Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Fafnir wrote:
Although, as a far left democratic socialist, I do have to admit that it is deliciously evil.

Hey, evil is fun. We get dental and we get the cool cars. And we get to say to the hero. "Goodbye Mr. Bond. (INSERT PUN OF IMPENDING DEATH WITH CERTAIN MACHINE)."

And this time evil wins.

 daedalus wrote:


The "NSA scare" doesn't help the situation with government run electronic facilities either.

The government running their own service wouldn't really change anything in that department. Anyone hooked up to an modem and with enough processing power can collect all the metadata they want. Who owns the cables and assigns the IPs or whatever is kind of meaningless on that front.

And to be frank, every single company in the world, is doing what the NSA did. People have been saying this for nearly 20 years (same people who suspected the NSA was doing it). It's as old as the internet itself. every corporation on the planet has metadata on you, as well as personal data. They do it constantly, and no one cares, but the government does it, and



It just kind of makes me laugh.

 LordofHats wrote:

 daedalus wrote:


The "NSA scare" doesn't help the situation with government run electronic facilities either.

The government running their own service wouldn't really change anything in that department. Anyone hooked up to an modem and with enough processing power can collect all the metadata they want. Who owns the cables and assigns the IPs or whatever is kind of meaningless on that front.

The problem is that the public at large doesn't know and doesn't care.

Welcome to the story of my annoyances

People talk about fairness and making sure the next generation of start ups are given fair access and all that, and those are really good arguments. But for some reason I can't get my head past the idea that these companies are trying to turn internet subscription in to the next confusopoly, where instead of being able to make easy price comparisons between different companies offering different speeds and total monthly downloads for a given price, I'll instead have to troll through hundreds of big brand websites figuring out if its worth paying a slightly higher price for faster speed netflix, or if I should go with some cheaper service that's giving me higher speed Apple TV.

Simple, straight forward technology is turned all weird and confusing so that companies can build business models that prevent direct competition forcing the consumer to pay a premium.

 LordofHats wrote:

 daedalus wrote:


The "NSA scare" doesn't help the situation with government run electronic facilities either.

The government running their own service wouldn't really change anything in that department. Anyone hooked up to an modem and with enough processing power can collect all the metadata they want. Who owns the cables and assigns the IPs or whatever is kind of meaningless on that front.

Well, assuming the people you're wanting to snoop on are using your services, or you have said modem and processing power in a closet of said service you've strongarmed into compliance, or you're doing something nefarious to route traffic. The internet isn't just some magic pool of traffic where I can see your traffic and you can see mine.

I think there would probably be positive net gain if the government took over the distribution and infrastructure portions of the US networks that make up our portion of the internet. I agree completely that the government running it wouldn't make the spying worse, but there'd be an even bigger perception of impropriety there though.

And to be frank, every single company in the world, is doing what the NSA did. People have been saying this for nearly 20 years (same people who suspected the NSA was doing it). It's as old as the internet itself. every corporation on the planet has metadata on you, as well as personal data. They do it constantly, and no one cares, but the government does it, and

*snip*
It just kind of makes me laugh.

As an apologist for authority, I would imagine it does.

You can opt out of companies. Facebook only gets picture of me and my personal information if I make the mistake of giving it to them. Facebook also can only collect information sent to Facebook. I have to assume that the NSA collect any information sent anywhere. Again, you don't just vomit information in every direction possible every time you open a web browser. Or, at least, you shouldn't.

Facebook can't throw me in jail or make me part of secret investigations based upon any "metadata" they happen to collect either.

 daedalus wrote:
I think there would probably be positive net gain if the government took over the distribution and infrastructure portions of the US networks that make up our portion of the internet. I agree completely that the government running it wouldn't make the spying worse, but there'd be an even bigger perception of impropriety there though.

Oh yeah. Its just that to me, the internet is like the Interstate system. It makes sense for the government to be placed in control of managing the infrastructure to some degree and providing a basic level of service. I'm not really interested in completely cutting out the private sector, but a bare bones internet service suitable for basic news and email is something I'd like to see come to be with the private sector selling the premium services themselves.

