Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

More Trouble Expected When Egypt Comes Back Online

CmdrTaco posted more than 3 years ago | from the wait-till-china-gets-the-word dept.

Government 175

schliz writes "Net activists at Telecomix are preparing darknets, encryption, proxies and VPNs to protect Egyptians' online freedom when the Government-imposed Internet blackout ends. Today, Telecomix regarded Egypt as being on "the same level as North Korea and Burma in internet censorship" amid rumours that Egyptian phone lines were to be shut down. Analysts and the Internet Society have also warned of technical and business difficulties to come — including BGP churn and commercial fears of doing business in Egypt."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

A Straw Vote! (3, Insightful)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 3 years ago | (#35071484)

Who's all in favor of modifying the constitutions of every Western country to read:

"Any attempt by government to in any way censor or limit or shut down the Internet will lead to immediate execution of said members of the Executive and Legislature by having their heads repeatedly smashed in by a circa-1995 Cisco router."

Re:A Straw Vote! (2)

Magic5Ball (188725) | more than 3 years ago | (#35071552)

Absolutely not; for similar reasons to why advocating political murder of JA and circumvention of due process are frowned upon.

Re:A Straw Vote! (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 3 years ago | (#35071606)

Ah, but this would be an amendment to the constitution. It would simply the immediate and permanent elimination of any politician who tries to foil civil liberties. You would have them on record as either having introduced the bill or voting for it, or from the Executive end of things, passing the bill into law. That would be a matter of public record. Should be enough for the amendment to allow the splattering of their brains over the pavement.

Re:A Straw Vote! (1, Flamebait)

Suki I (1546431) | more than 3 years ago | (#35071950)

Try that one against the Muslim Brotherhood/CAIR after they take over Egypt. If you think the government there was "mean" before, you just watch and see what a *mean* version of Iran is like. They don't beast you with routers and the AK-47 bullets are metal, not rubber.

Re:A Straw Vote! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35072626)

Interesting. And when did you first know that you could tell the future?

Re:A Straw Vote! (4, Insightful)

Caerdwyn (829058) | more than 3 years ago | (#35072656)

Interesting. And when did you first know that you could tell the future?

On the day we learned to study the past.

Re:A Straw Vote! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35072676)

Interesting. And when did you first know that you could tell the future?

Who needs to tell the future in that part of the world when the past is in an infinite loop?

Re:A Straw Vote! (2)

skarphace (812333) | more than 3 years ago | (#35073684)

It would simply the immediate and permanent elimination of any politician who tries to foil civil liberties

Oh cool, defend civil liberties by taking people's civil rights. Great solution, dude.

Re:A Straw Vote! (2)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | more than 3 years ago | (#35071970)

circumventionn of due process?

did we do that 200+ yrs ago fighting england? we didn't like the way things were, we fought back and this included guns and violence.

we look at it as a symbol of freedom.

but now, you wont allow a new one if its NEEDED and called for?

how sad. you have learned nothing from our history.

Re:A Straw Vote! (1)

sjames (1099) | more than 3 years ago | (#35072234)

Fine, they get their trial where the people must show that there was an attempt to shut down, censor, or limit the internet and that the person was at that time a member of the Legislative or executive branch. Then we smash their head in. If they can show a strong and substantive effort to prevent the damage to the internet, we could consider it a mitigating circumstance.

Re:A Straw Vote! (1)

sumdumass (711423) | more than 3 years ago | (#35073098)

So it takes messing with your internet to get you fired up.

Perhaps it would be easier to just pay attention more and not vote the asshats into office in the first place?

Perhaps death and physical harm is not what's needed but a recall option to which any politician can be removed from office upon a certain set of criteria and be barred from serving office for a set amount of time would be more appropriate. At least then you wouldn't have a mess created by a governor who got thrown out just to get reelected when the mess got worse and the incumbent reached a term limit.

Re:A Straw Vote! (1)

sjames (1099) | more than 3 years ago | (#35073538)

You must admit, a political attempt to disrupt the speech of the people is a rather serious threat to the Constitution.

