Vladimir Putin Wants His Own Internet (bloomberg.com) 149
A bill that's progressing through Russia's legislature could grant local authorities deeper control over internet access. The so-called "Sovereign Internet" bill seeks to set up a centralized hub officials can use to manage the flow of information in the nation. From a report: Putin is touting the initiative as a defensive response to the Trump Administration's new cyber strategy, which permits offensive measures against Russia and other designated adversaries. But industry insiders, security experts and even senior officials say political upheaval is the bigger concern. "This law isn't about foreign threats, or banning Facebook and Google, which Russia can already do legally," said Andrei Soldatov, author of "The Red Web: The Kremlin's Wars on the Internet" and co-founder of Agentura.ru, a site that tracks the security services. "It's about being able to cut off certain types of traffic in certain areas during times of civil unrest."
France's Minitel is for sale (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
May be all Russia can afford.
Why do they need their own Internet?
From comments here, I thought they already p0wned this one.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
My hovercraft is full of eels.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I think they're probably not happy that it turns out they're own astroturfers are vulnerable. The problem with cyberwarfare is not much different than conventional warfare; just because your bullets can hit the enemy does not discount the ability of the enemy's bullets hitting you.
Re: (Score:2)
Or at least make it more blatant when external powers are messing about.
It's well worth noting that the modern US military (and probably many others) sees the "cyber domain" as just as important a domain of warfare as air, land, sea an space. And specifically, manipulation of civilian perspective, not just hacking enemy comms.
Russia's manipulation of public perception as they walked into the Ukraine--they did very simple things like remove patches from their uniforms--to keep it uncertain for a couple of d
Re: (Score:2)
Social media and public perception have nothing to do with infrastructure hacks and cyber-warfare really. You're conflating a propaganda campaign with the actual warfare that would follow.
They are both the "cyber domain" in modern warfare. As far back as Clausewitz it's been understood that attacking the moral strength of the enemy is just as valuable as attacking the enemy soldiers or logistics. But more than that: social media is often the fastest way information gets around in the modern world, and the modern battlefield is all about acting faster than your opponent can obtain the information to make a decision.
When it goes off, the internet GOES OFF. There will be no social media for a few days. There MAY be no power/water for a few days, airline flights, etc. THAT is what we're talking about.
Perhaps. But that's more of an act of desperation than of efficiently figh
Re: (Score:1)
" it's been understood that attacking the moral strength of the enemy is just as valuable as attacking the enemy soldiers or logistics." - Yet never demonstrated effectively. Every war was fought physically anyway.
The US won every major battle throughout the war in Vietnam. Then we surrendered and left. That is straight from Clausewitz on how a weaker foe can defeat a stronger, when it's not "total war".
They are two different concepts : influencing people with propaganda to weaken them, and actually attacking their physical resources to make them capitulate.
It was pretty well demonstrated in WWI that attacking the enemy's infrastructure makes little difference. We bombed a shitload of German factories, only to have them back a week later. Only logistical "choke points" help. Bombing the same factories every week didn't help, but cutting off Germany's supply of e.g. t
Re: (Score:2)
And connecting utilities infrastructure to the internet will always be stupid. You don't need your own internet to solve that problem, you need that stuff off of any internet whatsoever.
While I agree that's what you'd want, that horse left the barn long ago. I doubt any nation has offline utilities anymore.
Re: Does that mean he gets his own goatse? (Score:1)
And can we ship APK to PutiNet?
Re: Does that mean he gets his own goatse? (Score:4, Funny)
And can we ship APK to PutiNet?
How about Cyberia? [badum-*tish*]
Last thing he would do (Score:1)
The absolute last thing any politician or ruler would do is ban Spybook or Google. The permanent profiles they build on individuals are quite literally Stalin's dream.
Re: (Score:2)
The absolute last thing any politician or ruler would do is ban Spybook or Google. The permanent profiles they build on individuals are quite literally Stalin's dream.
You assume a lot from an entire planet full of politicians and rulers.
You do know other forms of politics besides socialism/communism exist, right? Not every leader is a murderous dictator...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
your favorite flavor of politician is above all that then huh ?
Yes, I oddly enough prefer a leader who isn't a murderous dictator. And regardless of anyone's assumptions of how bad things "really" are, they're NOT as bad as they were for anyone who managed to survive socialism/communism half a century ago.
100 million lives lost tend to validate that statement.
Re: (Score:2)
The next six years are really gonna suck for you.
Get some help.
thought crime (Score:2)
Next up get arrested for drug evasion. Thx1138
Re: (Score:1)
You do know other forms of politics besides socialism/communism exist
I do, and from where I'm standing, they all seem to be in favor of mass surveillance.
Re: (Score:2)
You do know other forms of politics besides socialism/communism exist
I do, and from where I'm standing, they all seem to be in favor of mass surveillance.
As much as I'm against mass surveillance, I'll take that over mass genocide any day.
Learn from history.
Re: (Score:2)
History? Trump has a history of supporting authoritarian autocratic murderous dictatorships.
FTS: Putin is touting the initiative as a defensive response to the Trump Administration's new cyber strategy,
You have a strange definition of "support".
Re: (Score:2)
The absolute last thing any politician or ruler would do is ban Spybook or Google. The permanent profiles they build on individuals are quite literally Stalin's dream.
But foreign companies means a lot of corporate resistance, public outcry, possible exposure and potential for other governments to snoop. China wants the Chinese on WeChat and Baidu, not Facebook and Google. Same with Russia and VKontakte. If they can use some legitimate-ish excuse to drive people away from American services, they will.
Good (but not really) (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course, this (and what China is doing) pretty much destroy the entire point of the Internet. It'd be good (for me) in the short term, but bad for humanity as a whole, of course.