As an apologist for authority, I would imagine it does.

It's not so much apologism as it is annoyance at how selective people are with what they freak out about and how they freak out about it. In the end what the NSA did was illegal and that's all that matters, but that people can be so carefree about multi-billion dollar corporations doing the same thing, which registers nary a comment in public discourse, baffles me.

Facebook can't throw me in jail or make me part of secret investigations based upon any "metadata" they happen to collect either.

It's not like Samsung pretty much runs South Korea or anything People should be just afraid of blugeoning power of corporations in the world as they are of the government, but they're not. Daily, corporations probably do more to harm us than the government does (other individual citizens do more to harm us), but there are people so much more obsessed about government doomsday than they are about the things that are actually out there doing damage to people right now, so yeah. I kind of become a dick about it That's why a put an adorable bunny in my sig

It will be interesting to see if the Internet does actually have an expiry date in the end. Will it become more trouble than it's worth? Perhaps even have it running like cable. You sign up to Virgin, but all you have access to is stuff hosted on the Virgin cloud, each operator has their own "cloud" and none actually talk to each other anymore.

I know corporations are easily as dangerous, if not more.

To me, a lot of the problem is that the situation is asynchronous. You (as a hypothetical corporation) know my data, but I know neither my data nor your data. I think it's that asynchrony that makes the situation injust.

My proposal is that we just dump EVERYTHING. Thermonuclear mutually assured destruction with data as the payload. Make everything 100% public.

It'll sting for everyone, but afterwards:

- People will know whether there was any reason to freak out about what the government knows about them.
- Everyone knows everything bad about each other.
- People learn what companies have been watching the things they have no business sticking their noses into.

It'll never happen, and would probably destroy the current civilized world economy in the short term, but it would be the "right" thing to do.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Wolfstan wrote:
It will be interesting to see if the Internet does actually have an expiry date in the end. Will it become more trouble than it's worth? Perhaps even have it running like cable. You sign up to Virgin, but all you have access to is stuff hosted on the Virgin cloud, each operator has their own "cloud" and none actually talk to each other anymore.

I'll just leave this here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prodigy_(online_service)

Well feth.

On a side note, I you want to understand net neutrality I would recomend checking out the Network Neutrality FAQ. This is by Tim Wu, they guy who coined the phrase, and has quite a few academic papers there too.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Well feth.

On a side note, I you want to understand net neutrality I would recomend checking out the Network Neutrality FAQ. This is by Tim Wu, they guy who coined the phrase, and has quite a few academic papers there too.

I've read that actually. Quite informative. Which is referenced in the Extra Credits video. (Though not on the video surprisingly)

Also I laugh at everyone here. Because one of the main reasons why I have put this thread up is to spread awareness of the issue and to do something about it. We can't just sit idlely by while an idiot pokes at something beyond their understanding. I mean all it takes is a simple letter or email to your congressmen saying. "I Support net neutrality and so should you," Then explain to them what net neutrality is. Tell them benefits of staying the current system. Tell them all the good things. I did that and I mean we stopped SOPA and APA from occuring from barging down the entire system with emails and letters.

 daedalus wrote:
I know corporations are easily as dangerous, if not more.

To me, a lot of the problem is that the situation is asynchronous. You (as a hypothetical corporation) know my data, but I know neither my data nor your data. I think it's that asynchrony that makes the situation injust.

My proposal is that we just dump EVERYTHING. Thermonuclear mutually assured destruction with data as the payload. Make everything 100% public.

It'll sting for everyone, but afterwards:

- People will know whether there was any reason to freak out about what the government knows about them.
- Everyone knows everything bad about each other.
- People learn what companies have been watching the things they have no business sticking their noses into.

It'll never happen, and would probably destroy the current civilized world economy in the short term, but it would be the "right" thing to do.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Wolfstan wrote:
It will be interesting to see if the Internet does actually have an expiry date in the end. Will it become more trouble than it's worth? Perhaps even have it running like cable. You sign up to Virgin, but all you have access to is stuff hosted on the Virgin cloud, each operator has their own "cloud" and none actually talk to each other anymore.

