Well... to be relevant the state backing it would have to have enough resources to make a difference. I don't know if Iran has the abiliity to wage as cyber war and I know Palestine doesn't.
It takes a technological society to back a cyber war. China, Japan, South Korea, many countries in europe, or the US... that's about it. If your country doesn't have an information economy then you can't wage cyberwar anymore then a per-industrial society can wage mechanized warfare. You can't build tanks without factories and you can't wage cyberwar without a software industry. At least not with state backing.
Something that happens if a state backs it is that companies get paid to develop cyber warfare weapons. Several US weapons contractors are already selling such tools to the US government and it would be folly to think that wasn't going on all over the world in every information economy. However, I don't think Iran has an information economy. Maybe I'm wrong... and I know Palestine doesn't... so who is backing it if not disqualified powers that lack the resources?
Now, I'm not saying AGW is real or unreal. What I am saying is that to even presume to be in the same category as Darwin you must FIRST disclose the raw data. Now. Just do it. You have nothing to lose and everything to gain if you're right. The only reason to not release the data is if you're in fact hiding something or there are many different wants to interpret the data. That leads us to methodology. You then have to explain exhaustively why your method of handling the data is correct. Then after both data and methodology are verified we can look at the conclusions.
Prior to that, it's all premature. In effect, I'm saying science must be open source. Disclose all the data, all the computer code used to manage the data sets, and finally offer up a good sdk to explain what you're doing throughout.
That's how this is supposed to work and it's what Darwin did when he published his theory. If you want to claim AGW is the same as evolution then you need to first make AGW into an ACTUAL scientific theory. AGW is not a theory yet. It isn't nearly as solid. Currently it's still a hypothesis and really taking issue with a hypothesis is not a sign of ignorance or stubborness. Make AGW into a theory and THEN complain about people not accepting it. Not before.
And the first step to do that is to open up and tell people everything. These leaked emails are just a symptom of the problem. Why are these people sneaking around in the dark at all about it? Have your discussions in public or on public channels so we can read what you're saying to each other in real time. Why not? I'm not saying they have reasons to hide the information or that their desire to keep things private is evidence of wrong doing. But someone will make that argument and they do themselves no favors by giving them ammunition. Just open up, treat your opposition with respect and civility, and argue your case like professionals.
If you can't do that then you might as well run off in a childish huff because that's what's required here.
I have no problem switching places. I know I can have everything I have now if I switched and probably more.
I firmly believe most differences at this point are due to culture and not racial bias. As I'd keep my mind and culture in a body swap... I feel I could attain everything I have now.
However, I would NOT swap cultures regardless of what body I had at the end. I do feel that certain cultural outlooks will lead people to under perform. I value my culture and mind. So I couldn't swap that. But my skin color? My ethnic origins? My gender? I don't really care.
I am somewhat attached to being a male of course but that's just my self image. I am male. But do I think I'd be worse off as a woman? Not really. If anything things would be a lot easier in a few respects.
without state backing I don't see how some small band of hackers is going to make any difference.
On the bright side, the threat of this will likely motivate the banking industry to finally close some giant security holes in their system.
Many businesses don't change slowly. They change in bursts typically as a result of some sort of trauma or unlikely opportunity. Nothing changes and then everything changes all at once.
Everything is a gender or race issue. Why is this so important? No one is forcing women out of open source. Pretty much anyone can participate that WANTS to be there.
First, most participation comes without any idea of what the other person even looks like so the notion of gender or race probably is irrelevant. Am I man or a woman or an orange gorilla who escaped from his cage? You don't know.
Second, most of these heavily male communities are not lacking for females because they're intentionally driving them away. To the contrary, most of them want women if only to feel less like they're in an isolated research station on the moon. Psychologically men just prefer that. It doesn't even need a sexual component.
I guess I wonder if people are going to be playing the race and gender card 100 years from now? Does this thing expire ever? What effort needs to be made and then we can say "enough."... ever? Because if it's never enough then just out of simply pique I suggest we reverse that situation and start demanding male participation in female activities ESPECIALLY if men don't want to participate. See, some group is complaining because women have INTENTIONALLY chosen to not participate in certain activities. And this is somehow a male problem. Well, what about all the female groups that men don't have any interest in at all? Demand equal representation. Now you might only be able to get one man for every ten women that want to join such groups. But if you enforce equality it means that nine women have to be rejected for every one that is accepted into such groups and all men are accepted indifferent to any other qualification.