I like many many others do try to avoid electing asshats, but it seems that mostly asshats are running and the media filters most non-asshats out of the debates.

Honestly, the death penalty is a bit much, and there are a lot more things that should get a politician sanctioned. For one, I would like a 3 strikes (or perhaps 2) law barring anyone from office if they vote in favor of any legislation that is later narrowed or struck down as unconstitutional. If they either know so little about the Constitution or hold it in such disdain, they are unfit to make laws.

Re:A Straw Vote! (1)

cheekyjohnson (1873388) | more than 3 years ago | (#35074134)

Perhaps it would be easier to just pay attention more and not vote the asshats into office in the first place?

Oh, I do. The millions of other people residing in this country do not, however, despite my attempts to convince ones within my reach otherwise.

Re:A Straw Vote! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35071556)

Why use a Cisco router when you can use an IBM Model M keyboard. Those are MADE to smash heads in!

Re:A Straw Vote! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35071706)

Not because the Model M would break, but because it might get dirty beyond possibility of cleaning ;-)

Re:A Straw Vote! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35071558)

Why not the judiciary?

Re:A Straw Vote! (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 3 years ago | (#35073758)

Because it's already way, way too late to do anything when these guys are involved.

Re:A Straw Vote! (2)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 3 years ago | (#35071572)

having their heads repeatedly smashed in by a circa-1995 Cisco router.

We're gonna need a lot more circa-1995 cisco routers...

Re:A Straw Vote! (1)

abbynormal brain (1637419) | more than 3 years ago | (#35072930)

You're gonna need 2!

Re:A Straw Vote! (1, Funny)

dissy (172727) | more than 3 years ago | (#35073254)

having their heads repeatedly smashed in by a circa-1995 Cisco router.

We're gonna need a lot more circa-1995 cisco routers...

That's cool, Sprint's got you covered.

Re:A Straw Vote! (1)

Amorymeltzer (1213818) | more than 3 years ago | (#35071578)

I think we can all agree that, in this enlightened day and age, using a router from 1995 would qualify as cruel and unusual punishment.

Re:A Straw Vote! (1)

RavenLrD20k (311488) | more than 3 years ago | (#35071858)

...for the Router, maybe.

Re:A Straw Vote! (1)

h00manist (800926) | more than 3 years ago | (#35071702)

"Any attempt by government to in any way censor or limit or shut down the Internet will lead to immediate execution of said members..."

I vote for it. Including under "censor" the categories of copyright, trademarks, and defamation.

Re:A Straw Vote! (1)

RazzleFrog (537054) | more than 3 years ago | (#35073162)

Copyrights give creative people a reason to do what they do. Writers, musicians, artists, etc. need to eat, too.

Trademarks protect the consumer as much as the business. Without trademarks what stops somebody from selling bottles of piss and marketing it as Mountain Dew?

Defamation completely throws me for a loop. You have a problem with people suing other people for making up lies about them?

Re:A Straw Vote! (1)

russotto (537200) | more than 3 years ago | (#35073516)

Copyrights give creative people a reason to do what they do. Writers, musicians, artists, etc. need to eat, too.

Trademarks protect the consumer as much as the business. Without trademarks what stops somebody from selling bottles of piss and marketing it as Mountain Dew?

Defamation completely throws me for a loop. You have a problem with people suing other people for making up lies about them?

You're considering the advertisement for these things rather than reality. In reality, copyrights are used to _shut down_ creative people for using the wrong three notes, or for writing the wrong computer program. Trademarks are used to remove words from the language (e.g. "monster") or to quell criticism. Defamation law is also used to quell criticism, e.g. trade libel claims against negative reviewers.

Re:A Straw Vote! (1)

Tharsman (1364603) | more than 3 years ago | (#35071704)

Who's all in favor of modifying the constitutions of every Western country to read:

"Any attempt by government to in any way censor or limit or shut down the Internet will lead to immediate execution of said members of the Executive and Legislature by having their heads repeatedly smashed in by a circa-1995 Cisco router."

Sir, if you run for president, I'll vote for you.