I'll just leave this here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prodigy_(online_service)

Well that's interesting and I can see the Internet splitting off into something like this. You're average "Joe" gets fed up with slow connection speed and problems with hacking & viruses, they could quite easily sign up for a one stop shop of a service. Get a fixed line speed that allows them to game on line, connect via social media, use ebay and watch TV & movies. How many of us know people who just do that now? I know my dad does and there are a lot of "dad" characters out there.

 Wolfstan wrote:


Well that's interesting and I can see the Internet splitting off into something like this. You're average "Joe" gets fed up with slow connection speed and problems with hacking & viruses, they could quite easily sign up for a one stop shop of a service. Get a fixed line speed that allows them to game on line, connect via social media, use ebay and watch TV & movies. How many of us know people who just do that now? I know my dad does and there are a lot of "dad" characters out there.

Back in the day, you were basically limited to consuming services. It was pretty much interactive TV. I don't remember it very well, being about 6-7 years old when we had Prodigy, but I remember bits and pieces. You could only use what was in Prodigy's walled garden. Compuserve had their own walled garden, and so on.

The sad thing is that for most people, it would probably be perfectly great. Most people don't have to get worried they're close to exceeding the max open ports on their routers. I'd find it appalling.

 Asherian Command wrote:



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 LordofHats wrote:
The current structure of the cable market is one where the cable companies have no incentive to offer a superior service. Time Warner, Comcast, Verizon, just carve out their own little corners and built regional monopolies for their service.

While I've advocated a government run internet provided before, I don't think such a thing is politically viable right now. Maybe in a few years when people really start getting tired of being gouged but not now.

Hence why I am moving to the EU.

You're moving to the EU for better internet?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Asherian Command wrote:

Also I laugh at everyone here.

Smug people often do that. I would laugh at how no one here is as good looking as I am, but then I remember I'm also the Must Humble Dakkanaught, three years running.

Smug people often do that. I would laugh at how no one here is as good looking as I am, but then I remember I'm also the Must Humble Dakkanaught, three years running.

He said while manly giggling at all those not as humble as himself

 kronk wrote:

 Asherian Command wrote:



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 LordofHats wrote:
The current structure of the cable market is one where the cable companies have no incentive to offer a superior service. Time Warner, Comcast, Verizon, just carve out their own little corners and built regional monopolies for their service.

While I've advocated a government run internet provided before, I don't think such a thing is politically viable right now. Maybe in a few years when people really start getting tired of being gouged but not now.

Hence why I am moving to the EU.

You're moving to the EU for better internet?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Asherian Command wrote:

Also I laugh at everyone here.

Smug people often do that. I would laugh at how no one here is as good looking as I am, but then I remember I'm also the Must Humble Dakkanaught, three years running.

EU has passed the Net Neutrality policies. The EU will not follow the United States in that regard. Mostly because the United States should of become an Observer in the EU so they could see why they should pass net neutrality and any thing. Like it or not. The United States is a European Power. Don't believe me. 80% of the people here are European descendant. Founded by European power and also follows a European system. No matter how much we try in the States, we will always be apart of Europe.

I do laugh at people. Not because of that. But because its the internet and I need a good laugh now and again. Especially on the subject of the United States believing it is a hegemonic power, which is sadly not the case, it has been losing its powers and has become more of a power struggle between multiple countries or states. As we can see that the EU will take the cloak of leadership and moves towards a more united group of individual states. The US has been struggling with many of its policies and has become inadqueate in actually dealing with world affairs so the EU will take its place. As it is the second to the united states. If not more powerful if it pooled its resources together.

