There Is No 'Internet Kill Switch' Legislation... And Pretending There Is Distracts From The Real Debate

from the overhyped-analysis dept

In mid-June, we noted that due to all the questionable cyberwar hype, Senator Joe Lieberman had introduced a "cybersecurity" bill. We had plenty of issues with that bill, but still found it odd a week or so later, when we started getting all sorts of submissions from people saying that Lieberman was trying to implement an "internet kill switch." As bad as the bill appears to be, there isn't an internet kill switch in the bill, and so we wrote another post pointing that out.

However, it appears that the meme of an "internet kill switch" -- which apparently was first put forth by Declan McCullough -- has pretty much taken over the debate on the bill. And some are noting that this is problematic, as there are lots of real issues to be discussed around the bill, and focusing on the bogus "internet kill switch" makes it less likely those other, real, issues will get as much attention.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 20th, 2010 @ 3:21am

    which is why...

    ... the people in favor of this bill are in favor of having this bill "battled over" and the 'Internet kill switch' part 'taken out' then the bill passed because "its better now"....

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    identicon
    abc gum, Jul 20th, 2010 @ 4:50am

    Re: which is why...

    "are in favor of having this bill "battled over""

    Like children, they enjoy arguing.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 20th, 2010 @ 5:00am

    What Lieberman wants is to all traffic to go through a few points that he can control, that is it.

    Which is ironic because the internet works best when it have no choke points, it is resilient because it cannot be dismembered, it was created exactly for the purpose of being able to survive such attacks he said it wants to prevent and yet he wants to handicap it so it make it even more vulnerable to crippling attacks.

    This is not about cyber attacks is about spying on everyone and reducing the work the government has right now.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 20th, 2010 @ 5:04am

    If he is so preoccupied about national security he should be nagging Obama to produce results on the internet infra-structure to augment its capabilities so it is not vulnerable from other countries that have bigger pipes.

    Australia did it.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  
    identicon
    out_of_the_blue, Jul 20th, 2010 @ 5:13am

    "The Internet's public-private balance is a difficult one."

    From the last link, one "Nancy Scola". -- No, it's not. Just gov't STAY OUT.

    Now, having read the piece at that last link, I feel MISLED from your phrase: "there are lots of real issues". -- Not at that link, just a few paragraphs, first self-referencing, then saying it's "important", and that Obama won't have a giant red button on his desk. That's not journalism, just blather.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6.  
    icon
    Black Patriot (profile), Jul 20th, 2010 @ 7:00am

    Re:

    lol, we might be building a national broadband network, but it's going to take so long to build that it'll be out of date. Realistically it's already out of date, as the NBN is only designed to have speeds of around 100 Mbit, whereas other countries have Gigabit internet connections available.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7.  
    icon
    Sean T Henry (profile), Jul 20th, 2010 @ 8:26am

    Re:

    If they get the internet to go through a few points for everything it removes the need for net-neutrality. Or better said forces a requirement for net-bias since the internet can't handle pushing all the data through that one pipe so we need to prioritize the packets. Also it would give Telcos an extra arguing point for gov funding to "build out" there infrastructure. (LOL the thought of them building out.)

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 20th, 2010 @ 9:32am

    Declan's never let the truth stand in the way of a sensational story.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  9.  
    identicon
    Don P., Jul 20th, 2010 @ 9:54am

    Typical McCullough. Remember how he made shit up about Gore in 2000?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  10.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 20th, 2010 @ 10:07am

    It's not so much an "Internet Kill Switch" as it is an "Internet Death Panel".

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  11.  
    icon
    DanVan (profile), Jul 20th, 2010 @ 2:39pm

    People don't care whether one actually exists.......they heard it on Fox News and therefore it MUST be true

    The fact that people can't actually read what is in the bill is pathetic but pretty much sums up the IQ of the right

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  12.  
    identicon
    JBDragon, Aug 2nd, 2010 @ 5:09pm

    Re:

    Like the Democrats that can't be bothered to read any bills and flat out SAY SO!!! There may not be a so called Internet Kill Switch in THIS bill, but it puts the Government is far more control that it shouldn't have, and just like everything else, before long, there's yet another bill a few years later that really does give the government a Internet Kill Switch!!! Which is a BAD thing no matter WHO is running the Government. Just to prove my point, here's a good example!!!
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gW7mOaPnYYA

    That's just sad, rush though a bill that no one has time to read, or understand, and really just don't care. I don't care what side your on, it's just plain WRONG.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This