Re:A Straw Vote! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35071856)

>> "Any attempt by government to in any way censor or limit or shut down the Internet will lead to immediate execution of said members of the Executive and Legislature by having their heads repeatedly smashed in by a circa-1995 Cisco router."

In Soviet-America router crashes you?

Re:A Straw Vote! (1)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | more than 3 years ago | (#35071944)

add wellfleet and proteon and I'll be onboard with that.

Re:A Straw Vote! (1)

hesaigo999ca (786966) | more than 3 years ago | (#35071954)

Can i see this on youtube please....i really want to see this....like really badly....can we also include all lower end state governors and city mayors while your at it?

Re:A Straw Vote! (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 3 years ago | (#35072104)

Absolutely. It should be broadcast. Why, I think it should be mandated that there be mash-ups to Rick Astley songs, to give the appropriate dignity to the execution of those that fear citizens that much.

Re:A Straw Vote! (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 3 years ago | (#35073784)

...Rick Astley songs performed by Weird Al.

If you want dignity, go all the way.

Re:A Straw Vote! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35072118)

I see what you did there. Nice try slipping in a proprietary hardware requirement. No deal.

If I want to do it by dropping my old G4 Sawtooth doorstop on one of them, I'd better be able to.

Open source, or nothing.

Re:A Straw Vote! (1)

aliquis (678370) | more than 3 years ago | (#35072150)

I'm all for it but the retards in charge deciding against freedom and the Internet is the same people writing the law/constitution. So.. I don't see how that will happen. Unless you Ciscocute them beforehand :)

Isn't IBM what you want for some heavy iron though?

Re:A Straw Vote! (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 3 years ago | (#35073804)

Yes, but IBM hardware tends to be expensive and cost more than the heads being smashed are worth.

It's still a capitalist world, comrade, just because it's head smashing time doesn't mean that we can forgo the principles this country was built on.

Re:A Straw Vote! (3, Funny)

Jason Levine (196982) | more than 3 years ago | (#35072284)

I'm not in favor of that at all. It's a horrible idea. How dare you suggest doing such violence to circa-1995 Cisco routers!

Re:A Straw Vote! (1)

G00F (241765) | more than 3 years ago | (#35072458)

You have my vote.

Free people are people who can overthrow a government should it wish it. A tyrannical government is one that makes it impossible for the people to overthrow it.

Re:A Straw Vote! (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 3 years ago | (#35073818)

Hmm... but it has become de facto impossible to overthrow the government with nonviolent means. Does that mean that violence is justified?

Re:A Straw Vote! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35072486)

hell yeah! it's not perfect legislation but we can ramrod it through congress and force it on the american people anyway. we can always come back and fix in mistakes in it. let's call it the ObamaNet amendment!

Re:A Straw Vote! (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 3 years ago | (#35073704)

You didn't think this through, obviously. That router can be put to better uses, using it to bludgeon that heads with it is a horrible waste of valuable resources (at least compared to the head).

Use a stone for the operation suggested.

Re:A Straw Vote! (1)

Dan541 (1032000) | more than 3 years ago | (#35074292)

I second that motion.

Re:A Straw Vote! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35074370)

No, I wouldn't abuse a router like that. But seriously, the fact that the government shut down public communications shows what kind of government they have. The guy in charge has been in charge for 30 years. Where I live (Canada) I hate any government that's been in for 8-10 years. Its like there is a window in front of the guys in charge, and they do their best for whoever they see in the window. At first the window is opaque, and they see the people, but slowly over time, the window becomes a mirror (but they still do their best for whoever they see in the window). I've hated parties on both the left and right (and then after 8-10 years, they have to go). The guy in charge in Egypt has been there 30 years. He's 82 years old. Before taking over, he was vice president for 5 years. Before that he was in charge of the Air Force there for about 3 years. He's been in charge for too long. He should have retired about 17 years ago. As for the internet, I'm waiting (and I don't know if we will ever see it, every government is power-trippy), but I'm waiting for 802.11s. 802.11s is decentralized. If its solar powered with batteries, then its always on. "What about the national kill switch" you ask. I reply: there is none. "What about centralized command and control" you ask. There is none, I reply. Its an ad-hoc mesh network. If it was available 5 years ago, no one would be talking about how Egypt is 'down' now. People want it, but the government is nervous. Read my previous line about governments wanting centralized power and control.

