Internet Control

[GreyGeek]

Midnight tonight.
And after two years of nothing but hand-ringing and fundraising mailers over this "sale", neither party has done squat. Four State AG's are trying to sue to stop Obama from giving/selling away what he is not allowed by the Constitution to give away/sell. That has a snowball's chance in hades of working.

[TWPonKubuntu]

That Being Said, Saturday will be interesting as that is the day the deal is supposed to go down.

There are some very large corporations which want it to happen, but even the head of the FCC is warning about it.

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2016/...-irreversible/

You may not care for the host of the show, but the FCC Commissioner has a point to be considered.

[woodsmoke]

Well, I'll keep this to a couple of short comments:

A) It is just amazing to me how the liberals of the U.S. have become the conservatives at whom they sneered fourty years ago:

a) As to wanting to censor "offensive speech", does anyone remember when the Liberals of the U.S. used to sneer at the Conservatives about "sexdrugs/rock and roll" on t.v. by saying...."If you don't like it just change the channel".

b) It used to be that the conservatives were sneered at for the Principal having a 7th grade girl get down on her knees on the floor of the cafeteria so that they could measure "skirt length"...

Principal Cumback explained to Webster that it was “necessary to closely monitor the girls attire because boys at this age get very distracted by the girls and their appearance.

http://www.scarymommy.com/6th-grade-...rt-dress-code/

i) SO..........I reply...........put horseblinders on those boys instead of sex-shaming the girl!!

ii) And PUUUULEEEZE do NOT come back (sorry I couldn't help myself) with ..."Its South Carolina"..... the U.S. school system down south is just as "liberal" as the north nowadays. If the Principal has NOT done it he and the school would be in NON-Compliance of about ten jillion federal regulations that have appeared in the last few years.

I know....because we have to attend compulsory compliance meetings at the beginning of each semester or the school will be FINED...that started this year...

B) Anybody remember when I kept saying that the U.S. was building a "an internet "geo" fence", in part using the Patriot Act ( started by Bush and DOUBLED DOWN ON by Obama.... that would keep "internet radio" out of the U.S. because it "might harm" the big music companies,

Ummmmm....aside from the commercial, tower based radio stations who have deluged the internet radio of the U.S.....

HOW MANY "free" as in NON-PAID ADVERTISING" "internet radio" stations are still extant in the U.S.?

Ummmm one....

http://somafm.com/

And.... I can also remember when people used to post....."But we can always figure out a way around it...like with our PHONES!!"....

to which I reply.............ummm rrriiiiiigggggttttt.

woodrecordsstreamsandputsthemonDVDssoIcanlistenwhe nthefinaldigitalWALLisbuiltaroundtheU.S.smoke

[GreyGeek]

As my signature line jokingly hints, we may need new technology to get better security.

If 'net traffic were truly secure (it is not) it might prevent this takeover of our privacy. Big dreams, but it's better than throwing our hands in the air and giving up.

That's why I
1) Run Linux
2) use good passwords
3) use a firewall
4) have a 4096 RSA encryption key
5) Not voting for any incumbent politician.
6) and other steps ....

[TWPonKubuntu]

As my signature line jokingly hints, we may need new technology to get better security.

If 'net traffic were truly secure (it is not) it might prevent this takeover of our privacy. Big dreams, but it's better than throwing our hands in the air and giving up.

[GreyGeek]

Just found this article about 'net alternatives:

http://observer.com/2016/09/a-second...he-blockchain/

Time will tell, but I'm keeping an eye on all of these options.

[edit] I'm not happy that the browser being used by Blackstack is based on Google's Chromium. This sends warning signals about real security...

I watched that 45 minute description about Namechain and 15 minute description of BlockStack. At the 29 minute mark Muneeb Ali discussed serious shortcomings of Namechain. He thinks he has them solved in BlockStack. It's based on the BitCoin Stack, and the developers of that group have been debating for a year if they want to change one line of code to double the size of the base block from 1MB to 2MB because, it seems, that BitCoin is saturated at 100% with the 1Mb base block. That's the stumbling block Muneeb thinks his group has developed a work around for.

