Internet Oversight is Going Global: And They Want to Control Information "Integrity"

a reply to: Logarock

Indeed, so he said. The way I read this is: "how do you know that what is being said (on the Internet) is the truth?".

Well, I can assure you that all that can ever happen on the Internet is that we ensure technical (data)integrity. There is no such thing as absolute truth (nor on the Internet, nor in real life), it is all relative, all context-sensitive. So, like in real life: the only way to know that something is true (that it is "the truth") is to know and trust the origin of it.

As an example: say I posted right here that I know for a fact that aliens exist. Say that you have known the real me all of your life - so you know my real name, met me frequently IRL and build a trust relation with me. Say that you even know that I use the nickname "ForteanOrg" on the Internet. So, there you are, you read this posting of an entity that says it is "ForteanOrg". Do you therefore now believe that aliens exist? Is this "the truth" to you?

It all depends, but the first thing that matters is that the message was not altered on its path from me to you. Perhaps I originally wrote "I know for a fact that aliens DO NOT exist" but the words "DO NOT" somehow got lost; maybe an evildoer removed them intentionally from my post, maybe they never went from my browser buffer into the backend database due to some technical failure, whatever. So, the first worry would be "is the message integer?" (complete, unaltered). I believe that this is the type of integrity that we can assure and yes, that's the next thing we need to do (actually, are doing) on the Internet.

Next question: even if you do know for sure - by some technical solution - that the message I sent to you was integer - it is how it was composed - how do you know it was I that wrote it? Well, there are various methods to assure this but most of these methods aren't used on-line (yet). So, that's what Chehadé refers to, IMO.

Also, another fascinating question is that even if we massively employed such methods, though you now may be sure that a person with the nickname ForteanOrg wrote the message, how do you know that this ForteanOrg corresponds to the IRL person you know and trust?

And even if you ARE able to determine for a fact that this ForteanOrg is really the person you normally trust with - say - maintenance of your car - do you really believe him/her as she/he says aliens exist? Even if you trust your source to be reliable on one matter - is it with the next?

So, integrity as in 'this is true, this is the truth' can NOT be ensured by whatever means applicable on the Internet. It's an entity-to-entity thing, not enforceable. But we CAN enforce data-integrity and provide certainty about technical and related IRL identity. believe THAT is what Chehadé is discussing.

In short: truth is only truth if you trust the source and can be sure the message originates from that source and was not altered during transport. I believe that is the only form of "integrity" we can have on the Internet.

By ensuring that you can be sure that data originates from a source which you trust - you have the truth. YOUR truth, as an absolute truth does not exist on this planet. I

To put it simple: you just won a million dollars. Do you believe me - and who am I?

a reply to: ForteanOrg

You're being awfully generous giving the psychopaths that are pushing this the benefit of the doubt. Do you honestly believe this is what he meant when they've been steadily increasing pressure on controlling the internet or do you just happen to think like a shill would?

originally posted by: Logarock
a reply to: ForteanOrg


Yea but this is what he said.....

Chehadé believes the next hurdle for the global internet community doesn’t relate the underlying infrastructure of the internet. Instead, he thinks it's time to focus on "what happens on the internet." He went on, "When I see something on the internet written about me ... How do you know it is a high integrity item? How do you know this is the truth?" Chehadé believes that the next issue to be tackled is not how the internet works (which is the infrastructure that ICANN has been overseeing for decades), but how to create a better way to ensure and protect the content disseminated on the internet.

I don't believe I just read that. How do they plan to enforce this?

originally posted by: Bilk22
a reply to: mister.old.school

The people wanting this are the same type of people that burned books when they didn't like what was written. There's no way to prove any information that's read in a book or on the internet as being true or false. That takes a certain amount of judgement on the part of the reader, to determine one way or the other.

Why don't they just give us all a frontal lobotomy and be done with it?

Those who burn books usually end up burning/killing people if history is any indication.

How else can they get their one world government unless they control the information. There are those working on the human domain to take control and direction .... to influence the outcome of any collective situation that might arise. Nothing new just better organized now with more and more tools.

The question being brought up by this man is an interesting one. In the past, while publishing made books readily available the fact that only the best of the best could be published made the written word a mostly high integrity item, and things which weren't good enough to be published typically didn't get distributed very much. Ironically enough this all changed with the internet when it allowed everyone to publish everything. The question he's asking, which just about everyone agrees is a problem is how to you explain to someone the differences between this man
i.imgur.com...
and this man
redstarfilmtv.com...

There is no publisher filter on the internet, and a whole lot of people believe there should be one. I don't agree with them, but as of yet no one has put forth a coherent argument as to why the internet is a better place without that filter that ensures only people who are publishing high quality material are publishing at all.

a reply to: TheLaughingGod

I think I'm not generous - I'm realistic. When technical people talk about integrity they do not refer to the content itself, but to the bits it is made of. That is the only type of 'integrity' we can enforce on the Internet.