What'a a darknet? (3, Interesting)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 3 years ago | (#35071486)

I have a feeling we'll need one in the US very soon (sometime this decade).

TOR: Congress prepares to follow Egypt with internet kill switch
http://www.itnews.com.au/News/246707,egyptians-turn-to-tor-to-organise-dissent-online.aspx [itnews.com.au]

"Appelbaum, a high-profile associate of the Wikileaks whistleblowers' site, said the "irony was rich" in how the US Government that supported the pro-democracy protesters treated him on his return to the country and the experiences of an Egyptian democracy activist who was harassed on his return to Egypt as revealed in a Wikileaks cable."

Re:What'a a darknet? (3, Insightful)

toygeek (473120) | more than 3 years ago | (#35071730)

"What's a darknet? I have a feeling we'll need one in the US very soon"

Typical. You don't know what it is but it sounds cool so we need one. Right.

Re:What'a a darknet? (4, Informative)

mob)barley (1377683) | more than 3 years ago | (#35071736)

It's a standalone network that is not physically connected in any way to the public networks we know of as the Internet. Learned that from a Gibson novel.

Re:What'a a darknet? (1)

99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) | more than 3 years ago | (#35072944)

It's a standalone network that is not physically connected in any way to the public networks we know of as the Internet. Learned that from a Gibson novel.

It's also used to refer to the allocated but unused IP space in the existing internet. It is a term used by security researchers who are looking for subsets of traffic directed randomly by malware and misconfiguration. It is a good place to find internet worm traffic if you're trying to do research on traffic levels or find new worms.

Re:What'a a darknet? (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 3 years ago | (#35073836)

Why so much hassle? Just look up the IP ranges for China and filter for that. Presto malware traffic.

Re:What'a a darknet? (1)

99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) | more than 3 years ago | (#35074342)

Why so much hassle? Just look up the IP ranges for China and filter for that. Presto malware traffic.

Your sarcasm notwithstanding, Chinese IP space is primarily valid traffic. Darknet traffic has no real legitimate traffic; just traffic targeting indiscriminate space and erroneous configurations of valid software.

Re:What'a a darknet? (1)

h00manist (800926) | more than 3 years ago | (#35071796)

I have a feeling we'll need one in the US very soon (sometime this decade).

Irconically it may be that in Egypt they won't need it after all. US envoy has told Mubarak they recommend him not to run again, not to participate in transition.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/02/world/middleeast/02transition.html?emc=na [nytimes.com]

Re:What'a a darknet? (3, Insightful)

timholman (71886) | more than 3 years ago | (#35071946)

Irconically it may be that in Egypt they won't need it after all. US envoy has told Mubarak they recommend him not to run again, not to participate in transition.

There's no way the Egyptians will accept half measures from Mubarak at this point, and I doubt Mubarak is foolish enough to think they will.

Mubarak is trying to buy time while he empties out his bank accounts and hides his loot. He'll be headed to Saudi Arabia before the week is out.

Re:What'a a darknet? (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 3 years ago | (#35072210)

It's hard to get any kind of truth out of all of this, but the rumor flying around now is that his son Gamal and other members of the family have already left the country. And I doubt he's scrabbling to gather together cash. In all likelihood he's been squirreling it away for decades, just like Ben Ali and his kin did in Tunisia.

Re:What'a a darknet? (1)

h00manist (800926) | more than 3 years ago | (#35074162)

Mubarak is trying to buy time while he empties out his bank accounts and hides his loot. He'll be headed to Saudi Arabia before the week is out.

Let's hope you're right. Either he's gathering up his money from the closed banks, or he's being foolishly hard headed, which is what I heard commenters say.

Governor Tarkin (1)

Covalent (1001277) | more than 3 years ago | (#35071490)

The more you tighten you grip, the more Star Systems, er, informed citizens will slip through your fingers.

Re:Governor Tarkin (1)

Alphaman001 (1987934) | more than 3 years ago | (#35072134)

I thought I smelled your foul stench when I logged on....