The fundamental problem still remains: it all has to go through ISP servers and the gov has access to those servers. It would be nothing for TimeWarner, for example, to introduce a value in IP packets which identify their router which the consumer uses to connect to BlockStack and its network. In Utah the federal government has developed a storage facility so massive that they have the capacity to store every byte of traffic on the Internet predicted for the next hundred years. By the end of 2016, global IP traffic will reach 1.1 ZB per year, or 88.7 EB per month, and by 2020 global IP traffic will reach 2.3 ZB per year, or 194 EB per month. While the Feds claim their Utah facility has a capacity of between 3 and 12 exabytes, depending on who you talk to, others estimate it to be well beyond a Yottabyte. Seven years ago a Department of Defense (DoD) report titled “Global Information Grid Architecture Vision”, in a section listing “key targets” for DoD technologies, the report included “very large scale data storage, delivery, and transmission technologies that support ... capacities exceeding exabytes (10¹⁸ bytes) and possibly yottabytes (10²⁴ bytes) of data That's all forms of data, ranging from what is obtained by tapping the Internet, cellphone networks, private networks, etc... ALL areas of data exchange across the globe. Audio transmissions and sound tracks are transcribed to text for storage.

This doesn't take into account the fact that IPv6 traffic has remained under 7% worldwide for the last couple years and if economic problems occur, which is most likely, IPv6 expansion will stagnate, further limiting what the Feds have to capture. Right now, the Feds know more about you and me than we know about ourselves. And I haven't mentioned FAIRVIEW or BLARNEY.

[TWPonKubuntu]

...
The Internet is about to take a steep dive into chaos, which is probably the goal for most of our politicians. The only question now is "Will this world wide communication net survive, or become isolated chunks controlled by sociopaths and psychopaths.

An argument could be made that it already is such... "I fear this will not end well."

[GreyGeek]

It seems that a few are trying to stop this change:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016...t-control.html

Frankly, I'm not sure that this isn't just election politics in action, since it is so late and so little.

If anyone of either party were sincere about preventing the illegal give away of ICANN and iana they had TWO YEARS to do something about it. Since the Constitution specifically allows only Congress to approve sale of US property Obama couldn't legally give it away and anyone in Congress could have begun the appropriate action to stop the transfer the day after it was announced. Tomorrow is the last day to do anything and most of Congress is out campaigning for their jobs. It is obvious that they don't care about anything except getting re-elected to sustain their personal power and perks. So it is up to four state AG's to try a court injunction, which I seriously doubt a judge would approve.

The Internet is about to take a steep dive into chaos, which is probably the goal for most of our politicians. The only question now is "Will this world wide communication net survive, or become isolated chunks controlled by sociopaths and psychopaths.

[Snowhog]

An open and free Internet is the most dangerous thing 'in the eyes of a Government'. If you don't believe this is true, just look to China.

[TWPonKubuntu]

It seems that a few are trying to stop this change:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016...t-control.html

Frankly, I'm not sure that this isn't just election politics in action, since it is so late and so little.

[TWPonKubuntu]

Just found this article about 'net alternatives:

http://observer.com/2016/09/a-second...he-blockchain/

Time will tell, but I'm keeping an eye on all of these options.

[edit] I'm not happy that the browser being used by Blackstack is based on Google's Chromium. This sends warning signals about real security...

[GreyGeek]

So I am looking for alternatives such as local, privately owned, wireless networks. Some communities have already installed these and the hardware is "off-the-shelf".

It doesn't look good from my point of view...

So was I. Besides Tor, which I think has been totally compromised, I found ipfs and netzero. Both claimed to be a form of P2P but both of them require users to go through their local ISP. When you don't own the trunk-line servers you don't have control over the traffic that passes through them. Both of ipfs and netzero required that your computer act as a node on the P2P network and the bandwidth it took was probably 1/3rd of my 20Mb. The HD space it took gradually increased to a couple GB each, but the size of it can be limited. What you wouldn't know was the type of files being stored, or who owned them. Child porn? Stolen IP or military secrets? ISIS attack plans?

