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.

 

How long would the internet last in the event of meltdown?

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 05:18 AM
link   
I was thinking about the internet last night and in particular this site as its my favourite.

With all the previous and (I think I can surely say without a doubt now) future catastrophe to come.
How long would it be before the internet is shut down to americans or indeed the world?

It is my understanding that the core of the internet traffic runs through AT&T in new york therefore if the stock market plunges to unrecoverable levels, there was a major attack or other scenarios would that not mean that the internet would be down?

Correct me if im wrong but is'nt ATS a commercial company so it would be possible it could go bust as well?

Is there any policies that members know of that would authorise a shut down of the net?

One more point, if the internet were to go down after a major event then most of the world would be completely oblivious to it from a general public view unless media air it and I would not rely on the UK media to say the least.

Obviously I am speculating here and i am interested to hear from anyone with any points or someone who knows the facts with regards to this.

Hope it never comes to it but what if's cannot be disregarded in these times even if its a big one.



[edit on 7-10-2008 by XXXN3O]




posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 06:47 AM
link   
AT&T is a major player in the internet in the US and abroad, and you might see lots of websites go down. The thing is though, the internet is so resilient and non compartmentalized that these routers would pick up what was still active and re route traffic. Could loose overseas connections though. But mostly it would take a huge, world wide catastrophe to kill the net



posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 06:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by midnightbrigade
AT&T is a major player in the internet in the US and abroad, and you might see lots of websites go down. The thing is though, the internet is so resilient and non compartmentalized that these routers would pick up what was still active and re route traffic. Could loose overseas connections though. But mostly it would take a huge, world wide catastrophe to kill the net


Nope.. you only need to take out the 13 Root DNS servers around the world. (yea, there are only 13 Roots). Take them out, and the net would start to deteriorate. Unless you knew the IP address of the website you want to visit.. you will be out of luck. The net would still be somewhat functional, but you have to be a bit savvy in order to get where you want. Besides that, there isn't much you can do to take it down other than the major bridges failing. You would only have to take out a certain percentage of them to make the Net basically inoperable.



posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 07:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by djcloudy

Nope.. you only need to take out the 13 Root DNS servers around the world. (yea, there are only 13 Roots). Take them out, and the net would start to deteriorate. Unless you knew the IP address of the website you want to visit.. you will be out of luck. The net would still be somewhat functional, but you have to be a bit savvy in order to get where you want. Besides that, there isn't much you can do to take it down other than the major bridges failing. You would only have to take out a certain percentage of them to make the Net basically inoperable.


hehehehe I thought of that, but I figured we were looking at a total drop of functionality..but you're right, it would cause havoc with the average user



posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 07:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by midnightbrigade
The thing is though, the internet is so resilient and non compartmentalized that these routers would pick up what was still active and re route traffic.


People love to say this, but in reality there are enough chokepoints that losing even one or two would reduce your ability to reach other machines drastically.



posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 07:41 AM
link   
You are actually worried about the affects of the internet during a global meltdown????

OMG.

Tell me something...does that mean if your favorite website goes down...your life comes to an end?

There is more to life than the internet. If you are that worried about the internet going poof and you cant visit your favorite website or even ATS after that...then you are really screwed.

If I were you, I would be more worried about survival and getting through the meltdown than be all uptight over loosing internet.

Sheesh...some need to get priorites straight.

Try focusing on stocking up on supplies, clean water, clothing, tools, learn hunting skills and how to survive in a total collapse. Oh and also..learn how to put the comptuer and internet at the bottom of the list of priorities.

Cheers!!!!



posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 07:50 AM
link   
The internet was originally designed to maintain communications in the event of a full-scale nuclear war between the U.S. and the old U.S.S.R. (Although, for some reason, people want to hide that fact now).

It is called "the web" because if you would draw it out on paper, it looks like a giant spider's web. (I believe it was the Hopi who said that in the time of the end, the world would be covered with a spider web. But that could be an old wive's tale). Just as a spider web can be brought down by cutting any single point, the internet cannot either.

Taking out the "13 root DNS servers" wouldn't do much, because most ISPs cache DNS locally.



posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 07:56 AM
link   
The internet would be one of the best survival tools ever.

For communication and information.

Most of us don't have the skills to survive in our own backyards without a wal-mart nearby.

How to field dress a rabbit? Google it.

Is this plant edible? google it.

Who has spare parts and ammo for an SKS? email inquiry.



posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 07:57 AM
link   
reply to post by RFBurns
 


Looks like you completely missed the point


The internet is a source of information didn't you know? Information is extremely important in the event of a "melt down".



posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 07:57 AM
link   
Internet?! We don't need no steenking internet!

