What disturbs me is how many people in other countries (like the USA) feel that this type of thing could never happen here. However, it seems that even in the US the internet could be controlled by the government/army if they so desired and various proposed 'internet control' legislation packages seem to push us one step closer toward that possibility.
While it could possibly happen, it would be very difficult, even if the US government (and general power in the US) was much more powerful and organized than it currently is. The US is big, and the borders between the US and Canada and Mexico are also big; there's a lot of room to set up some discreet wires or even microwave transmitters and receivers some distance from the borders. Latency would be crap at first but would get better over time. It would be harder to get a packet from the US to a European country if all trans-ocean cables were cut, but not impossible, and at that point we're probably well into WW3. The US population is also well educated as a whole (still with many offline centers of gaining technical knowledge--i.e. books) and many citizens would have strong motivations to get the internet back, there are many large concentrations of highly technical nerds who wouldn't be afraid to start wiring up their own internet (I'd love to see a wireless mesh network take over), there are lots of computers and routers and cat5 in circulation and other useful equipment as well. Many people also have printers, flash drives, and cars, it would not be hard to communicate across cities and states with a sneakernet. For a total internet blackout cutting US citizens off from other citizens (intra country) and from the world, the amount of individual and corporate cooperation with the government which the people would hate (for taking away their access to cat videos among other things) and powerful businesses would hate (for hurting their profits) is astounding.
There is civil war. And cables will always be delicious target for any party. No bank transfers for the fleeing elite or being able to deal with external affairs, total blackout for the defender (military and police have their own systems usually so the ruling party is not that affected)
The situation in Syria is dangerous. A failed state in that location ... Arab Peninsula in the 2013 is the Balkans in 1913 ...
And this is what bitcoiners and similar don't understand. It's not like your internet connection will remain happy and stable while the rest of the world goes to hell around us. Telecomms will be a first-class target, and most systems have some pretty central points of failure that would make juicy (and easy) targets.
In such a situation, if you've chosen to use an electronic cryptocurrency dependent on things like robust network and electrical infrastructure to function as your primary value store, you're going to have a bad time.
This doesn't even contemplate the additional issue for bitcoin and its derivatives: the blockchain depends on a consistent, global view of network transactions, and apocalyptic-type network segmentation will cause severe forking in the blockchain, further diminishing the utility and therefore the value of the [already worthless] cryptocoins.
There is a campaign of terrorism waged by NATO, specifically Turkey , Qatar, Isreal, UK, France to secure the transit for the South Pars/North Dome gas field.
You do realize that NATO is a separate entity from the UK, Israel, France, etc. right?
Unless you can show actual NATO forces what you've said is the equivalent of saying that the UN is waging a terrorism campaign because some of its member states happened to allegedly be involved.
And while I agree the Al Jazeera link is thought-provoking, that's all I could see in there. Thought-exercises about who benefits from what in the whole series of conflicts. If anything the writer seemed to go along with the idea that the uprising commenced due to the Arab Spring and now it's a question of what actors external to Syria might do.
The only discussion I saw regarding NATO was whether or not NATO would have cause to go all-out after Assad... without any discussion of what "going all-out" might mean (since presumably it doesn't involve the military).
There's also no real discussion of how Israel would benefit from any of these pipeline schemes. For all the animosity Israel and Syria might have had for each other, the current situation has to be considered worse from their point of view than a stable Syrian nation where all the weapons were staying in secure Syrian bunkers.
Well, let's suppose what you said is all true. That doesn't preclude the fact the regime is playing this game as well and in fact is utilizing it to its advantage. The fact of the matter is, Syria has been under the control of a mafia-like government for over 40 years, and ruled by one family. It's one of the most repressive regimes on earth.
You're also forgetting that the revolution started peacefully. People protested simply for freedom and liberty, which all human beings aspire for. It was the suppressive and violent actions of the government, which immediately resorted to killing its own citizens, that has lead the conflict to eventually turn violent and to where it is now.
No matter what the global interests are, it's the very actions of the suppressive regime that's worsening the situation and leading to the country's destruction. None of this would exist and we wouldn't be talking about it today, had the mafia-like government initially conceded to the will of the people and worked on transitioning the country to a fully democratic government. But notice the "mafia-like" adjective? A mafia-like government obviously does not have the best interest of the country in mind, so they're not going to adopt the will of the people and threaten their iron-grip rule. They're going to suppress every dissent with maximum force. That's exactly what has been happening for over 40 years.
Calling it a civil war does not mean we support the islamist rebels, you have to understand that. The label "civil war" is not a value judgement, it's a description of what is actually going on.
Syria is a dictatorship, and it's under assault from (mostly) fanatical religious people. One does not always have to choose sides. It isn't always good vs evil. We need to be very clear that the ruling regime has a lot of blood on its hands. But I also understand the visceral hatred reserved for the muslim extremists who are on the other side of this war.
I imagine the rebels will win the civil war eventually, supported by the West all the way of course, but it won't be a victory for democracy or freedom or anything like that. Syria has a long and awful history, like most of the countries that surround it. Good guys do not exist in this region, at least not in a statistically meaningful number.