Sound like fun? Well, the men aren't enjoying this nonsense either. Just stop it. If you're actively being driven away because of your vagina then cite some evidence and we'll deal with it. But if all you've got is correlative gender statistics then please don't waste our time.
anyway, it doesn't matter... the drm doesn't work. The game they cited had a crack released for it almost as soon as it hit shelves. So whatever they think they did it wasn't effective.
If you want to keep it secure then you need to keep critical game code off their machine. Force them to log to play the game.
One idea is to not provide game AI to the local machine and force them to log in to get access to AI. AI would be for all sorts of things. Pathing, targeting, NPC AI, economic AI, whatever is relevant to the game. There are certain calculations that have to be made in real time or the game doesn't work that don't involve graphics or sound. Off load portions of that a centralized server. Using very little bandwidth such a server could process AI instructions for hundreds or thousands of players. This would require that they log into the internet to play but that's going to be required for any strong DRM.
The trick will be to offload enough to make it difficult to emulate but not so much that running the server is burdensome.
When the game is no longer being supported or the company doesn't want to host the server anymore... release that code. Ideally just patch people's games so they don't need it. But worst case just give them the server code so they can run it locally on their machines and alter a host file or something to link to it.
Short of that, you have to do an OnLive solution where the game is just held entirely on remote systems to which the user never has physical access.
the effort to control game piracy through DRM is futile.
The only thing that might work is if you keep the game online either by not releasing the server code for a multiplayer game or keep the the whole thing on line by using a system like OnLive to keep the whole game code in the cloud.
Not really. You can go back to colonial times and certain sorts of behavior were just accepted as normal. That's always been the case. Certain things you would take as odd have at certain times in history been "normal."
Consider that some cities were under near continious siege for hundreds of years. They built up a big wall on the vulnerable sides of the city, strengthened their trade relations through what avenues could be protected from enemy attack, and got on with living.
Take the fortress city of Constantinople. They lived in a state of siege. People were born, raised, raised their own children, lived, and died under siege. Generates went by under siege.
It becomes normal.
What's really happening is the war is becoming "normal"...
We don't think to oppose the pursuit of criminals by our police. That's effectively what has happened to the terrorists. This is made much easier with the drone war because we don't take the same sort of causalities. We just play whack-o-mole with the terrorists. And assuming we can manage the politics, we can logistically sustain the campaign indefinitely.
I'm not saying we should or shouldn't. I think he's right in saying that if we don't oppose it soon it will just become an institution like the drug war. This thing that sits there and we do but we don't actually think about it. It just happens. It has it's own momentum, budget, and everyone just expects it to keep rolling along for various reasons forever.
It's possibly too late to stop it already. The CIA has built it into their budget and that is one of the harder budgets to penetrate.
I'm torn... I don't want to fight anyone or kill anyone. But of course I recognize that if people are going out of their way to kill me or people I care for then they must themselves be engaged and destroyed. The whole fat man thin man situation is somewhat confusing in that we're not really dealing with any fat men. It's all thin men... lots of them. It's a very target rich environment. And we're capable of icing them with a high degree of efficiency. But then there's blow back, reprisal, revenge... it just this endless struggle to balance an enemy's fear and hatred. I don't want to be hated. But I do want to be feared if only because I think it will make me safer.
Fear might not be the right term. Respect would be a better term. And i don't mean respect as in liked or admired. I mean respect in the same way you respect a tidal wave, the sun, or a mountain. You don't mess with these forces. They will break you if you don't respect them. That's how I want my nation regarded. Like the mountain, I don't have any ill will against anyone else on the planet. But don't mess with my people or I'm going to find a reason for you to change your mind. Lets just not go there. Everyone go to their little corners and swear peace. First bastard that breaks the peace gets pounded into the ground like a tent peg.
Just about any business that wants to relocate the US is welcome. And really, we're well suited to this one. GMO doesn't scare us and whatever some people think it's the future.
So I'm very happy the US is increasing market share in an industry with huge growth potential and effectively infinite life span because this is a business that will never go away.
all things are relative. Brazil is an island of sanity in a sea of madness. if her neighbors weren't completely kookoo for coco puffs then they might not be able to get away with it. But since they are they can probably do almost anything and stay competitive.
if you start DDoS's politicians they're going to get angry. And then they're just going to pass the first thing that comes across their desk that hurts you.
In short... your idea would massively backfire. You might as well pull the pin on a grenade and then eat it.