Re:Governor Tarkin (1)

westlake (615356) | more than 3 years ago | (#35072326)

The more you tighten you grip, the more Star Systems, er, informed citizens will slip through your fingers.

Don't confuse with reality.

The only time a gov't needs to censor its people.. (1)

Onuma (947856) | more than 3 years ago | (#35071536)

...is when they've got something they want to hide from the rest of the world.

I don't mind Frequency Assignments (like the US FCC does) or things like that; we wouldn't want phones interfering with TVs and microwaves, or microwaves exploding our phones! However, no one should be able to limit what we say or to whom we say it.

Re:The only time a gov't needs to censor its peopl (0)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 3 years ago | (#35071588)

>>>I don't mind Frequency Assignments

Speaking of assignments: the FCC is planning to sell-off the Free TV frequencies sometime this decade (current date is 2015 but will probably be pushed back). What on earth would replace it, I wonder. Non-free cable tv I suppose.

Does it matter? (3, Insightful)

Snaller (147050) | more than 3 years ago | (#35071580)

I just one of our national stations have flow their news people to Egypt and set up a studio broadcasting live from the place and interviewing people on the street.

Seems any attempt at blocking anything has long since failed . And the military are just look on, they are on the side of the protesters.

Re:Does it matter? (3, Interesting)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 3 years ago | (#35071620)

I don't think they're on the side of the protesters so much as they're on the side of whoever wins. Which, in a way, seems an appropriate thing for an army to do in a case of popular revolution.

Re:Does it matter? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35071940)

They don't care who wins. They protect the country, no matter which side wins.
You watch the videos and you see the protectors loving up on them, yet you also see the uniformed people telling/stopping the protesters from being violent. I know there was one where a guy thew a rock at the riot guys, and a military guy next to him picked him up and carried him away.

I also think the military should not choose sides, as they stop being military. There still going to have their job no matter the outcome. They also don't have a choice if there ordered to help contain the violence. The riot police though, should have a choice as to what side their on.

Re:Does it matter? (1)

RazzleFrog (537054) | more than 3 years ago | (#35073222)

Based on what I've seen the military has been doing a pretty good job of staying unbiased as best they can in all this. I mean this isn't the Bolshevik revolution where at some point the military just said screw you to the Czars and turned their rifles the other way but it also isn't "just following orders" blanket killing.

Re:Does it matter? (1)

v1 (525388) | more than 3 years ago | (#35073608)

it was a millitary coup that put this guy in power in the first place. Most millitaries follow command, and in a case like that the president (president for life/dictator) is at the top. So they're probably going to do just what he tells them to, until they realize his overthrow is inevitable, at which point they'll start considering what actions they'll be held accountable for by the new ruling party, and only then do you usually see them not following orders.

Re:Does it matter? (1)

Anonymous Cowpat (788193) | more than 3 years ago | (#35073822)

They also don't have a choice if there ordered to help contain the violence. The riot police though, should have a choice as to what side their on.

I disagree, you've got that backwards. The soldiers are there to protect the country, the police are there to protect the government. The soldiers have every right to refuse orders to deploy against the population.

As a matter of principle, it's one of the few things which can keep a government straight - if you antagonise enough of the population that they can rise up and defeat your civilian police force, your army should not (and hopefully will not) protect you.

What they should do, symbolically at least, is march up to the border of the country, spread out (on their side), and turn to face outwards.

Re:Does it matter? (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 3 years ago | (#35073876)

Military personnel are still people. If they choose to align with the protesters as people and not as military, should they be stripped from this right?

Re:Does it matter? (1)

TubeSteak (669689) | more than 3 years ago | (#35074160)

I don't think they're on the side of the protesters so much as they're on the side of whoever wins. Which, in a way, seems an appropriate thing for an army to do in a case of popular revolution.

Egypt has mandatory military service.
The people protesting and the soldiers on the ground are not mutally exclusive groups.

