Subject: Internet 2.0: now kill switch enabled!   
   @VIA: TINFOIL   
   @MSGID: <513730C3.1220.dove-int@bismaninfo.hopto.org>   
   @REPLY: <5136ACB4.32.dove-int@tsebbs.com>   
   @TZ: 4168   
     Re: Internet 2.0   
     By: Shadowheart to Khelair on Tue Mar 05 2013 18:40:00   
      
           Good lord a cut 'n paste just went awry and I lost a good 25-50      
   lines of text that I'd been typing in my reply to you.  :(  I'll try to      
   recreate what I had written previously; I wonder why the hell 'pico'   
   couldn't handle some simple pasted raw text.   
      
    >   Re: Internet 2.0   
    >   By: Khelair to The Millionaire on Tue Mar 05 2013 11:07 am   
    >    
    >  >      Almost true.  BBSes will probably just be local islands of   
    >  > relatively isolated folks, unless many of them have exchanged analog line   
    >    
    > That is sort of the way it was before america online came around.   
      
           I was online in this day and age, as well.  I knew of 2 local BBS   
   systems that I found out about from a friend, when I first picked up some   
   telecommunications equipment (archaic as it was); I have no idea where he   
   came up with these numbers, but there was no real 'list' around here at      
   the time.  After I got to know some of the users of these local BBSes, I made   
   pretty good friends with another kid who was my same age on there; he opened my   
   eyes to the wonder that was the internet before the days of the WWW.  The only   
   number available for access at the time was via the higher education computer   
   network for the state, and the accounts weren't legitimate, they were   
   CrackerJack produced dictionary attack successes from somebody that knew their   
   *NIX stuff before I even knew what it was.  Those were back in the days where   
   files were found solely by archie and FTP, the closest thing to the web was   
   gopher, and if you went to other sites it was by telnet or rlogin.   
      
    > You are almost correct but you must be young because originally fidonet and    
    > things like usenet and what not were around before the conveniance of the      
    >  internet to transfer the mail packets. long ago in a land far far away        
    > sysops used to use things called front door mailers and such to frequently     
    > call out to other bbs's in order to send netmail back and fourth from bbs to   
    > bbs. back then the bbs was used daily to send and receive email because it     
    > wasnt as instant as it is now a days. some sysops had their bbs's configured   
    > to do the mail transfers at midnight.   
      
           Oh I'm well aware of ZMH and the way that message packets were   
   transferred between analog line based systems.  I thought I made that   
   clear in my message but it could well have been one that I typed either A)   
   before having enough coffee to make my point clearly or B) after so much     
   coffee that my point came unhinged and I hurriedly banged at the keys from   
   my Larry King hunchbacked position in front of the glowing amusement box     
   here.  I'm totally working on getting my BBS set up with all of this    
   oldschool technology as backup systems whenever my place of work isn't   
   keeping me too busy with the whole wageslave thing.   
           I'm 35, btw.  ;)  Younger than a bunch that I've seen around, but    
   by no means a spring chicken any more.  Just a couple of years ago I   
   started developing a paunch on my gut that I thought I would NEVER have to   
   deal with thanks to how fast my metabolism has always been; alas, now I        
   can't keep it off unless I'm running 6+ miles per week and interspersing   
   it with physical training damn near as hard as the Army used to put me   
   through.   
      
    > The 'internet kill switch' is a rumor and theoretical at that. i am not        
    > saying the government does not have the power to order the servers running     
    > the internet because most are probably run in area 51 or something. Do nott    
    > get me wrong, i believe it is important for it to continue running we need     
    > persons like yourself calling polititions out to be parinoid of infringing o   
    > our constitutional rights. if no one squeeked their wheels no one would get    
    > anything fixed because the politicians would become complaicent.   
      
           I try to be as politically active as possible without seeming to     
   get onto their lunatic fringe list.  The time needed to be able to get       
   this kind of action done just seems to melt away more and more now that      
   I'm working again, though.   
           As far as there being an actual big red switch that the chief   
   executive hits to take all of our 'net communications down, I'm sure   
   you're right.  However, please take a look at the following analysis of      
   his Assignment of National Security and Emergency Preparedness   
   Communications Functions (an executive order):   
      
   -=-=-=-   
   The White House has finally responded to criticism over US President Barack   
   Obama’s hushed signing last week of an Executive Order that allows the   
   government to command privately-owned communication systems and acknowledges   
   its implications.   
      