Very well... we'll see what happens... For what it's worth to you I don't want SOPA passed either... I just worry that this is going to keep eating away until we find some sort of bargain we can both live with... but maybe you're right... maybe they won't stop until they get unreasonable levels of control. In case, I think it's important to discredit the people pushing the legislation. Part of the purpose of a compromise would be do that. But if you have a better way I'm open to ideas.
The wealth of nations is directly related to their productivity. Just be careful that you don't reduce the productivity of the economy or everyone suffers.
You think they put SOPA out there to be rejected so we'd then agree to something else?... Look... if we could just shut all this done, stick our fingers in our ears, and hum... then that might be a functional response.
However, you can't. Your idea just will lead to them getting SOPA in one form or another. You have to put something out there to mitigate the piracy issue. You have to at the very least show good faith here. If you don't do that then you've effectively shown bad faith and at that point your ability to influence the situation will be limited.
Your solution of dispensing with copyrights entirely is about as practical as responding a debate by covering yourself in whip cream and then singing the thong song.
I guess it makes sense to you... but to everyone else it just looks like you went crazy and started wigging out.
It's also a strawman to say I have advocated we forge our own bonds. Rather we have to come up with some legislation that solves the piracy issue in a constructive way that also respects our rights. Simply saying no more copyrights is madness. It won't happen and you might as well give in to your corporate overlords now. because if that's the best you've got then they'll eat you alive.
What I am proposing is that we come up with some legislation addresses the concern without giving them license to turn the internet into a pirate witch hunt.
There has to be some kind of compromise you're willing to offer... because if the best you've got is the whip cream and thong song then... you've basically disqualified yourself from participating in the discussion. Everyone will just passively ignore you.
I'm not saying any of this to insult you. I'm just cluing you into how that looks. THAT strategy won't work. It is already backfiring. SOPA has only gotten this far because that strategy isn't working. If you want to fight a revolution or something then get your gun now. Because short of a compromise you might as well.
Tell me that after they've rejected a proposal we've offered. because right now that's just conjecture on your point to justify not offering another solution.
Maybe you're right but it would have more weight if it were proved.
We need to offer something. Right now you're backing congress into the position of either supporting the RIAA or Pirates... that's how this looks to them. They hear you're upset but they take the lack of a solution as evidence that you're just pirates. Because only pirates would want no solution. that's their perspective on this issue. Just take that for what it is worth.
We'll have a MUCH better chance of defeating SOPA if we have another solution to offer. If we have nothing we're probably screwed.
This is a warning. We have to come up with competing systems to address the problem. Simply saying "do nothing" isn't going to work. They're going to pass something. And if we offer them nothing to pass they'll just take what the RIAA gives them and run with it.
It's very important that the EFF amongst others come up with some alternative... Or we're boned.
Generally... it's going to make companies unhappy and there are all sorts of consequences when employers get upset. Like... not employing as many people.
I agree... ideally one should be able to wave this whole overtime thing since a lot of employees aren't paid by the hour anyway. Just make it part of the law that no employer can coerce someone to wave the requirement and that it has to be voluntary.
You had me until you made the stupid insult against my country.
We are well aware companies do bad things all the time. My point was that the companies are not paying for overtime. They won't do it. So the new rule is going to be disabling the email.
They're not going to pay overtime. So what they'll do is instruct the email servers to not send mail outside office hours. This might cause problems if employees don't all work at the same time. But doubtless the servers can be programmed to send mail in some customized fashion.
Maybe even make it the employee's job to update a settings page in the web terminal for the email system.
Memo 5441: Employees are required to keep current their hours by logging into the provided address. Errors in this system will be assumed the employee's responsibility and the company takes no responsibility for... yahtah yahtah yahtah.
They're not paying over time. Governments might be dumb enough to do it but corps just won't. So they'll find some way to not do it. They don't really need employees to respond to company emails outside of work time anyway.
The worst thing that could happen is Google etc cooperating with these governments to shut the internet down. Now the Indian government is fighting with them which will force Google etc to fight back. That creates a situation where freedom is actually best likely to survive. The indian government can't do anything without the cooperation of these companies. Even if they had it they might not succeed. But without them its totally hopeless. And by going in this direction google is put in the position of treating these entities as hostiles to be defeated.
Slashdot Mirror
Well... to be relevant the state backing it would have to have enough resources to make a difference. I don't know if Iran has the abiliity to wage as cyber war and I know Palestine doesn't.
