Top
Best
New

Posted by WaitWaitWha 4 days ago

Deliberate Internet Shutdowns(www.schneier.com)
318 points | 163 commentspage 2
IceHegel 15 hours ago|
I’m against internet shutdowns, but I cringe at the phrase “international community.” Who does that even include?
BLKNSLVR 1 day ago||
Which reminds me that I've let my connection to this group lapse for... about a decade: https://air-stream.org/

Covering Adelaide, South Australia. Such communities should exist in most cities.

8bitsrule 1 day ago||
According to Gigazine (Osaka, est. 2000), "In 2024, there were 296 internet shutdowns in 54 countries around the world, with Myanmar, India, Pakistan and Russia accounting for about 70% of the total."

https://gigazine.net/gsc_news/en/20250228-internet-shutdowns...

g947o 1 day ago||
Related: this is an interesting case study https://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/15/world/asia/15china.html
stogot 1 day ago||
Its become clear that the axiom “The Net Interprets Censorship As Damage and Routes Around It” as no longer true. It hasnt been since before 2010 anecdotely but the data Schneier presents here is undeniable
cyberax 1 day ago||
This is still somewhat true. For example, Russia is now frequently shutting down mobile Internet. Ostensibly for protection against drone attacks, but even it had to relent a bit and allow at least some whitelisted services to work.

So immediately local VPN companies started providing the unrestricted access through proxies at these services.

hulitu 1 day ago||
It hasn't been true since 9/11 when the US name servers were "shut down" and traffic was dropped ftom level3 nodes.
stogot 1 day ago||
What name server / level3 event was this?
bschne 1 day ago||
fun anecdote about Ethiopia doing this to prevent cheating in national exams --- https://x.com/benkuhn/status/1339016975494811649?s=20
vivzkestrel 1 day ago||
did you see the data i posted earlier on how many shutdowns have happened this year across the world? https://public.tableau.com/app/profile/zach.rosson/viz/STOP_...
vjay15 1 day ago|
its really crazy how much internet shutdowns india has done
crossroadsguy 1 day ago||
India doesn’t do any of this. This is all propaganda by CIA, Ford Foundation, and George Soros. India is the biggest democracy and we had autonomous and conscious flying air-things when the world barely even existed in this form i.e. millennia ago. This is the best UNESCO certified country in the world led by a non-biological (in His own words) head of state. Now, bow!

PS. Don’t forget the zero! You still owe us that much.

goku12 21 hours ago||
I was confused for a minute after reading this, until I remembered that I'm on HN.
hannukahharry 1 day ago||
This is concerning in the comments:

> I suspect most can guess where this mess will end up, and it’s not good.

What I read from this is going to sound conspiratorial, but I think it’s a valid “read between the lines” of an insider. I think they’re saying that they’re alarmed that Silicon Valley is supporting the current U.S. administration assuming he’s doing what’s best for their welfare, while it’s clear based on the activities of Iran and others that are practicing working without internet that they are planning on losing internet, which could either be because Iran, Russia, China, or the U.S. itself may plan to sever or disable internet connections (while unsure what would be isolated or disabled) as an act of war or extreme and dangerously naive nationalism.

ffuxlpff 1 day ago||
One more reason to resist the fragile lifestyle that requires constant internet access. Even if you don't live in a totalitarian country where shutting down the net would be easy and probable.

Some time ago someone posted in Twitter a letter of Theodore Kaczynski giving life advice, one point being not to use internet for more than one hour a day. Too bad I couldn't find it anymore.

zzo38computer 18 hours ago||
I also think that you should be able to do stuff without requiring internet access, and also should be able to do stuff without requiring electrical power, etc. You should not be overly reliance on technology. They can be useful (in many ways), but should not be mandatory to rely on, and furthermore should avoid damaging the natural environments for such technology, and also avoid damaging the possibility of working without them.
dijit 1 day ago|||
why is this flagged? (maybe Theo? I don’t know this person).

Its absolutely a good argument against fragile IoT devices that have no local/offline mode and the ever increasing lurch of internet requirements for our daily life.

I’m not sure my phone does much of anything without an internet connection. Yet it is my primary banking and authentication method (via BankID).

EDIT: Theodore Kaczynski is the unabomber… well, thats an odd name to drop and maybe not an ideal candidate for life advice.

