BF2S Forums Obama Admin: Zombie Quarantine infected computers

Phrozenbot wrote:

Shahter wrote:

Phrozenbot wrote:

Is it even illegal for an ISP to deny service to their users? Not that I'm aware of. The only thing stopping them is that it would completely alienate their customers, leaving them with less revenue to draw from when they "vote with their wallets", as Senor put it.

i dunno how it is where you live, but in russia, when a firm i work for got ddos-attacked, all isp's that were asked immediately shut off every ip from which we were being attacked. if i'm not mistaken, they also provided logs and assisted our admins and lawers when this issue was being reported to law enforcement.

Not here in the states. Did the authorities at least find out who was responsible and apprehend them?

you gotta be shittin me. i'm in russia, man, nobody gives a fuck here . i'm not sure, but i think the firm only reported the incident because it incured some damages to the customers - you know, legal reasons, to shift the blame where it belongs.

SenorToenails wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

It goes back to the biological virus metaphor. In most cases you can deal with the problem without resorting to extreme measures. In worst case scenarios though, drastic action is required. The issue is as I said making sure that the technology the government uses is used as intended in these dooms-day scenarios and not just as another way of censoring content.

You really can't use that comparison though.  In one case, lives are at stake...and in the other, data.  There is a huge difference.  And the reason this isn't worth considering is because of the technological infeasibility as well as massive potential for abuse with very little positive benefit.

As the world becomes more and more reliant on technology, the distinction between lives and data becomes more and more blurred. Even besides the ability to financially ruin not just one but many people, as pointed out there are areas where lives are directly reliant on technology.

SenorToenails wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Asking the question "what else is there?" implying we are at the limits of our understanding is a silly thing to do this day in age.

Ah, but if you look at the context, you'll see what is actually meant--Why should we be restricting freedom due to some undefined 'threat'.  In that case, the question is valid.  Restrictions on liberty and freedom should require a very well-defined threat, and since there really isn't one...

I don't see how the threat is so undefined. There are so many people out there that are so clueless when it comes to internet security that anyone who wants to (most of the people who have actually harnessed these computers have been teenage script kiddies ffs) can harness that computing power in whatever way they choose. I don't understand how that threat is so vague.

though really

FEOS wrote:

Until then, it's the equivalent of a moron telling an imbecile what to do...it won't end well.

This is the root of the issue, as are all questions of government interference.

mikkel wrote:

Shahter wrote:

mikkel wrote:

If a host attacks its own ISP, the ISP already have the right to disconnect him. If the host simply transfers traffic to other hosts, whatever that traffic might be, then that is perfectly fine.

and if they are attacking anouther isp that's fine? really?

Yes. Really.

mikkel wrote:

That has nothing to do with SP. The talk is about shutting down Internet connections. What happens on the LAN is outside of the scope of this discussion.

ah, i see. well, untill you've read wikipedia or smthing and have at least some basic understanding of how this shit works there's no point in discussing it with you. this conversation is over.

Shahter wrote:

mikkel wrote:

Shahter wrote:

and if they are attacking anouther isp that's fine? really?

Yes. Really.

mikkel wrote:

That has nothing to do with SP. The talk is about shutting down Internet connections. What happens on the LAN is outside of the scope of this discussion.

ah, i see. well, untill you've read wikipedia or smthing and have at least some basic understanding of how this shit works there's no point in discussing it with you. this conversation is over.

Heh, I manage service provider networks for a living, Mr. Help Desk.

mikkel wrote:

Shahter wrote:

mikkel wrote:

Yes. Really.

mikkel wrote:

That has nothing to do with SP. The talk is about shutting down Internet connections. What happens on the LAN is outside of the scope of this discussion.

ah, i see. well, untill you've read wikipedia or smthing and have at least some basic understanding of how this shit works there's no point in discussing it with you. this conversation is over.

Heh, I manage service provider networks for a living, Mr. Help Desk.

ah, so you are trolling then. k.

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Shahter wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

This is the root of the issue, as are all questions of government interference.

if not government, who else would have the power and will to do something about this issue? this "government never does it right"-moaning is getting old.

It doesn't matter if they have the will and the power if they don't have the competence. Doing something poorly is not necessarily better than doing nothing.

that's right. however, nobody's competent in everything they try to do - not right away. some trial and error is going to happen anyway. the point is if nothing's done - nothing ever changes.

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Shahter wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

It doesn't matter if they have the will and the power if they don't have the competence. Doing something poorly is not necessarily better than doing nothing.

that's right. however, nobody's competent in everything they try to do - not right away. some trial and error is going to happen anyway. the point is if nothing's done - nothing ever changes.

The government is not full of children. These are full grown adults that have spent much of their time lying and extracting money from the public to get elected.

already addressed that. if not the government then who? or would you rather have this shit left as it is?