This is part of the subject by the way mostly due to the fact that net neutrality voted in the united states affects other countries. The United States, doesn't understand that those people in the EU actually put time into investigating and figuring out how things work and what to do best, so they saw net neutrality as the best solution. The US likes to shoot off laws and ask questions later. And then it takes decades to repeal those laws. The only thing the american population can do is email their congressmen, which is not that hard, as they actually listen to us as we are their voters. They cant scrub off a well informed citizen, because well informed citizens are usually intelligent and with that they hold a suitable amount of power over a larger degree of people. They can't brush you away or else they will lose a majority of their voters. That's how this system works. I bet if everyone who is on this website that is an american voted during a state election we would swing the vote single handily. I've actually talked to a Congressmen and they literally say they want to hear from people, they want to talk to informed citizens on these issues. They want to talk to IT people, they want to understand what Net Neutrality is and have it explained to them.

 Asherian Command wrote:

This is part of the subject by the way mostly due to the fact that net neutrality voted in the united states affects other countries. The United States, doesn't understand that those people in the EU actually put time into investigating and figuring out how things work and what to do best, so they saw net neutrality as the best solution. The US likes to shoot off laws and ask questions later. And then it takes decades to repeal those laws. The only thing the american population can do is email their congressmen, which is not that hard, as they actually listen to us as we are their voters. They cant scrub off a well informed citizen, because well informed citizens are usually intelligent and with that they hold a suitable amount of power over a larger degree of people. They can't brush you away or else they will lose a majority of their voters. That's how this system works. I bet if everyone who is on this website that is an american voted during a state election we would swing the vote single handily.

I... when you talk about the US, you're referring to the United States, right?

I've actually talked to a Congressmen and they literally say they want to hear from people, they want to talk to informed citizens on these issues. They want to talk to IT people, they want to understand what Net Neutrality is and have it explained to them.

"I wish I had more bright eyes youngsters like you coming up to me and showing enthusiasm for the issues they care about. I'm very interested in what your concerns are, and I wish to represent you in taking them to a higher authority. Next year, vote Quimby."

"I don't care about your computer gak, nonvoter."

Which one sounds better?

 Asherian Command wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Well feth.

On a side note, I you want to understand net neutrality I would recomend checking out the Network Neutrality FAQ. This is by Tim Wu, they guy who coined the phrase, and has quite a few academic papers there too.

I've read that actually. Quite informative. Which is referenced in the Extra Credits video. (Though not on the video surprisingly)

Also I laugh at everyone here. Because one of the main reasons why I have put this thread up is to spread awareness of the issue and to do something about it. We can't just sit idlely by while an idiot pokes at something beyond their understanding. I mean all it takes is a simple letter or email to your congressmen saying. "I Support net neutrality and so should you," Then explain to them what net neutrality is. Tell them benefits of staying the current system. Tell them all the good things. I did that and I mean we stopped SOPA and APA from occuring from barging down the entire system with emails and letters.

Have you read The Master Switch? It's very informative.

So, AM. You are moving to the EU? Yes or no? I don't need to read your diatribe. I'm just curious that you're leaving to join the better internet league. Do you have a job lined up?

Edit: Added who I'm talking to.

Are you talking to me or Asherian Command?

 daedalus wrote:

 Asherian Command wrote:

This is part of the subject by the way mostly due to the fact that net neutrality voted in the united states affects other countries. The United States, doesn't understand that those people in the EU actually put time into investigating and figuring out how things work and what to do best, so they saw net neutrality as the best solution. The US likes to shoot off laws and ask questions later. And then it takes decades to repeal those laws. The only thing the american population can do is email their congressmen, which is not that hard, as they actually listen to us as we are their voters. They cant scrub off a well informed citizen, because well informed citizens are usually intelligent and with that they hold a suitable amount of power over a larger degree of people. They can't brush you away or else they will lose a majority of their voters. That's how this system works. I bet if everyone who is on this website that is an american voted during a state election we would swing the vote single handily.

I... when you talk about the US, you're referring to the United States, right?

I've actually talked to a Congressmen and they literally say they want to hear from people, they want to talk to informed citizens on these issues. They want to talk to IT people, they want to understand what Net Neutrality is and have it explained to them.

"I wish I had more bright eyes youngsters like you coming up to me and showing enthusiasm for the issues they care about. I'm very interested in what your concerns are, and I wish to represent you in taking them to a higher authority. Next year, vote Quimby."