It takes a technological society to back a cyber war. China, Japan, South Korea, many countries in europe, or the US... that's about it. If your country doesn't have an information economy then you can't wage cyberwar anymore then a per-industrial society can wage mechanized warfare. You can't build tanks without factories and you can't wage cyberwar without a software industry. At least not with state backing.
Something that happens if a state backs it is that companies get paid to develop cyber warfare weapons. Several US weapons contractors are already selling such tools to the US government and it would be folly to think that wasn't going on all over the world in every information economy. However, I don't think Iran has an information economy. Maybe I'm wrong... and I know Palestine doesn't... so who is backing it if not disqualified powers that lack the resources?
Now, I'm not saying AGW is real or unreal. What I am saying is that to even presume to be in the same category as Darwin you must FIRST disclose the raw data. Now. Just do it. You have nothing to lose and everything to gain if you're right. The only reason to not release the data is if you're in fact hiding something or there are many different wants to interpret the data. That leads us to methodology. You then have to explain exhaustively why your method of handling the data is correct. Then after both data and methodology are verified we can look at the conclusions.
Prior to that, it's all premature. In effect, I'm saying science must be open source. Disclose all the data, all the computer code used to manage the data sets, and finally offer up a good sdk to explain what you're doing throughout.
That's how this is supposed to work and it's what Darwin did when he published his theory. If you want to claim AGW is the same as evolution then you need to first make AGW into an ACTUAL scientific theory. AGW is not a theory yet. It isn't nearly as solid. Currently it's still a hypothesis and really taking issue with a hypothesis is not a sign of ignorance or stubborness. Make AGW into a theory and THEN complain about people not accepting it. Not before.
And the first step to do that is to open up and tell people everything. These leaked emails are just a symptom of the problem. Why are these people sneaking around in the dark at all about it? Have your discussions in public or on public channels so we can read what you're saying to each other in real time. Why not? I'm not saying they have reasons to hide the information or that their desire to keep things private is evidence of wrong doing. But someone will make that argument and they do themselves no favors by giving them ammunition. Just open up, treat your opposition with respect and civility, and argue your case like professionals.
If you can't do that then you might as well run off in a childish huff because that's what's required here.
I have no problem switching places. I know I can have everything I have now if I switched and probably more.
I firmly believe most differences at this point are due to culture and not racial bias. As I'd keep my mind and culture in a body swap... I feel I could attain everything I have now.
However, I would NOT swap cultures regardless of what body I had at the end. I do feel that certain cultural outlooks will lead people to under perform. I value my culture and mind. So I couldn't swap that. But my skin color? My ethnic origins? My gender? I don't really care.
I am somewhat attached to being a male of course but that's just my self image. I am male. But do I think I'd be worse off as a woman? Not really. If anything things would be a lot easier in a few respects.
without state backing I don't see how some small band of hackers is going to make any difference.
On the bright side, the threat of this will likely motivate the banking industry to finally close some giant security holes in their system.
Many businesses don't change slowly. They change in bursts typically as a result of some sort of trauma or unlikely opportunity. Nothing changes and then everything changes all at once.
So... maybe this will be the catalyst.
Everything is a gender or race issue. Why is this so important? No one is forcing women out of open source. Pretty much anyone can participate that WANTS to be there.
First, most participation comes without any idea of what the other person even looks like so the notion of gender or race probably is irrelevant. Am I man or a woman or an orange gorilla who escaped from his cage? You don't know.
Second, most of these heavily male communities are not lacking for females because they're intentionally driving them away. To the contrary, most of them want women if only to feel less like they're in an isolated research station on the moon. Psychologically men just prefer that. It doesn't even need a sexual component.
I guess I wonder if people are going to be playing the race and gender card 100 years from now? Does this thing expire ever? What effort needs to be made and then we can say "enough."... ever? Because if it's never enough then just out of simply pique I suggest we reverse that situation and start demanding male participation in female activities ESPECIALLY if men don't want to participate. See, some group is complaining because women have INTENTIONALLY chosen to not participate in certain activities. And this is somehow a male problem. Well, what about all the female groups that men don't have any interest in at all? Demand equal representation. Now you might only be able to get one man for every ten women that want to join such groups. But if you enforce equality it means that nine women have to be rejected for every one that is accepted into such groups and all men are accepted indifferent to any other qualification.
