4 ms·

I don't think western countries even have the necessary mechanisms.

Victerius 5y ago
There have never been widespread energy shortages in Western countries. The closest we came was the oil shocks of the 70s, and it cost Jimmy Carter a second term.
- adventured 5y ago
  Jimmy Carter had zero shot at beating Reagan, with or without the oil shocks. Carter and Ford were both extraordinarily weak candidates. Ford was a Bob Dole tier candidate (ie incapable of winning the Presidency in an election), with the Republicans still mired in the consequences of Nixon, and Carter still struggled to beat him in 1976. Reagan's carry of California was a near certainty, and it guaranteed the end of Carter with or without the energy problems. Carter was a weak southern Democrat that couldn't pull Texas and couldn't pull New York - there was nowhere for him to win from, there was no angle of victory.
- iso1210 5y ago
  3 day week 1973/74 in the UK, I'm sure there were worse energy crises in other countries
- mgbmtl 5y ago
  France had pretty big protests: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_vests_protests https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_vests_protests but as an outsider, those protests just seemed like any other day in France :) In the west, at least where I'm from, whether energy or other types of protests, the government usually finds a wedge to split the population into two major groups where in-fighting will exhaust and marginalize protesters. Cutting the Internet only brings more focus on the government.
SilasX 5y ago
Hm … not the internet at large but weren’t there cases of a subway system or other dense area in the US suddenly having no cell service during a protest? I remember reading stories about this.
- emteycz 5y ago
  That's normal. The mobile network can't magically handle 1000x more cells concentrated at one place.
- kalleboo 5y ago
  Yes it happened in San Francisco https://www.wired.com/2011/08/subway-internet-shuttering/ https://www.wired.com/2011/08/subway-internet-shuttering/
zupreme 5y ago
Have you considered ICANN? Or USA-based DNS providers? One letter, from the right agency, can do a great deal.
- emteycz 5y ago
  I don't think turning off DNS servers is 1) actually possible (people would start running mirrors + other countries continue to run) and 2) would disable the internet into uselessness (anything IP based still works).
  - int_19h 5y ago
    It doesn't have to be 100% effective, just as with the Great Firewall. Shutting down DNS would shut down most existing apps until they're updated (and also the app stores that are normally used to update them), and preclude the majority from accessing anything online.
    - Const-me 5y ago
      Despite the centralization efforts of big tech, Internet is more resilient than you think it is. > would shut down most existing apps until they're updated Most apps are using DNS client APIs provided by their operating systems. > and also the app stores that are normally used to update them They too. As for the OSes, they don’t normally have hardcoded DNS servers either. Instead, they rely on DHCP to get DNS servers from the routers. There’re many levels of caching involved: operating systems have a DNS cache, home routers have a caching DNS servers, ISPs usually running their own caching DNS servers for their clients, and so on. Updating any single one of them going to fix the issue for all of these end-user apps. ISPs probably gonna be there first, it’s their job to support their network infrastructure 24/7.
      - int_19h 5y ago
        If it gets to the point where DNS is shut down by government fiat, ISPs would be unlikely to push back, because that would just make them a target for more, shall we say, physical activities.

There have never been widespread energy shortages in Western countries. The closest we came was the oil shocks of the 70s, and it cost Jimmy Carter a second term.

adventured 5y ago
Jimmy Carter had zero shot at beating Reagan, with or without the oil shocks. Carter and Ford were both extraordinarily weak candidates. Ford was a Bob Dole tier candidate (ie incapable of winning the Presidency in an election), with the Republicans still mired in the consequences of Nixon, and Carter still struggled to beat him in 1976. Reagan's carry of California was a near certainty, and it guaranteed the end of Carter with or without the energy problems. Carter was a weak southern Democrat that couldn't pull Texas and couldn't pull New York - there was nowhere for him to win from, there was no angle of victory.
iso1210 5y ago
3 day week 1973/74 in the UK, I'm sure there were worse energy crises in other countries
mgbmtl 5y ago
France had pretty big protests: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_vests_protests https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_vests_protests but as an outsider, those protests just seemed like any other day in France :) In the west, at least where I'm from, whether energy or other types of protests, the government usually finds a wedge to split the population into two major groups where in-fighting will exhaust and marginalize protesters. Cutting the Internet only brings more focus on the government.

SilasX 5y ago

Hm … not the internet at large but weren’t there cases of a subway system or other dense area in the US suddenly having no cell service during a protest? I remember reading stories about this.

emteycz 5y ago
That's normal. The mobile network can't magically handle 1000x more cells concentrated at one place.
kalleboo 5y ago
Yes it happened in San Francisco https://www.wired.com/2011/08/subway-internet-shuttering/ https://www.wired.com/2011/08/subway-internet-shuttering/

zupreme 5y ago

Have you considered ICANN? Or USA-based DNS providers? One letter, from the right agency, can do a great deal.

emteycz 5y ago
I don't think turning off DNS servers is 1) actually possible (people would start running mirrors + other countries continue to run) and 2) would disable the internet into uselessness (anything IP based still works).
- int_19h 5y ago
  It doesn't have to be 100% effective, just as with the Great Firewall. Shutting down DNS would shut down most existing apps until they're updated (and also the app stores that are normally used to update them), and preclude the majority from accessing anything online.
  - Const-me 5y ago
    Despite the centralization efforts of big tech, Internet is more resilient than you think it is. > would shut down most existing apps until they're updated Most apps are using DNS client APIs provided by their operating systems. > and also the app stores that are normally used to update them They too. As for the OSes, they don’t normally have hardcoded DNS servers either. Instead, they rely on DHCP to get DNS servers from the routers. There’re many levels of caching involved: operating systems have a DNS cache, home routers have a caching DNS servers, ISPs usually running their own caching DNS servers for their clients, and so on. Updating any single one of them going to fix the issue for all of these end-user apps. ISPs probably gonna be there first, it’s their job to support their network infrastructure 24/7.
    - int_19h 5y ago
      If it gets to the point where DNS is shut down by government fiat, ISPs would be unlikely to push back, because that would just make them a target for more, shall we say, physical activities.