Dotcom Wants To Encrypt Half The Internet

Elios said:
yes one at one of the few major data trunks that enter the US
that doesnt count the ways they have of getting stuff from other places in the world
some the true stories out of the NSA are better then science fiction
look at the spying they did on the Soviets
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ivy_Bells
Click to expand...

1970's Soviet Union is not 2013 in the US. Slower transmissions and not the entire population of the planet constantly sending stupid texts and pics to each other. That's a different situation in different circumstances that you can't apply. Just because the NSA did it doesn't mean it's magically the same.
 
Elios said:
i count maybe 12 or so major entry points notice how there are places where multiple cables come to one point...
Click to expand...

Went from 6 to 10 in your last post to 12 now. So what you're saying is, "I have no idea what I'm talking about, but I like the X-Files because Mulder was hot."
 
Elios said:
i count maybe 12 or so major entry points notice how there are places where multiple cables come to one point...
Click to expand...

Did you zoom in? There are 6 points in Florida (that's the state that looks like a penis, FYI), and 5 each in New Jersey and New York; and I can't count past 16, so I'm ignoring the ones in Rhode Island and Massachusetts, and the whole of the good coast. Also ignoring the cable that goes from Texas to Mississippi; wtf? I guess someone doesn't like Louisiana.
 
toast0 said:
Did you zoom in? There are 6 points in Florida (that's the state that looks like a penis, FYI), and 5 each in New Jersey and New York; and I can't count past 16, so I'm ignoring the ones in Rhode Island and Massachusetts, and the whole of the good coast. Also ignoring the cable that goes from Texas to Mississippi; wtf? I guess someone doesn't like Louisiana.
Click to expand...

that cable in the golf is owned by BP and is used for there own network
BP Fiber Backbone (2 Landings, 1216km, 10Gbps)
Used internally by BP
Click to expand...

and you only need to tap the major trunks a lot of the cables are redundant
 
and there are 11 major trunks
the thinness of the lines relates to the bandwidth of the cable
 
I want Gemma Atksinon to appear naked in my bed next to me this morning when I wake up with bacon and pancakes made...

Life is disappointment Kim.
 
Nothing funny or odd about what Kim talked about.

I agree with his assessments completely.

Email should have been encrypted by default ages ago.

And yes, it has already be covered that all email traffic in the US is being stored by the government. Kim did not go all conspiracy crazy. He told it like it is. He said that IF you ever come under scrutiny THEN they can do some truly disturbing searches that yield far too much information. More than should ever be easily available to anyone, government or otherwise.

Our communications are far too open in general.

PS - Back on the email subject for a second... why is Blind Carbon Copy not the default option on every email client when emailing multiple people? How many times have you gotten an email from someone who forgot to check BCC before sending to ALL?

On the same front, most email should be end to end encrypted with the recipient. It simply would not be hard to do. No one should be sniffing email any more than they should be reading your personal postal snail mail. (Which is very illegal)
 
toast0 said:
The US isn't Egypt or Syria or Cuba; there are a shitton of international undersea cables attached to the US http://www.cablemap.info/ Plus however many terrestrial connections to Mexico and Canada.

At one point, maybe a majority of internet traffic traveled through major peering points (MAE-West MAE-East), but those got expensive, so new peering points popped up. Equinix runs 8 in the US (and one in Toronto), and they're not the only one.
Click to expand...

HAHA! You mean they seriously ran wires across the ocean? What happens if a shark bit into it or something? :p
 
The government doesn't have to spy on everyone. It just needs to keep up the perception that they know everything about you - the nebulous threat of ending up on The List is enough to keep many people people in check - most of whom just want to keep their heads down and live their lives without challenging the status quo or pissing off the wrong people. Mass surveillance is a tool to show the population who's the boss.

With this in mind, It's rather perplexing that the government isn't doing more to crack down on civilian use of encryption. You'd think by now that there would be a massive push to restrict it since it could be used for "terrorism".
 
I thought he was going to be staying outta the limelight for a while and keep a low profile.
 
madmat said:
I thought he was going to be staying outta the limelight for a while and keep a low profile.
Click to expand...

I think that interview was made around the time of Mega's announcement. They did talk about it being the 1 year anniversary of the raid etc. etc. I'd be weird to talk about that a week later.
 
This guy is no dummy. He makes a lot of sense and speaks very well. I'll listen to him over a politician any day.
 
He's not perfect. He is a businessman after all. But most of his grievances are valid. Anyone who hates him or despise him needs a reality check. Sure, he isn't the most likeable guy. But at least he's not afraid to speak his thoughts.
 
I may not be popular because of the "main post comments - (yes, I'm pointing at Steve)" but I found that there was nothing crazy at all with nearly any word Kim said in that interview.

After spending 14 minutes watching the video, I believe Kim made many valid and articulated responses in regards to many of the questions posed to him. You may or not may agree with all of his views on the questions asked but I feel based on this interview that he seemed very genuine in many of his responses to the questions.. Strangely I found myself agreeing with Kim on quite a few points he made in the end.
 
This title is correct if by "encrypt" you mean "eat" and by "half the internet" you mean "the entire dessert aisle at Acme."
 
^..... really? You're attacking him on his weight? What are you like 8 and a half years old?
 
pothb said:
^..... really? You're attacking him on his weight? What are you like 8 and a half years old?
Click to expand...

I think he meant it in good humor. That said, Dotcom is morbidly obese. We better listen while he is still here. His heart is working double shifts every day - I´d hate to see his arteries.