   When President Obama inked his name to the Assignment of National Security and   
   Emergency Preparedness Communications Functions Executive Order on July 6, he   
   authorized the US Department of Homeland Security to take control of the   
   country’s wired and wireless communications — including the Internet — in   
   instances of emergency. The signing was accompanied with little to no   
   acknowledgment outside of the White House, but initial reports on the order   
   quickly caused the public to speak out over what some equated to creating an   
   Oval Office kill switch for the Web. Now the Obama administration is addressing   
   those complaints by calling the Executive Order a necessary implement for   
   America’s national security.   
      
   â€œThe [order] recognizes the creation of DHS and provides the Secretary the   
   flexibility to organize the communications systems and functions that reside   
   within the department as [Homeland Security Secretary Janet A. Napolitano]   
   believes will be most effective,â€� White House spokeswoman Caitlin Hayden   
   tells the Washington Post.   
      
   Hayden insists that “The [order] does not transfer authorities between or   
   among departments,â€� but the order does indeed allow the DHS to establish and   
   implement control over even the privately owned communication systems in the   
   country, including Internet Service Providers such as Time Warner, Verizon and   
   Comcast, if the administration agrees that it is warranted for security’s   
   sake.   
   -=-=-=-   
   (cut from: http://www.mercatornet.com/sheila_liaugminas/view/11281)   
      
   > networks would revert to dial up connections.   
   > it would be slow but i think we would find a way to manage.   
   >   
   >  > there would be no way to locate backup modem numbers on the web, there   
   >   
   > that is why bbs lists are usually advertised on local boards. in the day the   
   > sysops used to have god by screens for a logging off user to call such and     
   > such bbs. now most of the bbs lists really only list the telenet addresses o   
   > other boards. if you would imagine every where you see a wep or ip address     
   > link to visit another board listing a phone number you may be able to imagin   
   > how it was.   
      
       I agree to a point.  I think that it would take some serious time, though.    
   The mainstream users of the web these days will just be shut down, I believe.    
   The diehards will be able to start looking for ways to get in contact with   
   BBSes again, but the very fact that BBSes list telnet addresses instead of   
   phone numbers will make this nigh impossible.  Who knows how many people are   
   going to actually have the digits written down when searching for them via the   
   internet is no longer possible.   
      
   > it would be sysops getting together with other sysops telling each other i   
   > will put your bbs number on my board if you do the same and advertise mine.    
   > that has mutated to how on our networked message bases people post their       
   > board advertisements like the pharcyde agoranet. back then that is how acid    
   > networks got started.   
      
       Ayuh, I agree.  I really think that sysops that aren't already connected to   
   Fido or Dove-Net are going to be outside of that loop for quite some time,   
   though.  What I'm trying to say is that yeah, it'll evolve and will survive,   
   but it's going to take some time, and the time that it's going to take is going   
   to be when people need the networking resource the most, I fear.  Who other   
   than the aforementioned sysops of those networks have dialup numbers written   
   down or stored in a text file for use?  I guess the Thai probably have some, at   
   least.  ;)   
      
   > this is how much the bbs scene has mutated to/from the internet. it also   
   > demonstrates how entagral the internet has become and how much of political   
   > suicide it would be for any politician to "press" the internet "off/kill"   
   > switch.   
      
       Absolutely it would.  What about for a president like Obama which has   
   already taken for granted his mandate from the people via the 2nd election,   
   though?  He doesn't have anything to lose.  He'll get a plush corporate job   
   after his presidency no matter what the constituents think of him, provided he   
   doesn't usurp dictatorial control at some point in the next 3+ years.   
      
   > all you need is one phone number of an active dial up bbs and you can get   
   > other dial up numbers from that one. that is how we used to do it back in th   
   > day. it was word of mouth and grew from there. i remember going to a Radio   
   > Shack to get my first bbs numbers.   
      
       I hear what you're saying, my good man, but I don't really agree on this   
   point.  Those will take serious time to be generated and propagated around   
   again, most likely when we need the resource of international networking most.   
      
   -The opinions expressed are not necessarily an advocation of any of the   
   aforementioned ideologies, concepts, or actions.  We still have the freedom of   
   speech, for now, and I enjoy using it in a satirical or ficticious manner to   
   amuse myself.-   
      
   â€œIn times of universal deceit, telling the truth will be a revolutionary   
   act.â€�--  George Orwell   
      
   ---   
    þ Synchronet þ Tinfoil Tetrahedron : telnet bismaninfo.hopto.org 8023 :   
   http:8080   
    * Origin: Time Warp of the Future BBS - Home of League 10 (1:340/400)