Sound like fun? Well, the men aren't enjoying this nonsense either. Just stop it. If you're actively being driven away because of your vagina then cite some evidence and we'll deal with it. But if all you've got is correlative gender statistics then please don't waste our time.
people pirate games even when they cost a dollar.
anyway, it doesn't matter... the drm doesn't work. The game they cited had a crack released for it almost as soon as it hit shelves. So whatever they think they did it wasn't effective.
If you want to keep it secure then you need to keep critical game code off their machine. Force them to log to play the game.
One idea is to not provide game AI to the local machine and force them to log in to get access to AI. AI would be for all sorts of things. Pathing, targeting, NPC AI, economic AI, whatever is relevant to the game. There are certain calculations that have to be made in real time or the game doesn't work that don't involve graphics or sound. Off load portions of that a centralized server. Using very little bandwidth such a server could process AI instructions for hundreds or thousands of players. This would require that they log into the internet to play but that's going to be required for any strong DRM.
The trick will be to offload enough to make it difficult to emulate but not so much that running the server is burdensome.
When the game is no longer being supported or the company doesn't want to host the server anymore... release that code. Ideally just patch people's games so they don't need it. But worst case just give them the server code so they can run it locally on their machines and alter a host file or something to link to it.
Short of that, you have to do an OnLive solution where the game is just held entirely on remote systems to which the user never has physical access.
the effort to control game piracy through DRM is futile.
The only thing that might work is if you keep the game online either by not releasing the server code for a multiplayer game or keep the the whole thing on line by using a system like OnLive to keep the whole game code in the cloud.
Short of that... it will be pirated.
Not really. You can go back to colonial times and certain sorts of behavior were just accepted as normal. That's always been the case. Certain things you would take as odd have at certain times in history been "normal."
Consider that some cities were under near continious siege for hundreds of years. They built up a big wall on the vulnerable sides of the city, strengthened their trade relations through what avenues could be protected from enemy attack, and got on with living.
Take the fortress city of Constantinople. They lived in a state of siege. People were born, raised, raised their own children, lived, and died under siege. Generates went by under siege.
It becomes normal.
What's really happening is the war is becoming "normal"...
We don't think to oppose the pursuit of criminals by our police. That's effectively what has happened to the terrorists. This is made much easier with the drone war because we don't take the same sort of causalities. We just play whack-o-mole with the terrorists. And assuming we can manage the politics, we can logistically sustain the campaign indefinitely.
I'm not saying we should or shouldn't. I think he's right in saying that if we don't oppose it soon it will just become an institution like the drug war. This thing that sits there and we do but we don't actually think about it. It just happens. It has it's own momentum, budget, and everyone just expects it to keep rolling along for various reasons forever.
It's possibly too late to stop it already. The CIA has built it into their budget and that is one of the harder budgets to penetrate.
I'm torn... I don't want to fight anyone or kill anyone. But of course I recognize that if people are going out of their way to kill me or people I care for then they must themselves be engaged and destroyed. The whole fat man thin man situation is somewhat confusing in that we're not really dealing with any fat men. It's all thin men... lots of them. It's a very target rich environment. And we're capable of icing them with a high degree of efficiency. But then there's blow back, reprisal, revenge... it just this endless struggle to balance an enemy's fear and hatred. I don't want to be hated. But I do want to be feared if only because I think it will make me safer.
Fear might not be the right term. Respect would be a better term. And i don't mean respect as in liked or admired. I mean respect in the same way you respect a tidal wave, the sun, or a mountain. You don't mess with these forces. They will break you if you don't respect them. That's how I want my nation regarded. Like the mountain, I don't have any ill will against anyone else on the planet. But don't mess with my people or I'm going to find a reason for you to change your mind. Lets just not go there. Everyone go to their little corners and swear peace. First bastard that breaks the peace gets pounded into the ground like a tent peg.
Just about any business that wants to relocate the US is welcome. And really, we're well suited to this one. GMO doesn't scare us and whatever some people think it's the future.
So I'm very happy the US is increasing market share in an industry with huge growth potential and effectively infinite life span because this is a business that will never go away.
all things are relative. Brazil is an island of sanity in a sea of madness. if her neighbors weren't completely kookoo for coco puffs then they might not be able to get away with it. But since they are they can probably do almost anything and stay competitive.
if you start DDoS's politicians they're going to get angry. And then they're just going to pass the first thing that comes across their desk that hurts you.
In short... your idea would massively backfire. You might as well pull the pin on a grenade and then eat it.
Well, enjoy your decline then. In the US, we're going to fight the fall.