Loss of power (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35071608)

No surprise here. The closer a goverment comes to losing power -- the first concern and top priority for any government -- the more they resort to coercion in their attempts to avoid the loss of power. Egypt is hardly unique in this respect. Every government has and will do this, because coercion is government's only tool in a situation like this. (Let's call a spade a spade here: coercion is government's ONLY tool, the one which they necessarily employ in every aspect of their business.) The elite at the top of the pyramid are terrified of losing power, and their reactions to protest illustrate this perfectly.

With that said, it's beyond me how and why people put a single ounce of trust in those who control them through force.

Re:Loss of power (4, Insightful)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 3 years ago | (#35071742)

With that said, it's beyond me how and why people put a single ounce of trust in those who control them through force.

Because they can control the people by force? It's not like you often have a choice. The Egyptian people are like people everywhere. Their first concern is the wellbeing of their families and themselves. You have El Presidente basically saying "I will hurt you and those you love if you dare rise against me", and then demonstrate it every once in a while, well, people learn to keep their heads down.

Revolutions happen when that culture of fear breaks down, usually because at some point people see that the Emperor has no clothes. In the Arab states, what seems to have happened is that an already weak regime in Tunisia collapsed with relative ease, and a whole bunch of other Arabs in other states suddenly realized that maybe it wasn't THAT dangerous to throw out the dictators. Once that's been broken, once the idea of the state as this all-powerful entity no longer holds true, that's the end of the story.

We saw it in Tunisia with Ben Ali, and we're seeing it with Mubarak. It's almost laughably ironic that Mubarak is going through the same contortions Ben Ali did just a few weeks ago. Now it's reported he'll announce that he won't run again in September, just like Ben Ali seemed to open the way for meaningful rivals for the presidency in the final days. But the time has come and gone for that, and now that the army has signaled that it's sitting this one out (other than to maintain a degree of law and order so the whole thing doesn't collapse into anarchy, which it seemed poised to do a couple of days ago), Mubarak has damned few cards left. "I promise to go real soon" is the final death rattle of a regime that no longer has the strength to hold itself erect. I suspect Mubarak is trying that as much to keep the Americans and Europeans happy with dreams of a "peaceful transfer" (read: keep the Muslim Brotherhood out) as anything else.

Re:Loss of power (1)

cforciea (1926392) | more than 3 years ago | (#35072108)

Because there has always historically been a pyramid and therefore always somebody who can control through force. Your options are to either have everybody be roughly equal in power (communism) or you have to pick which entity carries the biggest stick. In a representative democracy, the idea is to try to keep the entity with the stick under your thumb, which is a whole lot better than some arbitrary rich guy/corporation amassing enough power to control you, where you have no recourse at all.

Re:Loss of power (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 3 years ago | (#35072294)

Actually, the idea in America is to give a number of coeval entities their own sticks, and make sure that they have enough separate powers, but at the same time enough overlapping powers that none of the three can ever actually gain any kind long-term dominance. It's actually a brilliant idea. The Convention Parliament in 1688-1689 in England came close with the Bill of Rights, 1689, by making the Executive (the Crown and its Ministers) subservient to Parliament, but the US Founding Fathers were smart enough to see how that didn't quite do the job so they furthered the concept of separation of powers.

Re:Loss of power (1)

Anonymous Cowpat (788193) | more than 3 years ago | (#35073914)

but they don't, really, the executive has control over the stick. The legislature notionally has control over the funding of the stick, but an executive sufficiently able to control the stick can have it seize its own funding and resources (or force the legislature's hand; as whichever president it was in the early 20th century did by ordering the Navy out, and daring congress to leave it stranded). All the judiciary has is a soapbox to shout from.

You'd think a business would be scared (2)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 3 years ago | (#35071782)

How can you possibly run a business in a place where the government might shut off a crucial resource at any time?

Re:You'd think a business would be scared (5, Insightful)

dave562 (969951) | more than 3 years ago | (#35072248)

How do American companies function every day? The company that I am working for is actually losing business because our clients do not want to store their data on our servers here in the United States. Everyone is concerned about the PATRIOT Act and the power it gives the government to compel disclosure of what should be private and confidential data. Although it is not exactly the same as being shut down, it goes to show that the effects of government policy are not just related to dictators in African countries.