Erm, that's an op-ed piece. Can someone explain why a proposed pipeline through Syria would be threatening enough to Turkey that it would rally many other states behind it in astroturfing the 2+ year conflict? The decades of oppression under the Assad family had nothing to do with it?
[+] [-] sjbach|13 years ago|reply
http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/traffic/disruptions...
(This page is distinct from the time series graph linked in another comment.)
[+] [-] emhart|13 years ago|reply
found via: https://twitter.com/therealfitz/status/331867408102993921
[+] [-] Thrymr|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] RKearney|13 years ago|reply
The nameservers for .sy domains are:
sy.cctld.authdns.ripe.net is still accessible so domains will still resolve.[+] [-] gngeal|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] evan_|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lmm|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tibbon|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Jach|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] venomsnake|13 years ago|reply
The situation in Syria is dangerous. A failed state in that location ... Arab Peninsula in the 2013 is the Balkans in 1913 ...
[+] [-] cookiecaper|13 years ago|reply
In such a situation, if you've chosen to use an electronic cryptocurrency dependent on things like robust network and electrical infrastructure to function as your primary value store, you're going to have a bad time.
This doesn't even contemplate the additional issue for bitcoin and its derivatives: the blockchain depends on a consistent, global view of network transactions, and apocalyptic-type network segmentation will cause severe forking in the blockchain, further diminishing the utility and therefore the value of the [already worthless] cryptocoins.
[+] [-] kmcd|13 years ago|reply
There is NO civil war in Syria.
There is a campaign of terrorism waged by NATO, specifically Turkey , Qatar, Isreal, UK, France to secure the transit for the South Pars/North Dome gas field.
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/08/20128513344...
What's at stake? About $200 billion annual output between Iran & Qatar. That's about $360,000 per SECOND.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Pars_/_North_Dome_Gas-Con...
Global Research has the best analysis out there:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/search?q=syria
[+] [-] mpyne|13 years ago|reply
Unless you can show actual NATO forces what you've said is the equivalent of saying that the UN is waging a terrorism campaign because some of its member states happened to allegedly be involved.
And while I agree the Al Jazeera link is thought-provoking, that's all I could see in there. Thought-exercises about who benefits from what in the whole series of conflicts. If anything the writer seemed to go along with the idea that the uprising commenced due to the Arab Spring and now it's a question of what actors external to Syria might do.
The only discussion I saw regarding NATO was whether or not NATO would have cause to go all-out after Assad... without any discussion of what "going all-out" might mean (since presumably it doesn't involve the military).
There's also no real discussion of how Israel would benefit from any of these pipeline schemes. For all the animosity Israel and Syria might have had for each other, the current situation has to be considered worse from their point of view than a stable Syrian nation where all the weapons were staying in secure Syrian bunkers.
[+] [-] dsaber|13 years ago|reply
You're also forgetting that the revolution started peacefully. People protested simply for freedom and liberty, which all human beings aspire for. It was the suppressive and violent actions of the government, which immediately resorted to killing its own citizens, that has lead the conflict to eventually turn violent and to where it is now.
No matter what the global interests are, it's the very actions of the suppressive regime that's worsening the situation and leading to the country's destruction. None of this would exist and we wouldn't be talking about it today, had the mafia-like government initially conceded to the will of the people and worked on transitioning the country to a fully democratic government. But notice the "mafia-like" adjective? A mafia-like government obviously does not have the best interest of the country in mind, so they're not going to adopt the will of the people and threaten their iron-grip rule. They're going to suppress every dissent with maximum force. That's exactly what has been happening for over 40 years.
[+] [-] Udo|13 years ago|reply
Syria is a dictatorship, and it's under assault from (mostly) fanatical religious people. One does not always have to choose sides. It isn't always good vs evil. We need to be very clear that the ruling regime has a lot of blood on its hands. But I also understand the visceral hatred reserved for the muslim extremists who are on the other side of this war.
I imagine the rebels will win the civil war eventually, supported by the West all the way of course, but it won't be a victory for democracy or freedom or anything like that. Syria has a long and awful history, like most of the countries that surround it. Good guys do not exist in this region, at least not in a statistically meaningful number.
[+] [-] knowaveragejoe|13 years ago|reply
Also, seriously? Global Research is a source?
[+] [-] benjoffe|13 years ago|reply
That's $360,000 per MINUTE (not second).
200*10^9/365/24/60/60 = 6342
[+] [-] oakaz|13 years ago|reply
Please look at this guy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahdi_al-Harati
He is the commander of the terrorists in Syria. These people are crazy islamists and all they believe is that they'll save Syria by killing people.
Please see the truth. The Al Jazeera analysis linked above is really good.
[+] [-] joonix|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] angersock|13 years ago|reply
That's an interesting read, if nothing else.
[+] [-] hasenj|13 years ago|reply
The regime is still alive because no outside force is really doing anything.
[+] [-] kmcd|13 years ago|reply
Who had the means, motive & opportunity to disrupt the Syrian internet traffic?
Most likely one of the NATO intelligence agencies.
[+] [-] mmagin|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sjbach|13 years ago|reply
http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/traffic/faq/#do_the...
http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/traffic/faq/#how_do...