traffic patterns. Effectively eliminating even the limited Anonymity Tor is touted as providing.

    I had a friend many years ago tell me he did everything on clearnet for exactly that reason. They are much less likely to find you in the cloud of public data than they are on privacy networks like Tor. While I disagreed with him and still do about the data itself, he was definitely right that the metadata of 'anonymized traffic' plus the flagging you recieve for utilizing it subject you to more scrutiny. However with Cloudflare and other MITM proxy services all over the internet, I would dare say that connecting to Tor websites has less of a chance of leaking the contents of your transmission with a website to third parties compared to using any service on the clear internet that might be behind a DDoS MITM proxy like cloudflare.

  20. Re: How do we escape it? How do we route around i by mSparks43 · · Score: 1

    ive done exactly this.
    But the software side of the mesh networking is a shitshow.

  21. Simple anwer: Host stuff there! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They should not just be a network of relays. They should BE the servers.
    For files, chat (IRC, Signal), mail, websites, forums, etc.

    If it offers the ability to host or read informatiom that can't be elsewhere, people will come.

    And of course, perverts and criminals. State-sponsored false flag ones and real ones.

    1. Re:Simple anwer: Host stuff there! by Allasard · · Score: 2

      They should not just be a network of relays. They should BE the servers. For files, chat (IRC, Signal), mail, websites, forums, etc.

      This project has some of that functionality: Piratebox

      I installed it on a battery-powered wifi router with some survival docs, but its battery is dead so it might not be very useful when the SHTF.

  22. Looming War? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sounds like to me war is about to happen and wants to control information, both militarily and civilian. If it was a non-war issue, he could have had this bill passed a long time ago.

  23. ROFL, yeah, and Trump is a democrat. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why have Americans apparently ZERO clue whar communism is?

    Hint: The whole point of communism is small communes that share everything to be more efficient, and no central government! It even shares much with libertarianism!

    There has never been a communist state on this planet! Only dictatorahips claiming they would "transition" into it, but, surprise surprise, never finished "transitioning".

    1. Re:ROFL, yeah, and Trump is a democrat. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No that is not the whole point of communism.
      Karl Marx wasn't too specific on how a communist country should be run after the bourgeois were defeated.
      This is why there are a couple of different possible implementations represented by schools of thoughts.
      Anarcho Communism or other forms of small government Communism are only a few among these.

      Lenin himself probably did not believe that Anarchy could work, hence he implemented his one party system. Then when Lenin died Stalin fucked over most of Lenin's ideals turning it into his own Stalinism, which he still called communism.
      And that is what Putin would like to be, another Stalin. Debating about whether that is true communism or not is merely nitpicking.

    2. Re:ROFL, yeah, and Trump is a democrat. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pffft. "Communism has never been tried". Communism has been tried over and over. The problem is that you cannot steal all the production from the productive along with everyone's savings and property, execute the productive and then expect the rest to be able to generate a healthy economy. It just doesn't work. You cannot FORCE people to share.

      And don't lie about what communism is: I've read both Das Kapital and the Communist manifesto. I know exactly what it is and so does history.

  24. Mont Perelin Society is their name. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A 500(!!!) think tank strong lobby organization, with the goals of making the entire planet libertarian fascist, ruled by corporations hindered by zero laws (like human, worker, environmental rights), zero taxes, and zero social safety nets.

    They are he US neoocons / Tea Party, they are behind the similar movements in the EU and fascist parties like the AfD (Germany), UKIP (UK) and Swoboda (Ukraine). And they wrote TTIP, CETA, TPP, and the other countless similar international reckless trade agreements with the second/third world countries.

    They all must be expelled from this *planet*!

  25. Netsplit by duke_cheetah2003 · · Score: 1

    Just cut them off completely. We don't need a global internet. It's just not worth the trouble. US should cut off every other country from their free and open internet. If backward countries without proper free speech laws on their books don't wanna play nice. If greedy countries wanna tax links and pictures.. go for it.. on your intranet.

    Get off our network.

    1. Re:Netsplit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And you'll kill many business relationships between US and Russia.

      As a quick example, recently I was in Russia on business and couldn't access AWS, LinkedIn and many other websites. Imaging how productive I was.

    2. Re:Netsplit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about you just cut America off from the rest of us? You'd get what you want and do the rest of us a favour at the same time.

      It's a bit like building a wall, only virtual - perfect!

  26. All countries should have more control!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    IMHO, lots of anti-government anarchists etc always working hard to turn the whole internet to a dark web, that is a crime heaven for all kinds of criminal & exploitative activities!!!

    IMHO, all world governments should/must have more active control over the internet, for sure!!!

  27. Internet etiquette by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... adopted a bill that would expand government control over the internet ...

    It is good netiquette to warn readers when a link contains auto-play video.

  28. anything plus internet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... increase the power of state agencies ...

    Do what the USA does, declare the whole internet under its jurisdiction and nearly anything "plus internet" is a crime.

  29. 672 anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How about the American 672 bill that fights antisemitism in Europe? (wtf - Europe?) Stating the facts - such as âoeThere is a disproportionate number of Jews in the mediaâ is now an offense.

  30. Good ideas. Thanks. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thanks for writing that up. Food for thought.

  31. I wonder what happens to those who vote nay? by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

    "To protect Russians from being cut off from the US.", what a laugh.

    And the Berlin Wall was there to prevent West Berlin from fleeing into the East.

    Just watch and see. Eventually Russia will decide it's time they "need to protect the sensibilities of their citizens" blah blah blah.

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    1. Re:I wonder what happens to those who vote nay? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just think of the children/capitalists/counter-revolutionaries.

  32. Control where? by mark_reh · · Score: 1

    In Russia or in the US?

  33. So, same as the rest of the world? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We are upset when they do it in Russia but hardly protest when it is done in the "free world". You would think we would be more concerned about what our own governments do... But I guess they have our best interest in mind, unlike Putin who is a monster! /s

  34. It's not just the idea that holds value by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ideas are not just words. How can one know the value of an idea without knowing its context -- things like where the idea came from, whom it came from, what motivated it, etc. The internet is flooded with misinformation: it's becoming quite difficult for the average person determine what's real and what's fake.

    1. Re: It's not just the idea that holds value by edris90 · · Score: 1

      Wrong is that people are accepting hearsay as fact without directly experimenting to test things for their own understanding and direct observation. people have forgotten but no peace and remembrance Shannon should ever be accepted as fact until you have personally approved it through direct experimentation. That's basic personal responsibility.