Seriously however, I think it would be the first thing to go down - China have a staggering amount of hacker/script kiddies ready to take down Western internet targets.

If computer communication was that essential to get information through, people could always string up some modems and set up an ad-hoc network or bulletin board sort of service.

The computers that run the thing still need power. Military networks might be fine, but I wouldn't hold much hope for civilian internet.

I'd be off in the hills or something by then anyway.



posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 07:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mainer

Originally posted by midnightbrigade
The thing is though, the internet is so resilient and non compartmentalized that these routers would pick up what was still active and re route traffic.


People love to say this, but in reality there are enough chokepoints that losing even one or two would reduce your ability to reach other machines drastically.


Very true.. Not to mention the varying routing protocols, they don't all play well together.



posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 08:04 AM
link   
I don't know much about the net, so I'm just posting what the IT guys at work say. . . .

One of them says that the net is basically losing money, and the the US military pays to maintain most of the bridges or bottlenecks or roots or whatever.

His claim is that the cost grows as internet usage grows and becomes more complex. He and others speculate that "internet 2" is an attempt to have only those mission-critical components of the web operable and paid for by the US defense establishmetn.

His argument is not that the web will collapse, but that it will be turned off in segments as global providers decide that the escalating cost doesn't outweigh their individual cost.

I don't have any idea if he is right. I hope knowledgeable folks here can critique and advise concerning the idea.

thanks.



posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 08:04 AM
link   
reply to post by slimpickens93
 


Nope.

The best communications would not be the internet during a time of crisis.

It would be HAM radio. Bar none.

American Radio Relay League


Cheers!!!



posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 08:09 AM
link   
If there is a Global Metldown, are you assuming the powergrid will still be up?....
Also, with the potential for an EMF attack, that would wipe out any electronic device that is not shielded......let alone a natural blast out of the Sun that would wipeout satellites.



posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 08:09 AM
link   
reply to post by dodgygeeza
 


Nope I didnt miss the point.

You are.

The internet would be completely useless during a meltdown, because that would be the first thing to go poof.

How can you rely on a media that doesnt work in a meltdown??? How can you get information off of the internet when the whole internet infrastructure is down???

What..we just sit here and look at blank 401 error pages while all hell breaks loose outside the front door?

Heh....its ok tho...I will be getting my info from well established and proven methods of communication during a meltdown while the rest can stare at blank screens....that is if your electricity is still working!!



posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 08:14 AM
link   
HAM radio dosnt need the electrical grid. Nor does it need satellites. And it doesnt need computers.

I can power a 20 watt 160 meter band radio rig off of a bycicle generator and an array of solar pannels or a set of batteries, or even a home made wind generator.

To which I already have all those things...part of my preparing for survival for the last 20+ years.

Hell I can even power a few home devices like small radios or even my desktop and play my pc games if I get board enough.

Even CB radio will be far more reliable for communications than internet in a meltdown situation.

Cheers!!!!



posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 08:45 AM
link   
reply to post by RFBurns
 





The internet would be completely useless during a meltdown, because that would be the first thing to go poof.


That's exactly the guy's point. How are we going to get unbiased news of what is really happening around the world, if the net's down.

That would be some important info.

You make it sound as if he needs the internet to watch his favorite show online, during a global meltdown.



posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 09:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by RFBurns
HAM radio dosnt need the electrical grid. Nor does it need satellites. And it doesnt need computers.

I can power a 20 watt 160 meter band radio rig off of a bycicle generator and an array of solar pannels or a set of batteries, or even a home made wind generator.

To which I already have all those things...part of my preparing for survival for the last 20+ years.

Hell I can even power a few home devices like small radios or even my desktop and play my pc games if I get board enough.

Even CB radio will be far more reliable for communications than internet in a meltdown situation.

Cheers!!!!


I totally agree with you. But I wanted people to know that for the internet to be "taken out", it will have to be ON PURPOSE BY THE GOVERNMENT. It was designed to stay up even in the event of a full scale nuclear war.

Was it just coincidence that when Katrina hit, the internet was still operational in New Orleans, even in the aftermath?

[edit on 7-10-2008 by sir_chancealot]



posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 10:27 AM
link   
reply to post by RFBurns
 


If you actually read my original post I said it was something I was thinking about.

If it was something I was worried or panicking about I would have mentioned.

As for your sarcastic comment on would my life end if this website went down, OF COURSE!

Hope that has cleared up your assumptions.





[edit on 7-10-2008 by XXXN3O]



posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 10:30 AM
link   
reply to post by enigmania
 


You are right in what you are saying, I do find that the resources on the net for news are so much better than mainstream media, radio, cb or others.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join