Important points on user data retrieval in an Orwellian time.
 
nakedhand said:
I think he meant it in good humor. That said, Dotcom is morbidly obese. We better listen while he is still here. His heart is working double shifts every day - I´d hate to see his arteries.

Important points on user data retrieval in an Orwellian time.
Click to expand...

Maybe in "good humor" but judging him on his weight while disregarding what he's saying and doing is no different from judging Obama on the basis of his skin color (good or bad). His weight is NOT an important point.

That said....a sense of humor is however important
 
prndll said:
Maybe in "good humor" but judging him on his weight while disregarding what he's saying and doing is no different from judging Obama on the basis of his skin color (good or bad). His weight is NOT an important point.

That said....a sense of humor is however important
Click to expand...

The poster was not attempting to comment on Dotcoms opinions, his only errant seemed to be a jab. He merely made a joke about him being obese, not judging his opinion. I found it mildly funny. And no it is not an important point that Dotcom is incredibly large, it just looks insane and it startles some of us, who never see people this big in our daily lives.
 
goodcooper said:
he doesn't really sound crazy if you actually watch the video...

it's the same fight going on w/ tor really... people look at the tor network and see how powerless "the man" is to disrupt it... and they think "hey, i want our internet to be like that"

only natural....
Click to expand...

Depends on your understanding of the word crazy in this context. Not crazy like "OMG HES NUTS" but crazy like "OMG THIS IS ACTUALLY GOING ON"
 
Count me in the group that just doesn't like him. However I support him for what he is trying to do. Finally someone with money who can see the big picture and has enough sense to fight.
 
Advil said:
PS - Back on the email subject for a second... why is Blind Carbon Copy not the default option on every email client when emailing multiple people? How many times have you gotten an email from someone who forgot to check BCC before sending to ALL?

On the same front, most email should be end to end encrypted with the recipient. It simply would not be hard to do. No one should be sniffing email any more than they should be reading your personal postal snail mail. (Which is very illegal)
Click to expand...

I send email daily to multiple recipients for business purposes and do not want to use BCC. That might be why. :)

Email should be encrypted, yes, but it's hard to cut that over. PKI doesn't scale on an enterprise level, and getting all the email clients to support the same standard these days? Good luck. The US alone is about competition, not cooperation, so everyone will want only their own solution.
 
Good business man? Sorry, but he's been running for years from other countries due to his poor business practices.

Good point about privacy? Yes, of course.
 
LonerVamp said:
I send email daily to multiple recipients for business purposes and do not want to use BCC. That might be why. :)

Email should be encrypted, yes, but it's hard to cut that over. PKI doesn't scale on an enterprise level, and getting all the email clients to support the same standard these days? Good luck. The US alone is about competition, not cooperation, so everyone will want only their own solution.
Click to expand...

why? all doing that does is show the list of emails your sending to to every one in the list
BCC does the same as Reply all but hides the other email addresses
 
Why do I want to hide other email addresses? All of the people I send email to should be aware of and be able to respond to all.

Do you work in business that needs to communicate?
 
LonerVamp said:
Why do I want to hide other email addresses? All of the people I send email to should be aware of and be able to respond to all.

Do you work in business that needs to communicate?
Click to expand...

On a side note, it is possible to run an enterprise PKI for mail encryption, but its a total pain in the buttskis (you know, the skis you wear on your backside..it hurts them) because you have to have a policy enforcement mechanism that prevents non-encrypted message traffic and you need client-side software to perform encrypt and decrypt operations once the message sent or opened which hurts performance and makes data recovery hard. All in all...totally a yuck-a-riffic situation.
 
LonerVamp said:
Why do I want to hide other email addresses? All of the people I send email to should be aware of and be able to respond to all.

Do you work in business that needs to communicate?
Click to expand...

It's for things like.... a teacher sending an email to all of the students. Naturally you don't want to give away personal emails of students to other students.

Or maybe you want to send the email to someone, then BBC your boss to catch them during their CRIME!

That sort of thing.
 
It has been known for some time that calls and anything digitally transmitted. I doubt everything is skimmed (WoW players might be given a passover - but it does make me wonder if in game coded chat would be a good vector for covert communications) yet. If you think this will not be attempted by government (as well as some private corporations) when the ability arises, you are an idiot. Google is doing this currently in the guise of "service" with everyone that touches it's products. Do they care what they are grabbing? For the most part no, but if there is significant money in it, ABSOLUTELY.

In today's world data = money = power.

Encrypting the internet is not insane. It is logical, it should have been done years ago.
For god's sake, email alone should have been encrypted, txt and mms as well.

I hope that people come to the realization that they are becoming the like serf's of the middle ages as turn the small moments (and significant ones), pictures, habits, schedules etc over to "trustworthy" companies like google, facebook and apple. We are cattle for data to them.
.
As for Kim Dotcom, he is clearly juvenile and eccentric (but intelligent - and he has a hot wife - or did?) and self serving. But if we can use him to further our privacy, so be it. There are very few with the money or power that are willing.
 
I think Steve just likes making fun of Kim. Starting to find that I disagree with Steve quite often.
 
Encryption is great in theory, but when the network providers and the CAs work together by the hand of a government, privacy is just a facade. I have absolutely no evidence of this happening, but smart businesses obey.
 
Everything be intercepted if they actually start looking for it. Tor is the best we have now, though.

You say "smart business obey" and I agree but smart may not the perfect word. Greedy perhaps?

Call me a tinfoil all you want, but over the years I got convinced that big companies, rising and falling companies are just different faces of the same thing behind all of them. Don't really believe there is competition on every level imaginable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top