Wireless Internet as Defense Tool

[ICantSpellDawg]

Oh Lord that is such a good idea!

The real reason is that I want boats running around giving me free internet.

[Kadagar_AV]

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Beside yourself if radios gonna stay.
Reason: it could polish up the grey.
Put that, put that, put that up your wall
That this isnt country at all

Raving station, beside yourself

Keep me out of country in the word
Deal the porch is leading us absurd.
Push that, push that, push that to the hull
That this isnt nothing at all.

Straight off the boat, where to go?
Calling on in transit, calling on in transit
Radio free europe

Beside defying media too fast
Instead of pushing palaces to fall
Put that, put that, put that before all
That this isnt fortunate at all

Raving station, beside yourself
Calling on in transit, calling on in transit
Radio free europe, radio.

Decide yourself, calling all of the medias too fast

Keep me out of country in the word
Disappoint is into us absurd

Straight off the boat, where to go?
Calling on in transit, calling on in transit
Radio free europe

[rotorgun]

What a naive idea. If only the world were such a place. What happens when the Wicked Witch of the West arrives on her broomstick to kill Dorothy and her little dog Toto? Alas! We shall douse her with the magic bucket of transparency!

All warfare is deception-Sun Tzu

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

I'm a little disturbed at the idea of the US attempting to weaponize twitter against regimes it doesn't like (it's not about liberty when the military gets involved). I'm comforted that the ghouls who actually write policy are always going to be one step behind technological/social developments.

[Vladimir]

(it's not about liberty when the military gets involved)

Yes, yes it is; from 1776 on.

[Husar]

I don't know who here has me on ignore but I just wanted to point out again that you cannot broadcast the internet like radio, assuming that is about as clever as saying the internet is a series of tubes...

[ICantSpellDawg]

I don't know who here has me on ignore but I just wanted to point out again that you cannot broadcast the internet like radio, assuming that is about as clever as saying the internet is a series of tubes...

Why not? Please explain? I recognize that digital signals are different, but what ae the limitations.

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

Yes, yes it is; from 1776 on.

Like when we freed

Canada (attempted, anyway)
The Native Americans
Mexico
The Philippines
a whole bunch of S. American countries

amirite? (I'd add more but those are some of the really blatant ones)

I'm not talking about invading or killing - i'm talking about creating trade and information hubs that totalitarian governments will have a hard time controlling. We use navies to secure shipping lanes - but I guess there is no liberty there, either.

So the US Army isn't going to carefully monitor and control these information hubs?

Also, will these magical liberty-granting wireless ships be granting operating in Egypt and Saudi Arabia? After all, those are authoritarian and unpopular regimes. And the US military is all about providing assistance to those overthrowing authoritarian regimes...

Don't be foolish. This isn't about helping people overthrow their government because we want them to be free. It's about using communication tools to overthrow governments we don't like. It's rather telling that you call using wireless internet to attack foreign governments we are not at war with a "defense" tool. Much like the DoD, it's a complete misnomer.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Like when we freed

Canada (attempted, anyway)
The Native Americans
Mexico
The Philippines
a whole bunch of S. American countries

amirite? (I'd add more but those are some of the really blatant ones)


So the US Army isn't going to carefully monitor and control these information hubs?

Also, will these magical liberty-granting wireless ships be granting operating in Egypt and Saudi Arabia? After all, those are authoritarian and unpopular regimes. And the US military is all about providing assistance to those overthrowing authoritarian regimes...

Don't be foolish. This isn't about helping people overthrow their government because we want them to be free. It's about using communication tools to overthrow governments we don't like. It's rather telling that you call using wireless internet to attack foreign governments we are not at war with a "defense" tool. Much like the DoD, it's a complete misnomer.

I want transparency. I'm perfectly happy watching the Saudis collapse just as soon as Islamic theocracies aren't there to gain from it. Freedom for everybody as a strategy, not a one size fits all.

[ICantSpellDawg]

I'm a little disturbed at the idea of the US attempting to weaponize twitter against regimes it doesn't like (it's not about liberty when the military gets involved). I'm comforted that the ghouls who actually write policy are always going to be one step behind technological/social developments.

Oh come on. The military delivers liberty. What country acheived liberty without bloodshed in an acceptable period of time?

India became free because of World War 2 and the devestation of Britain. THEN they had to kill one another to break away further. The big sucess stories became free because they killed enought of the enemy to get them off of their backs. Like fire, it can be used as a tool for good or ill.

I'm not talking about invading or killing - i'm talking about creating trade and information hubs that totalitarian governments will have a hard time controlling. We use navies to secure shipping lanes - but I guess there is no liberty there, either.

[Papewaio]

Oh come on. The military delivers liberty. What country acheived liberty without bloodshed in an acceptable period of time?

Australian Commonwealth as opposed to its composite countries...

=][=

As for wireless internet it ain't like radio. It is a two (or more) way communication, when you search you need to talk to the tower. Just look at how expensive it is to setup internet for phones and there are lots of nearby towers... look at the bandwidth compared with broadband.

What you are suggesting is a system like satellite phones... very very expensive, and very very low bandwidth.

EDIT: Note that with most wireless networking technologies the connection speed is based on the slowest member to join the node... so if the Peoples Government wanted to slow it down all they need to join one member that had a 9600 Baud just to make it painful. No need for expensive filtering or manpower, just an electronic clog. Or make a duplicate gateway nearby/ triangulate the broadcasts and send in the police... more sophistication and manpower but not nuclear rocket science.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Australian Commonwealth as opposed to its composite countries...

=][=

As for wireless internet it ain't like radio. It is a two (or more) way communication, when you search you need to talk to the tower. Just look at how expensive it is to setup internet for phones and there are lots of nearby towers... look at the bandwidth compared with broadband.

What you are suggesting is a system like satellite phones... very very expensive, and very very low bandwidth.

EDIT: Note that with most wireless networking technologies the connection speed is based on the slowest member to join the node... so if the Peoples Government wanted to slow it down all they need to join one member that had a 9600 Baud just to make it painful. No need for expensive filtering or manpower, just an electronic clog. Or make a duplicate gateway nearby/ triangulate the broadcasts and send in the police... more sophistication and manpower but not nuclear rocket science.

Thanks Pape - thats the real critiscism I was looking for. Servers could also reject a reciever under certain speeds. The point is that by putting digital defense into the mill, we are prepared to integrate new technologies as they are better able to do the job down the road. Fit the ships, buy the sites and get started. The worst threat to a good plan is the rumination of a perfect one or something like that, as ETW's loading screens would say.

[Husar]

EDIT: Note that with most wireless networking technologies the connection speed is based on the slowest member to join the node... so if the Peoples Government wanted to slow it down all they need to join one member that had a 9600 Baud just to make it painful. No need for expensive filtering or manpower, just an electronic clog. Or make a duplicate gateway nearby/ triangulate the broadcasts and send in the police... more sophistication and manpower but not nuclear rocket science.

Uhm, I already mentioned the triangulation, though with different words, but it's absolutely correct, they crack down on satellite dishes when they see them, but a wirleless network device makes itself visible even when it's hidden or else it has no connection. The thing about the slowest link is somewhat wrong though, that's certainly not the case if a mesh network is properly set up as in it's a real mesh and not a single-device line meaning every device has more than one way to get it's datta so when one link is too weak, it just uses another, the internet works that way, when one server is overloaded, the packages are usually routed through another server if available. It would only be a problem if there are too many weak links meaning that communication from point a to point b would go through a weak link no matter which route it takes. The triangulation would seem the better option for the government.