Re: (Score:2)
Whether or not it fits the "narrative" (whatever that means) doesn't matter. The only thing that matters is if it fits the truth.
Re: (Score:2)
Putin and Trump are putting out the same 1:1 lines (Score:1)
Except at the end, when Putin cheers on NK directly. *(Hint, Mr. President, Vladimir is NOT YOUR FRIEND, MORON) https://www.thedailybeast.com/russia-blames-dems-cheers-kim-after-trumps-korea-summit-fail
I want Russians off on their own network too (Score:1)
n/t
Re: (Score:2)
Re: I made my own internet in college (Score:2)
I use the thick 3 1/2" x 3/4" ones, but really you can use any width you like.
Re: (Score:2)
I go single mode with taut elastic string
Re: (Score:2)
What is the bandwidth of a cargo plane loaded with 512 GB micro SD cards making an eight hour flight? (but ignore the latency)
Re: (Score:2)
I chose pre-order 1TB Sandisk "Extreme" cards from Amazon for $404 each since the release is only 10 days away, and we can double our bandwidth over 512GB card
Re: (Score:2)
You must be referring to those bent wire things in the closet that I hang my shirts on?
One time at this one hotel, I looked in the closet and there were only three hookers in the closet! And I have more than three shirts! So I called the front desk and insisted that they send at least a dozen hookers to my room IMMEDIATELY !!!
Will we sell him the equipment? (Score:2)
Censorship by any other name. (Score:2)
Is still censorship.
Definition of Universe. (Score:5, Informative)
Warning: Linguistics and philosophy.
If you connect your network to the internet, it is part of the internet. That's what the internet is. It's the network between networks.
What he wants is not an internet, but a national intranet - well, unless he never connects it in any way to the rest of the world - then and only then would it be its own internet.
It's sort of like the definition of observable universe. If you can observe something, it is part of the universe. That's the whole 'Uni' part of universe - just one bucket to put things. So, if there's a gateway to some new place you can walk to/from - then you didn't open a gateway to another universe, you made the universe larger by opening that door. Connecting to our universe inherently joins the two spaces into once cross-observable space, even if you put protections and limitations in place.
Ryan Fenton
Re: (Score:3)
If you are going to discuss linguistics relating to what is the Internet, then you should capitalize it properly ("Internet").
Re: (Score:2)
>>If you are going to discuss linguistics relating to what is the Internet, then you should capitalize it properly ("Internet").
Nah - I think it's been a while since almost all standards bodies and style guides stopped suggesting that.
Capitalizing is kind of a system of giving credit - and the internet is past the point where there's anything to give credit to that would help anything. In that sense, it's bigger than English or any single language, in the sense that there's nothing trying to tally ho
Re: (Score:2)
Thus showing the flaw in your original post.
Any interconnected networks is an internet, not intranet. Technically, every home with a router is an internet. The major worldwide network of networks has a name: the Internet.
The flaw isn't in his original post. The flaw is in the understanding of moronic journalists who have been arguing since 2002 that Internet is a common noun, when it definitely is not. The Associated Press and The New York Times both decided to stop capitalizing the word in 2016, even when referring to the singular, properly named Internet. Oxford English Dictionary claims the common noun spelling is more common than the proper name spelling in the UK as of April 2016, while admitting the proper name is
Re: (Score:3)
If you can observe something, it is part of the universe.
I think of it as: anyplace that a photon could travel to in the normal way that photons travel would be part of our universe.
People have posited the existence of other universes. It would require some unknown method of travel to go from one universe to another. The collection of all universes can be called the Multiverse.
I recently saw, in a comic [thecomicseries.com], the idea that there could then be multiple Multiverses. That doesn't make sense to me any more than t
Re: (Score:2)
Cool - I'll check it out. Thanks!
Ryan Fenton
Re: (Score:1)
what governments really fear (Score:2)
Almost every government talks about threats from outside their borders, while in reality they most fear the threat inside their border. China, with more than a billion citizens is most afraid of what they might do if not carefully 'managed'. All the petty dictators of the world fear their citizens but it goes way beyond that. Even the US (fill in your own observations of US repression) . . .
Obligatory... (Score:2)
What can you expect from an ex-KGB thug? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Cue the Russian Reversal jokes (Score:2)
Central point of failure (Score:2)
Considering the early expansions of ARPANET to try to guarantee network survival in the event of nuclear attacks, going to a centralized hub for your country is a bit funny. Oh well, less to compromise or take out in the event of diplomacy failures.
Re: (Score:2)
The phone system will work.
Computers will send and get information for education.
Games will connect and play.
No outside peering, global networks needed.
He is concerned about election hacking (Score:2, Funny)
Putin is likely concerned that a foreign agent might interfere with his elections, skewing the results, reducing his victory from 95% to 94%
Fine. Get an axe. (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
My own internet! Without blackjack or hookers! (Score:2)
Don't laugh (Score:2)
The EU seems to be on its way to a sealed-off Internet of its own.
Political upheaval (Score:2)
But industry insiders, security experts and even senior officials say political upheaval is the bigger concern.
Given Putin's popularity in Russia, which is much higher than Trump, Macron, May or Merkel in their own countries, that seems odd.
Re: (Score:2)
The difference is, in Putinland the people admitting opposition expect to be secretly executed for it, and having 5% admitting opposition signifies a huge amount of latent demand for the ability to be opposed.
In the other places you named, the number includes basically everybody with a mild preference for somebody else, not just those willing to fight to to the death over it.
Places where it is dangerous to dissent have to worry about 9% becoming 95% very rapidly if people's emotions change, or their percept
Red Internet (Score:2)
SO much misinformaton in comments... (Score:2)
You asked for it (Score:1)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: You asked for it (Score:2)