"I don't care about your computer gak, nonvoter."

Which one sounds better?

The Top one
We are talking about the United States. Its quite interesting I was talking to people in the government about this and they are quite happy to talk to people about stuff.

Are you talking to me or Asherian Command?

Where? Sorry so many questions!

Have you read The Master Switch? It's very informative.

I'll add it to my to read list.

So, You are moving to the EU? Yes or no? Do you have a job lined up?

No Idea. I was planning on moving out of the states if my job requires me to do so, once I get my degree in game design I don't know. Because my school is quite well known for hiring everyone in the entire class out of college for some strange reason.

 kronk wrote:
So, AM. You are moving to the EU? Yes or no? I don't need to read your diatribe. I'm just curious that you're leaving to join the better internet league. Do you have a job lined up?

Edit: Added who I'm talking to.

Goddamned hard to do that. I tried to get a transfer over to a job in London a few years ago, but they didn't want to pay the relo.

 LordofHats wrote:

 daedalus wrote:


The "NSA scare" doesn't help the situation with government run electronic facilities either.

The government running their own service wouldn't really change anything in that department. Anyone hooked up to an modem and with enough processing power can collect all the metadata they want. Who owns the cables and assigns the IPs or whatever is kind of meaningless on that front.

And to be frank, every single company in the world, is doing what the NSA did. People have been saying this for nearly 20 years (same people who suspected the NSA was doing it). It's as old as the internet itself. every corporation on the planet has metadata on you, as well as personal data. They do it constantly, and no one cares, but the government does it, and

Spoiler:

It just kind of makes me laugh.

Because it's our government and they have rules to follow

The fact that it took a "traitor" to show everyone what they were doing behind closed doors doesn't matter to you?

 Gentleman_Jellyfish wrote:

Because it's our government and they have rules to follow

I even called it Illegal

I just want people to use some damn sense. Why do they only care when the government has all that information, but not when practically every corporation on the face of the earth has it? Why is distrust so heavily focused on a single entity in the world rather than on the numerous other ones guilty of just as many if not more damaging acts to our lives?

There's a lot of tyranny in the world but the only tyranny any gives a damn about is the hypothetical government kind of tyranny. While corporations were doing their own PRISM programs for nearly two decades, no paid any mind until the NSA did it, because corporations have apparently never done anything to harm anyone ever.

 LordofHats wrote:

 Gentleman_Jellyfish wrote:

Because it's our government and they have rules to follow

I even called it Illegal

I just want people to use some damn sense. Why do they only care when the government has all that information, but not when practically every corporation on the face of the earth has it? Why is distrust so heavily focused on a single entity in the world rather than on the numerous other ones guilty of just as many if not more damaging acts to our lives?

There's a lot of tyranny in the world but the only tyranny any gives a damn about is the hypothetical government kind of tyranny. While corporations were doing their own PRISM programs for nearly two decades, no paid any mind until the NSA did it, because corporations have apparently never done anything to harm anyone ever.

For sake of your argument...

It's because corporations want your business. Why does the government need it?

 whembly wrote:
For sake of your argument...

It's because corporations want your business. Why does the government need it?

I can think of as many uses for various kinds of information gather on the part of the government as for corporations (Metadata is less useful to the government, except to agencies like the CDC and the Census Beauru), but that's not really my point.

A government is beholden to voters to an extent. They can get away with a lot of gak if people don't care but if they rile the mob to much the mob throwns them out. It's a slow process but it works.

Look at the death of net neutrality as an example. The cable companies basically have a government permission to build monopolies, receive huge tax breaks and subsidies to build those monopolies, and now they're managed to goad the FCC into allowing them to charge GM for making cars that go on the highway, and you for driving that car. The FDA has been running a similar scheme between big pharma and food manufacturers for a long time.

People need to stop worrying so much about the hypothetical government doomsday and get their heads on straight. Corporations have gained so much political power they can practically write legislation (like big pharma and the ACA), and unlike politicians, we can't vote shout coroporations out of office. At most they knock the guy on top off the pyramid, apologize, and go back to doing what they were doing.