IAmGraydon 1 day ago||
It's getting downvoted because (1) this person is suggesting the answer to governments taking away our ability to freely communicate is to stop freely communicating (2) he's giving life advice from a terrorist mass murderer.

Yes, you're not at risk from being cut off from the world if you're not connected to it in the first place. That's not a state most of us want to exist in. Ted Kaczynski lived in a small cabin in the woods away from humanity.

ffuxlpff 22 hours ago|||
The solutions requiring constant internet connection are pushed by states and companies because they help cutting costs and gathering information. However, the users are often more vulnerable to the risks if the technology fails but have relatively little say.

The solutions that do much the same but require internet connection only once a day or even once an hour would be much more resilient and safe but currently there are few incentives for providers to develop and offer them.

The extreme situations like war or dictatorship are good awakening calls but it is easy to see there are lots of risks involved even if things would go rather smoothly otherwise.

blueflow 1 day ago|||
> this person is suggesting the answer to governments taking away our ability to freely communicate is to stop freely communicating

You equate comms with internet. Maybe you should talk to people IRL more often.

IAmGraydon 23 hours ago||
No one in their right mind believes that you can accomplish widespread, high speed communication via "talking to people IRL" like you can with the internet. It has become a very important way that we share information broadly, deal with emergencies, and stay informed. Going back to the stone age is not a good option at this point. But you know that, and you're just posting nonsense to have an argument.
blueflow 18 hours ago||
> No one in their right mind believes that you can accomplish widespread, high speed communication via "talking to people IRL" like you can with the internet.

Nobody claimed that. I'm not sure whether this sort of comms is meaningful at all or whether "staying informed" is just the dopamine thing in effect.

> Going back to the stone age

Its actually 20 years ago. That's less than the median age.

IAmGraydon 11 hours ago||
You think the internet started in 2005? Are you sure you belong here?
noident 1 day ago|||
Ted has some interesting ideas but I personally would not accept any life advice from him
iberator 1 day ago||
Living without the Internet is still doable. Just a little bit harder.

You gonna lose some time and money (buying bus tickets physically and not buying cheap junk over the internet, BUT you're gonna gain like literally 6h per day :)

Been there, done that. Its net positive experience. Just like going back to 1999.

krior 1 day ago||
You are aware of the fact that a lot of the payment infrastructure relies on the internet today?
goku12 21 hours ago|||
We used to carry paper pieces called 'bank notes' or 'bills' and round metal disks called 'coins' in a small leather pouch in our pockets called wallets. They were pretty effective for payments without much of an infrastructure. Even banks worked using paper documents and books.

I know this sounds a bit too condescending. But that's honestly not my intention. I just couldn't help it! Jokes aside, it's true that we often forget that these things can be done and were done without the internet. But more importantly, there are 2 dangerous implications for our over reliance on the internet for our financial activities. The first is that the government or a non-state actor can easily disrupt our commercial and personal activity unintentionally or as a retribution. We have effectively surrendered our financial autonomy to multiple powerful players.

The second major problem is if we ever face a post-apocalyptic situation with regards to modern technology. We already have only a few fabs that can meet the global demand for advanced ICs. We have already seen our vulnerability to one of them when a flood there caused supply chain disruptions and a slump in even automobile markets. HDD and SSD manufacturers have similar weaknesses. Meanwhile, DRAM manufacturers are placing all their (gambling) chips in the AI hyperscaler market, threatening to disrupt every market from smartphones, laptops and consumer appliances to military and commercial jets, ATC, shipping, railway signalling, telecom infrastructure, etc. The technology apocalypse isn't that farfetched and we are extremely vulnerable to it.

Bender 1 day ago||||
Depends where one lives. In my location there is zero dependency on the internet. It's just a convenience thing and the growing number of miscreants on the internet is negating that balance for me personally. Sooner than later I am going back to a landline and ditching the cell phone.
A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 1 day ago|||
Sure, but it does not mean it is not possible as OP notes.

More to your point though, even if it does, maybe it should not realy on it.

karel-3d 1 day ago|
Ahh I just wanted to host my website in Afghanistan.

(there are actual web hosting companies in Kabul, and it seems its not illegal to send money there)

More comments...