It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Internet of Today.. Gone Tomorrow?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 30 2003 @ 02:22 PM
link   
Issues 2004 - Picture, if you will, an information infrastructure that encourages censorship, surveillance and suppression of the creative impulse. Where anonymity is outlawed and every penny spent is accounted for. Where the powers that be can smother subversive (or economically competitive) ideas in the cradle, and no one can publish even a laundry list without the imprimatur of Big Brother. Some prognosticators are saying that such a construct is nearly inevitable. And this infrastructure is none other than the former paradise of rebels and free-speechers: the Internet.
msnbc.msn.com...

If this is the case what can we do to stop this?




posted on Dec, 30 2003 @ 02:36 PM
link   
If this does happen it will be the day the 1st admendment is removed from the Constitution.



posted on Dec, 30 2003 @ 02:39 PM
link   
it is started. Anybody have heard about Internet 2?

A new internet that there is only educating and political stuff controled by Governement?

Or you could just check the firewall that company install everywhere that restrict your internet acess to almost....
Nothing!



posted on Dec, 30 2003 @ 02:41 PM
link   
Sounds to me that these new controls are already being implmented:

In September Walker posted his fears in a 28,000-word Web document called the Digital Imprimatur. The name refers to his belief that it’s possible that nothing would be allowed to even appear on the Internet without having a proper technical authorization.

How could the freedom genie be shoved back into the bottle? Basically, it’s part of a huge effort to transform the Net from an arena where anyone can anonymously participate to a sign-in affair where tamperproof “digital certificates” identify who you are. The advantages of such a system are clear: it would eliminate identity theft and enable small, secure electronic “microtransactions,” long a dream of Internet commerce pioneers. (Another bonus: arrivederci, unwelcome spam.) A concurrent step would be the adoption of “trusted computing,” a system by which not only people but computer programs would be stamped with identifying marks. Those would link with certificates that determine whether programs are uncorrupted and cleared to run on your computer.



posted on Dec, 30 2003 @ 02:41 PM
link   
That would be a violation of Freedom of Speech, if they control what gets out. The government already has some control over what is seen, but if they do this, it would be the NWO of the Internet. This would probably be the beginning of Martial (sp?) Law!

-wD



posted on Dec, 30 2003 @ 02:43 PM
link   
What Worries me is Microsoft's new Digital Rights Management Software:

Palladium controls information after it's sent from your PC. Using Digital Rights Management (DRM) technology, Palladium can be used to securely distribute music, movies, and other intellectual property securely over the Internet. Movie studios and the recording industry could use this technology to let their customers exercise their fair use rights to copy audio CDs and movies, for example. "It's a funny thing," says Bill Gates. "We came at this thinking about music, but then we realized that e-mail and documents were far more interesting domains." Gates says that Palladium could ensure that email designated as private could not be forwarded or copied to other people, for example. Or, the Newsweek reports reads, "you could create Word documents that could be read only in the next week. In all cases, it would be the user, not Microsoft, who sets these policies."



posted on Dec, 30 2003 @ 02:46 PM
link   
1st admendment doesn't apply to the internet. Free speach is regulated by the servers that regulate the content.

The rest of the article goes over everything in a general sense but at least it has most of the sides covered

Does this mean that John Walker’s nightmare is a foregone conclusion? Not necessarily. Certain influential companies are beginning to understand that their own businesses depend on an open Internet. (Google, for example, is dependent on the ability to image the Web on its own servers, a task that might be impossible in a controlled Internet.) Activist groups like the Electronic Frontier Foundation are sounding alarms.
I'm not too worried about. I think of the internet as another planet. Its our part to keep it clean and running smoothly. We want growth but not destruction and we also want the freedom to host whatever content we desire as long as it doesn't damage the internet itself it should be okay, but that just doesn't happen in reality. Everything pretty much goes unless otherwise stated and everyone has a choice to visit and create good and bad things on the internet. No country should ever regulate the internet in a strict and mandatory manner.

you can really go on forever on the subject but thats a part of my view on the subject



posted on Dec, 30 2003 @ 02:53 PM
link   
I think the major changes will be made by business, not the government. Like Microsoft points out, companies will want records of who's who, digital rights management, and audit records. We can support companies who aren't interested in playing big-brother. We can also support companies who offer privacy products.

China has tried to crack down on dissidents. Usually they threaten ISPs. As a result, surfers have come up with many methods of subverting surfing rules. I'd assume that the same things would happen here.



posted on Dec, 30 2003 @ 03:07 PM
link   
The phone companies right now own about 90% of the backbone.

Yet they fight to keep their old hard wires ringing.

As voice and video pipelines open up in the internet, you will see the phone companies either dropping their land line circuits in trade for I-communication services thru plentiful fiber in every home, ...or they will go the way of the wagon wheel.

And if this happens you will start to receive in your ISP bill....

1/2 a page of your time and connect info fee's,

and then about a full page of...

connection fee
extended service fee
911 surcharge fee
telecomm relay surcharge fee
Interstate access surcharge
Inter-country surcharge
federal universal service fund fee
IP portability fee


And of course the fed and state gov will see big drops in tax revenues, so you will also see

Federal sales tax
state sales tax
international country access tax
county sales tax


It is already starting to go this route, and the fees will pile up, regardless if you believe the 'tax free' status of the web will continue.