 LordofHats wrote:

 Gentleman_Jellyfish wrote:

Because it's our government and they have rules to follow

I even called it Illegal

I just want people to use some damn sense. Why do they only care when the government has all that information, but not when practically every corporation on the face of the earth has it? Why is distrust so heavily focused on a single entity in the world rather than on the numerous other ones guilty of just as many if not more damaging acts to our lives?

There's a lot of tyranny in the world but the only tyranny any gives a damn about is the hypothetical government kind of tyranny. While corporations were doing their own PRISM programs for nearly two decades, no paid any mind until the NSA did it, because corporations have apparently never done anything to harm anyone ever.

Again though, a lot of us DO hate it too. There's people out there who don't have facebook accounts, who don't show up on the first 3+ pages of google if you search by their name. Not just old people.

You're reading text from one such person right now.

 LordofHats wrote:

 whembly wrote:
For sake of your argument...

It's because corporations want your business. Why does the government need it?

I can think of as many uses for various kinds of information gather on the part of the government as for corporations (Metadata is less useful to the government, except to agencies like the CDC and the Census Beauru), but that's not really my point.

A government is beholden to voters to an extent. They can get away with a lot of gak if people don't care but if they rile the mob to much the mob throwns them out. It's a slow process but it works.

Look at the death of net neutrality as an example. The cable companies basically have a government permission to build monopolies, receive huge tax breaks and subsidies to build those monopolies, and now they're managed to goad the FCC into allowing them to charge GM for making cars that go on the highway, and you for driving that car. The FDA has been running a similar scheme between big pharma and food manufacturers for a long time.

People need to stop worrying so much about the hypothetical government doomsday and get their heads on straight. Corporations have gained so much political power they can practically write legislation (like big pharma and the ACA), and unlike politicians, we can't vote shout coroporations out of office. At most they knock the guy on top off the pyramid, apologize, and go back to doing what they were doing.

NGOs (IGOS?) are quite powerful as of now. They didn't used to be, we only let them gain too much power.

 LordofHats wrote:

 whembly wrote:
For sake of your argument...

It's because corporations want your business. Why does the government need it?

I can think of as many uses for various kinds of information gather on the part of the government as for corporations (Metadata is less useful to the government, except to agencies like the CDC and the Census Beauru), but that's not really my point.

A government is beholden to voters to an extent. They can get away with a lot of gak if people don't care but if they rile the mob to much the mob throwns them out. It's a slow process but it works.

Look at the death of net neutrality as an example. The cable companies basically have a government permission to build monopolies, receive huge tax breaks and subsidies to build those monopolies, and now they're managed to goad the FCC into allowing them to charge GM for making cars that go on the highway, and you for driving that car. The FDA has been running a similar scheme between big pharma and food manufacturers for a long time.

People need to stop worrying so much about the hypothetical government doomsday and get their heads on straight. Corporations have gained so much political power they can practically write legislation (like big pharma and the ACA), and unlike politicians, we can't vote shout coroporations out of office. At most they knock the guy on top off the pyramid, apologize, and go back to doing what they were doing.

We can vote with whom we choose for our ISP right now... you may not get what you want, but there are options.

But if you actually read the proposal, the FCC will still require the content providers to:

“to offer a baseline level of service to their subscribers, along with the ability to enter into individual negotiations with content providers,” the official said by email. “In all instances, broadband providers would need to act in a commercially reasonable manner subject to [FCC] review on a case-by-case basis.”

The whole bit about Netflix entering into a commercial peering arrangement with Comcast makes a sense as the cost of doing business. As you can imagine, the Netflix bandwidth ain't anything to sneeze at.

 whembly wrote:

The whole bit about Netflix entering into a commercial peering arrangement with Comcast makes a sense as the cost of doing business. As you can imagine, the Netflix bandwidth ain't anything to sneeze at.

But Netflix already pays for the bandwidth they use.