I've been following the D-Wave 2X quantum computer. It's already up to 1,000 cubits. Quantum computers do a form of parallel processing, not serial processing like our common laptops. In conventional computers, to increase speed by parallel processing, problems have to be broken into many components, like solving an algebra problem by using a polynomial equation and giving each term in the polynomial to one of the parallel processors. A summing processor adds up all the terms from the parallel processors when they are finished iterating the sequence. It amounts to integrating a solution over thousands of intervals.

Superposition in quantum computers is when a qubit can hold both a 0 and a 1 simultaneously. Superposition of qubits is what gives quantum computers their inherent parallelism. This parallelism allows a quantum computer to work on a million computations at once, while your desktop PC works on one. A 30-qubit quantum computer would equal the processing power of a conventional computer that could run at 10 teraflops (trillions of floating-point operations per second). Today's typical desktop computers run at speeds measured in gigaflops (billions of floating-point operations per second). The D-Wave 2X Quantum computer has 1,000 cubits. While it is not a true quantum computer because it uses what D-Wave calls "annealing", it probably can crack any encryption algorithm available today, I suspect.

D-Wave's cubits are kept at less than 1mK while setting up their problems. Once configured the qubits are gradually raised in temperature to 45mK, which "anneals" the qubits much the way heating a stressed metal anneals it, allow the atoms of the metal to settle in less stressed states of minimum energy. For qubits that minimum energy is the solution(s) to the problem.

From 8 qubits to a 1,000 qubits in 8 years! There is no telling what their qubit capacity will be in another 10 years. If their rate of improvements are linear they will have 125,000 qubits by 2026. Will the ordinary person be allowed to own a quantum laptop, if such a beast can ever be built? When Hell freezes over.

So, I am just enjoying the computing weather while the sun is shining. Evil forces are not happy with you and I possessing the meager computer power we have today. It threatens their rule. Us expressing to each other our negative opinions of the powers that be threaten their continued rule so they have to constrain those expressions for their own continued existence.

[TWPonKubuntu]

So I am looking for alternatives such as local, privately owned, wireless networks. Some communities have already installed these and the hardware is "off-the-shelf".

It doesn't look good from my point of view...

[GreyGeek]

More information on the pending change:

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/09/y2k-2-0-is-the-us-government-set-to-give-away-the-internet-saturday/

I'm not sure that I completely agree with the opinion expressed in this article, which basically says "don't worry, be happy", because the US will retain control of the companies who operate the net because they are U.S. based...

How long do you thing it will take before those companies decide to remove themselves from U.S. jurisdiction?

One day.

I have little doubt that a move out of this country has been planned since the US Administration approved the transition two years ago. With one day left I see no action by the Dems or RINOs to halt the move. After all, A LOT of the DNS root servers, not including the major 13, are in Europe:
https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer...WzDa4h3BxJcbEo
or here
http://root-servers.org/

and all that has to be done is for most of management to move there. Once out of US jurisdiction they can thumb their noses at US. Now consider how free the European people have become since PES has taken control over all of the Euro governments, until BREXIT. How would you like European style "freedom of speech" imposed on the Internet world wide? Google, Facebook and Twitter are already censoring unapproved speech, which is why I canceled all my accounts with them. With countries like China, Cuba, Viet Nam, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and other dictator states having membership on the UN Human Rights Council how long do you think it will take for the freedom we enjoy to be "regulated" with the likes of "YouTube Heroes" working for those social media and governments.
The corruption is already taking place in this country. It can only get worse in those "Human Rights" countries.

[TWPonKubuntu]

More information on the pending change:


http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/09/y2k-2-0-is-the-us-government-set-to-give-away-the-internet-saturday/

I'm not sure that I completely agree with the opinion expressed in this article, which basically says "don't worry, be happy", because the US will retain control of the companies who operate the net because they are U.S. based...

How long do you thing it will take before those companies decide to remove themselves from U.S. jurisdiction?