Re:You'd think a business would be scared (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 3 years ago | (#35073138)

Everyone is concerned about the PATRIOT Act and the power it gives the government to compel disclosure of what should be private and confidential data.

That's a pretty weak fear though compared to having NO ACCESS to your own data.

I think it's wrong to equate the two things since one is about access by third parties and the other is sheer existence. If the government ends up spying on you, you've lost nothing.

Re:You'd think a business would be scared (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 3 years ago | (#35073922)

Well, I know businesses who would be more concerned with outsiders gaining access to their data than them being cut off from said data. Think off-site, emergency backups. If you happen to lose contact with your off-site backup place, you open a new one and everything continues running smoothly. If that data is sensitive and gets out, the damage is hard to measure, it may as well shut down your business.

You say 'when', but.... (1)

macraig (621737) | more than 3 years ago | (#35071804)

You say 'when', but perhaps what you mean is 'if'? Perhaps Egypt will simply slide back into the 'Dark' Ages again? Then the Amish could vacation there.

Re:You say 'when', but.... (2)

artor3 (1344997) | more than 3 years ago | (#35071876)

How do you propose the Amish get there? Horse-drawn jetliner?

Re:You say 'when', but.... (1)

macraig (621737) | more than 3 years ago | (#35071926)

They can make a Viking boat.

Re:You say 'when', but.... (1)

Cogita (1119237) | more than 3 years ago | (#35071996)

How do you propose the Amish get there? Horse-drawn jetliner?

Dolphins.

Re:You say 'when', but.... (1)

bsane (148894) | more than 3 years ago | (#35072204)

Tall ship?

Telecomix (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35071874)

Telecomix also set up a dialup service and was in ham radio contact with the Egyptians during the processes. They did a mass faxing operation to get information about the services and ham radio freqs into Egypt.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/29/anonymous-internet-egypt_n_815889.html

Telecomix are pretty awesome

amusing to see the importance given to internet (1)

youn (1516637) | more than 3 years ago | (#35071892)

if they are so important, it makes you wonder how they managed to go countrywide during the french revolution, the english revolution, various independance... maybe the internet was invented earlier than we thought... or maybe the internet is only a high tech version of the natural power of gossip that has existed for centuries and things would have happened anyway even without the internet

Re:amusing to see the importance given to internet (1)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 3 years ago | (#35072232)

Or maybe it's that at that time the communication abilities of the people in power were similarly constrained. I strongly doubt that the internal communication of the government/police is cut of in Egypt.

Why don't we use swords to fight in Afghanistan? After all, many wars in the past have been won using swords.

Re:amusing to see the importance given to internet (1)

Anonymous Cowpat (788193) | more than 3 years ago | (#35073944)

there was an English revolution? That must have been skipped in my history classes. Was it before or after the civil war?

Lets not be next (1)

droidsURlooking4 (1543007) | more than 3 years ago | (#35072106)

seriously, as crazy as it sounds in Egypt, they are trying to set the same thing up here (USA).

Re:Lets not be next (1)

silanea (1241518) | more than 3 years ago | (#35073692)

If by "it" you are referring to a democracy, well, you could use a new one. Yours looks kinda broken to me.

Empty barns... (1)

jfalcon (163956) | more than 3 years ago | (#35072128)

It seems to me that setting up darknets, encryption and vpn's after a internet blackout is lifted is sort of like closing the barn door after the animals get out.

If you're going to be an organization that runs in to restore communication links when the people at the top turn the switch off, you're gonna need a little more coordination than taking the shotgun approach. You need to employ organized, practiced emergency communication practices. The same practices that you would employ during a natural disaster that knocks out communications. I don't really see that going on here.

Telecomix has a dialup pool of modems available for people to dial to "if" they can call out of the country.. never mind that it's their dime to make the international call. I guess in a place where the average wage is $2/day they could try and phreak it but then someone gets toss into a prison and that's pretty much the reason they're protesting in the first place...

Amateur Radio operators in Egypt may also be under the same blackout as the radio/internet people as well in fear of said prisons. It would explain why there is no APRS traffic coming from Egypt...

