Posted on 01/26/2010 12:35:28 PM PST by kingattax
Google's threat to exit China is igniting worries that the Web, a linchpin of globalization, may fracture into regional fiefdoms.
The U.S. and China are ratcheting up rhetoric over the Internet's future. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Thursday warned that "a new information curtain is descending across much of the world."
China says it'll make no exception for Google (GOOG) or other U.S. firms on its Internet policies. China's government has lashed back at Clinton's speech, saying it damaged bilateral ties. On Monday, the Communist Party's People's Daily accused the U.S. of using social Web sites like Twitter to cook up unrest in Iran.
(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...
Separate networks wouldn’t be all bad. I could do with a lot less spam from the third world.
I’m thinking the same thing.
Darn I’ll miss my Nigerian banker friends, my Bulgarian/Russian spammer friends but sacrifices have to be made.
and i’ll miss my russian wives
If our government stays out of it, then let ‘er rip! We will continue to operate freely and let the chips fall where they may.
But who in their right mind would want to end up in China’s part of the www?
I'd gladly pay extra for a US Only domestic network. My servers practically are already, but it's a full time job maintaining the .htaccess.
All I see is SQL injection attempts, rogue bots, log spam, etc.etc. from all the usual places I'd love to see disappear. Life would be just fine without the .BR script kiddies, the .RU Mafia, and absolutely anything from .CN.
To hell with them all.
Yep. Other going to foreign english language news sources I don’t think I need much else from abroad.
Yep. Other than going to foreign english language news sources I don’t think I need much else from abroad.
Hmmm... That’ll create a new business opportunity, a search engine that crosses the various world wide webs.
Here’s the problem with this... a lot of FReepers seem to think this is a great idea, but consider some of the consequences. Disparate networks will be maintained by disparate providers. The Chinese and Russians might maintain an Asian network, while the Asia Pacific folks (Australia, Japan, New Zealand) will have their own, the middle east and parts of eastern Europe will have one, western Europe and parts of north Africa will have one, the US will likely maintain the north American networks, and the South Americans would likely team up with Africa to create some sort of pan-Atlantic conglomerate.
The problem here is the interconnects between networks. If they are going to segregate networks, that means that the administrators of those networks, presumably governments, will restrict access into or out of those networks. I play a game called EVE online, and the core systems are based in Iceland. I don’t get too much lag in game, but when population on the server is high, it can get laggy. If the north American network and the European network are dissected and handed over to individual governments or entities, what’s to stop them from throttling bandwidth into or out of that network?
What happens when the European network goes to IPv6, but the pan-Asian network stays on IPv4 or comes up with its own addressing schemes? What happens on networks residing in countries with no funds to upgrade infrastructure or a lack of entities to support interconnectivity? Imagine, if you will, a group of Chinese hackers with the backing of the Chinese government breaking into the core routers for the South American network and taking over the ENTIRE network. Now imagine they infect every system in that network and use them to do one, gigantic DDOS attack on US servers or military interests?
This has very broad implications for security, and considering a large swath of countries in this world are ruled by despots, we will likely see entire sections of the current Internet go dark or grow VERY slow. With network segregation comes network control by powerful singular entities versus a global group of involved and interested commercial and governmental entities.
The web is supposed to be collaborative. ARPAnet was founded on collaboration and communication. To take away network ubiquity is to go back on over 30 years of progress.
So how many have you collected so far?
If we do that, the government will take it as an excuse to regulate and tax.
On the other hand, I could do with a few hundred less port scans and dictionary attacks per day.
Can’t you all see that this is nothing but Marxist family dog and pony show — obamaoists — to brake apart a powerful (and unregulated) source of public information and access to information. The obamaoists are in cahoots to get their dirty little fingers on unregulated public access to information.
Divide and rule!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.