Almost none of the above would have a major effect on non-Internet business
Yes a savvy few would get around it but that would effective eliminate organized mass protests and opposition. Your news sources would become limited to the mainstream media.
That's why it would be smart to selectively shutdown non-corporate email and opposition websites instead of the whole Internet. That would massively disorganize any opposition. "Just for the duration of the emergency" of course. 1/3 of people would seethe, 1/3 would say it's justified for the duration of the "emergency", and the 1/3 that make up the faithful would cheer the government shuttering opposition sites.Problem is, almost ALL retail business operates with internet or satellite uplinks to credit card companies, banks, distribution centers, basically shutting down the internet would economically halt almost all business except on a cash basis. Then there is the telecommunications industries, energy management systems, etc.
Not enough to organize or publicize mass protests. You might get demonstrations at a college or two but nobody will hear about it. Not with the media refusing to report it. We face a situation that is not unlike the old Soviet Union in that the media has become little more than a propaganda arm for the government and that government is now reaching to take control of the only remaining methods of informing the public of what is going on around them.There may be more than a "savvy few" who could still communicate within limited areas
Except what about when corporate websites and email accounts start to be used by the opposition? My boss would be rewriting the company website himself if he had to he knows lots of like minded individuals and communicates with them via their corporate email accounts already. Thus they would have to either go through every web page individually or shut everything down.That's why it would be smart to selectively shutdown non-corporate email and opposition websites instead of the whole Internet.
Well, that presupposes an external enemy. What if Big Brother views its biggest enemy as lying within its own borders?... it's less likely that "Big Brother" would shut down the internet, than that "Big Brother" would start a war.
That's a tried and true method for empowerment of the regime, based on the histories of most nations.
What if Big Brother views its biggest enemy as lying within its own borders?
Mine would. If they shut us down, and in turn shut down the computers at our clients sites, then lets just say that things would soon get VERY interesting across the 5 states we service.There would be plenty of the "faithful" reporting anyone spreading bad thoughts and not many corporations will risk the company site to spread the word.
Well, that presupposes an external enemy. What if Big Brother views its biggest enemy as lying within its own borders?
... it's less likely that "Big Brother" would shut down the internet, than that "Big Brother" would start a war.
Getting back to the subject at hand I think we should all be writing our congress critters and telling them to nip this in the bud.
OuTcAsT said:There's the answer, Tell our "representatives" how we feel about an issue, that will get their attention ! Look how effective it's been on other current issues