I'm of the opinion that if you're being suppressed/repressed by your government, you can either obey or go pirate. And if you're gonna go pirate, then you need to coordinate some... or get your own satellite phone like the news agencies have.

Organizations like this may be able to help this cause: http://buythissatellite.org/ [buythissatellite.org]

Re:Empty barns... (1)

cpghost (719344) | more than 3 years ago | (#35072242)

I'm of the opinion that if you're being suppressed/repressed by your government, you can either obey or go pirate. And if you're gonna go pirate, then you need to coordinate some... or get your own satellite phone like the news agencies have.

In in that case, you better have 1/ a convertible currency to buy said satellite phone link, and 2/ a working financial system, i.e. banks still performing international transactions. Both of which is not a given for some 3rd world countries, esp. during a time or crisis.

Re:Empty barns... (1)

jfalcon (163956) | more than 3 years ago | (#35072600)

In in that case, you better have 1/ a convertible currency to buy said satellite phone link, and 2/ a working financial system, i.e. banks still performing international transactions. Both of which is not a given for some 3rd world countries, esp. during a time or crisis.

I'd expect that if you are organized enough to get your message out, you also have:

1.) a currency that isn't going to be more useless than toilet paper tomorrow tied to a foreign 3rd party bank... I hear that's what the swiss excel in...
2.) a group that has your back like the red crecent/red cross... or at least willing to pull some strings to get you smuggled out of the country if you're being hunted...
3.) a satellite termnal/phone since they are relatively cheap... it's the satcom time that's expensive. While it's all good gestures to allow your Cairo apartment block tweet out some messages to their family abroad and upload the snuff video of the day to youtube, you better have some backing behind you for those times when the tanks roll into your town...

Again, I didn't see any pirate APRS packets coming from Egypt all weekend. So I'm assuming that things aren't dire enough to do so.
There are LEO birds that pass over Cairo twice a day at least... so not hearing a single packet from there shows they didn't need to employ all options. And for APRS, it only takes a computer with a soundcard and a handheld radio in a open area.

Worse Things to Come? (1)

Belteshazzar (202070) | more than 3 years ago | (#35072292)

It would seem once all outside communication is cut off the time would be ripe to ramp up the violence and brutally crush this uprising.

Egypt wasn't shut down (5, Funny)

microbee (682094) | more than 3 years ago | (#35072568)

They just used up their monthly data caps. They will be here in the next billing cycle.

An AT&T spokesman said.

what we really need... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35072690)

is a large, voluntarily joined, (white) botnet.

Re:what we really need... (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 3 years ago | (#35073946)

Like, say, freenet?

Dear Egypt (2, Funny)

rudy_wayne (414635) | more than 3 years ago | (#35073350)

Dear Egypt,

All IP addresses previously assigned to you have been revoked and given to others, since you apparently don't want them anymore.

Thank you for helping us with the dwindling supply of IPv4 addresses.

Sincerely,
ARIN

Re:Dear Egypt (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35073556)

FFS can we please get a redundant on this post?

Re:Dear Egypt (1)

Thing 1 (178996) | more than 3 years ago | (#35074110)

If I still had mod points, yes, I would have modded you redundant. (NOTE: would have modded the parent, not the GP; this is the first time I've seen that expressed. Requests for others to moderate, though, I see them all the time and agree that they are redundant.)

Re:Dear Egypt (1)

Imagix (695350) | more than 3 years ago | (#35074360)

Signed by the wrong people.... you're thinking of ICANN. Those IPs wouldn't go to ARIN anyway... they'd go to AfriNIC.

Who is telecomix? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35074090)

Why do we care what their opinion about other countries are? I don't get this. If I ask any asshole a question on the street, I am sure I will get an opinion. I am not sure why these guys matter.

You, Net activists at Telecomix (1)

unity100 (970058) | more than 3 years ago | (#35074130)

I think i wont be alone, if i say that, you are really doing some good shit, with what you are doing, as of this moment. Tho i rarely show proper appreciation for things that are good in my life, i will take the time to say this : Well done, we appreciate that.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?