Very well... we'll see what happens... For what it's worth to you I don't want SOPA passed either... I just worry that this is going to keep eating away until we find some sort of bargain we can both live with... but maybe you're right... maybe they won't stop until they get unreasonable levels of control. In case, I think it's important to discredit the people pushing the legislation. Part of the purpose of a compromise would be do that. But if you have a better way I'm open to ideas.
The wealth of nations is directly related to their productivity. Just be careful that you don't reduce the productivity of the economy or everyone suffers.
You think they put SOPA out there to be rejected so we'd then agree to something else? ... Look... if we could just shut all this done, stick our fingers in our ears, and hum... then that might be a functional response.
However, you can't. Your idea just will lead to them getting SOPA in one form or another. You have to put something out there to mitigate the piracy issue. You have to at the very least show good faith here. If you don't do that then you've effectively shown bad faith and at that point your ability to influence the situation will be limited.
You're going to lose if you don't play the game strategically.
This isn't tic tac toe.
Your solution of dispensing with copyrights entirely is about as practical as responding a debate by covering yourself in whip cream and then singing the thong song.
I guess it makes sense to you... but to everyone else it just looks like you went crazy and started wigging out.
It's also a strawman to say I have advocated we forge our own bonds. Rather we have to come up with some legislation that solves the piracy issue in a constructive way that also respects our rights. Simply saying no more copyrights is madness. It won't happen and you might as well give in to your corporate overlords now. because if that's the best you've got then they'll eat you alive.
What I am proposing is that we come up with some legislation addresses the concern without giving them license to turn the internet into a pirate witch hunt.
There has to be some kind of compromise you're willing to offer... because if the best you've got is the whip cream and thong song then... you've basically disqualified yourself from participating in the discussion. Everyone will just passively ignore you.
I'm not saying any of this to insult you. I'm just cluing you into how that looks. THAT strategy won't work. It is already backfiring. SOPA has only gotten this far because that strategy isn't working. If you want to fight a revolution or something then get your gun now. Because short of a compromise you might as well.
Tell me that after they've rejected a proposal we've offered. because right now that's just conjecture on your point to justify not offering another solution.
Maybe you're right but it would have more weight if it were proved.
We need to offer something. Right now you're backing congress into the position of either supporting the RIAA or Pirates... that's how this looks to them. They hear you're upset but they take the lack of a solution as evidence that you're just pirates. Because only pirates would want no solution. that's their perspective on this issue. Just take that for what it is worth.
We'll have a MUCH better chance of defeating SOPA if we have another solution to offer. If we have nothing we're probably screwed.
This is a warning. We have to come up with competing systems to address the problem. Simply saying "do nothing" isn't going to work. They're going to pass something. And if we offer them nothing to pass they'll just take what the RIAA gives them and run with it.
It's very important that the EFF amongst others come up with some alternative... Or we're boned.
Generally... it's going to make companies unhappy and there are all sorts of consequences when employers get upset. Like... not employing as many people.
Anyway, it's brazil, so I don't really care...
I agree... ideally one should be able to wave this whole overtime thing since a lot of employees aren't paid by the hour anyway. Just make it part of the law that no employer can coerce someone to wave the requirement and that it has to be voluntary.
You had me until you made the stupid insult against my country.
We are well aware companies do bad things all the time. My point was that the companies are not paying for overtime. They won't do it. So the new rule is going to be disabling the email.
Please save the juvenile insults.
They're not going to pay overtime. So what they'll do is instruct the email servers to not send mail outside office hours. This might cause problems if employees don't all work at the same time. But doubtless the servers can be programmed to send mail in some customized fashion.
Maybe even make it the employee's job to update a settings page in the web terminal for the email system.
Memo 5441: Employees are required to keep current their hours by logging into the provided address. Errors in this system will be assumed the employee's responsibility and the company takes no responsibility for... yahtah yahtah yahtah.
They're not paying over time. Governments might be dumb enough to do it but corps just won't. So they'll find some way to not do it. They don't really need employees to respond to company emails outside of work time anyway.
The worst thing that could happen is Google etc cooperating with these governments to shut the internet down. Now the Indian government is fighting with them which will force Google etc to fight back. That creates a situation where freedom is actually best likely to survive. The indian government can't do anything without the cooperation of these companies. Even if they had it they might not succeed. But without them its totally hopeless. And by going in this direction google is put in the position of treating these entities as hostiles to be defeated.
So the whole thing is great. I love it.