Your AOL bill...


21.95 per month
11.95 fees and surcharges

or if you are on HighBandwidth circuits...

another $20.00
luxury tax $5.00

total monthly cost less electricity
$58.90 per month


Now if you want cable tv too.....

[Edited on 30-12-2003 by smirkley]



posted on Dec, 30 2003 @ 03:14 PM
link   
It wouldn't be a violation of speech. You can say anything you want...there just won't be anyone listening. If they shut off the WWW(1) and turn on WWW(2) making everyone register to use it, then they will control the horizontal...and the vertical.



posted on Dec, 30 2003 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by logiclock

China has tried to crack down on dissidents. Usually they threaten ISPs. As a result, surfers have come up with many methods of subverting surfing rules. I'd assume that the same things would happen here.

The Waste network is a good example of subverting surfing rules. If you haven't checked into it you need to. Here's a quick run down on the security it uses.

How WASTE Secures Links
WASTE secures the links of the WASTE network by using RSA to exchange session keys and authenticate the other end of the connection. Once the hosts have authenticated each other and both have the correct session keys, the connection is encrypted using Blowfish in PCBC mode (using different IVs for each direction of the connection). The oversimplified process for bringing a link up is (see comments in the code and the code itself for a more in depth view):
Both sides exchange public key hashes, and verify that they know that hash
Both sides exchange session keys and challenge-response tokens encrypted with each others public keys.
Both sides decrypt and verify the challenge-response tokens, and begin encrypted communication (a stream of messages, each message is verified using an MD5).

waste.sourceforge.net...

And best of all the program is free
Last time I checked.



posted on Dec, 30 2003 @ 03:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by darklanser
It wouldn't be a violation of speech. You can say anything you want...there just won't be anyone listening. If they shut off the WWW(1) and turn on WWW(2) making everyone register to use it, then they will control the horizontal...and the vertical.



I believe it's only a matter of time



posted on Dec, 30 2003 @ 03:27 PM
link   
sadly blackjackal your silly american constitution has no say in the land of the internet, it is the possession of no country.
the only thing i'm thinking is, linux



posted on Dec, 30 2003 @ 03:33 PM
link   

DEATH TO CORPORATIONS!! I`VE HAD NO SLEEP BECAUSE I`VE BEEN READING ATS SINCE LAST NIGHT!! I AM NOT MENTALLY STABLE! WOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!



posted on Dec, 30 2003 @ 03:39 PM
link   
You know Freedom is a funny thing. It exists but only in the mind of each individual can it be defined. Here is an example of what I mean (I am not pointing fingers or speaking ill of anyone & I do not want to offed, this just illustrates my point)
I am a non smoker ... I cannot stand cigarrete smoke... now I do not go around telling people that I dont want them to smoke around me, in fact many of my friends smoke. But one pet peeve I have is when people, particularly at my work, light up as they are 1 step out the door and stand right in the path of the door just puffing away. I do not ask them to stop or move, I agree they have the right to do it, but in a truly free society I have the right to ask them to move, however in past experiences that is not taken well!.

I kno wthis does not flow with this topic well, but I am looking at it from My veiw poiunt of freedom which is very literal. Spammers have the right to spam jsut like I have the right not to get spam. whose rights supersede the other? Now I am not making a case for spam ... in fact I loathe spam & I am so tired of being told that I need a larger P3n1s.

Its just that freedom is a fickle fickle lady that has to be dealt with gingerly. If I hate spam, I do things to block it, although it is not right that I shold have to pay for the software to block it.

Personally instead of the Government spending $$ on controlling the internet & restricting what can & cannot be done, they should create a free program to block spam & undesirable websites, that is "super strangth"
to be available for everyone. Of course, then you have to protect yourself from the spy ware they imbed in the software..... basically, in a nut shell no one will be happy because every option treads on someone elses Idea of freedom.



posted on Dec, 30 2003 @ 03:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by banjoechef
sadly blackjackal your silly american constitution has no say in the land of the internet, it is the possession of no country.
the only thing i'm thinking is, linux


Correct but a government can censor what you see on the internet (Ex.. China). A government can pass laws that require all companies that operate within its boundries to comply. A Government can do alot to stiffle the flow of the internet.

The reason I brought up my "Silly American Constitution" is because it is supposed to protect my rights as an individual.



posted on Dec, 30 2003 @ 03:54 PM
link   
The constitution also protects the rights of business practices. The gov cannot block a legal advertising venture.

This is why the Do Not Call list thingy has run into a roadblock.

Some states are still prepping for it and doing it, but it legally cannot be done at a federal level.

I will try to find a link to the court docs or something 4u.



posted on Jan, 1 2004 @ 11:26 PM
link   
Just something I thought relevent to add to this thread...

ISP's accelorate censorship on the web !!

It appears a multi-level control over the most open communications venue to date in history.



posted on Jan, 2 2004 @ 03:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by smirkley
Just something I thought relevent to add to this thread...

ISP's accelorate censorship on the web !!

It appears a multi-level control over the most open communications venue to date in history.


Thanks for the info



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join