Think about it: how do you envision the "other" type of integrity - as in "abiding to laws, correct" - to be enforced? The first problem here would be to whose laws an entity should adhere. if we chose the laws of one country, other countries would be offended and not feel obliged to enforce that law. If we only allowed the least common denominator (so: agreeable to every entity on the Internet), the Internet would become useless.

So, the only logical conclusion can be that you should NOT try to enforce integrity (as in: abiding to laws) on the Internet. You can, of course, enforce local law on local people (that's quite normal) and might use their activities on the Internet - if your laws allow you to check on it - might be used as evidence. So, the Brits check if their local users of whatever network abide to British Law, the Dutch might do the same but check against Dutch Law etc.

The people that think about the future of the Internet focus on technology, not or morality. Technology is unversal, a bit is a bit, regardless if in Russia, China or America. But laws and ethics differ from place to place and can only be locally enforced.

Also, don't worry too much about the intentions of engineers: they are a very anarchistic bunch and do their utmost to ensure that all can communicate with all without the risk of being spied on. That is actually held against them sometimes: that they do a too darned good job and allow the filth of the earth (by your definition) to use the Internet for their unlawful purposes (by your definition) just as well as we allow your dear old grandma to safely do her banking.

a reply to: Aazadan

It's a trust thing: if you are sure about the source and you trust that source, you'll trust the data it provides and destill information from it which you'll see as 'the truth'. Anybody with half a brain cell knows that the Internet is full of nonsense, we all have developed our personal filters in time. As an example: if I see a clip of a UFO on ThirdPhaseOfMoon I tend to take it with a grain of salt. If the same clip is posted on the NASA site, I tend to trust it it a real clip of a real UFO. Such 'trust filters' are personal and can not be replaced by some mechanism on the Internet. What we CAN do (and actually do!) is ensure that there are mechanisms available to allow you to be sure that the site you're looking at really IS the NASA site (or the TPM site).

a reply to: ForteanOrg

Oh yes, those engineers have been doing a splendid job keeping the NSA in check. I'm not worried about the intentions of engineers, they're simply workers. I'm worried about the people that call the shots, the corporations and the men behind the curtain.

Let's see what plays out then. You think they won't try or won't be able to "control" the internet, I beg to differ. To me the trend is clear, they're applying pressure and they'll keep applying pressure with more and more draconian laws. As for countries, they don't care about borders and their reach is long.

The people that think about the future of the internet isn't necessarily the people that get to decide the future of the internet. They're not that kind of power brokers.

I didn't mean to call you a shill by the way, just thought you were giving these guys too much credit.

With the internet we can get anything digital for free, you people really expected this to carry on forever?

a reply to: TheLaughingGod

Yes, governments can control their part of the Internet. But governments control what we are allowed to do anyway, that's why they're here. As long as it are the governed that determine how their government is done, that's allright with me.

a reply to: mister.old.school

This doesn't sound good. Is Fadi Chehade a Muslim? I know he's from Lebanon.

Quality-biased ranking of documents is not the same thing as "censorship".

This thread is so misguided and paranoid, and that, I suppose, is what makes it so fascinating.

Anyway, you all have to realize that this is happening right now, and you can't stop it. This is stuff that has been in development for more than 30 years. Anyone notice the age of Chehadé? How long do you think he's been a geek?

You have to get your head around the fact that this is how these systems are meant to function, it's a big project, and a lot of years have passed getting # in order so that they could begin to implement finer forces such as quality-bias based ranking for documents.

And that is, of course, considering that the internet is one big document.

originally posted by: Bilk22
a reply to: mister.old.school



Why don't they just give us all a frontal lobotomy and be done with it?

If the conspiracies are true, they are already giving us a frontal lobotomy by fluoridating our water!! drink up

a reply to: mister.old.school

like everything too much information doesn't play well in the hands of the commoners, so what was once free for all is now to be castrated and relegated to what a few deems to be the right kind of information to be disseminated, just like they have done with the media outlets, if people thinks that the media outlets in the US are liberal they have been taken for fools.

The corporate media in the US is as censored and controlled as China control the content of television to its citizens, with one difference, we got more bubble heads and more variety.

Integrity?
well, they did such a good job with TV...

Bill O'Reilly Has His Own Brian Williams Problem

www.motherjones.com...

lol
jeeez

well, you almost had it correct...drop the integrity part...they just want control over the population. But not in a good way.

Honestly, I won't be liked for this comment; I think the Internet needs massive restructuring and monitoring,or total dismantling.

Humanity has had their chance to connect, get near-unlimited information to whatever an indivdual seeks, as well as expose and put an end to the controllers..

Instead they took their time entertaining themselves with useless #, opinionating over ideologies and which side is better, porn, sports, games... just useless # that only occupies the mind and fills it like tetras blocks.

I'm all for an end to the pathetic pass time called Internet. People have become so lost and disconnected because of it, and they won't admit it of course. I can, I've had periods of unbalance and disconnect just spending my life time on this websites.

For what? What has the Internet actually done for us beneficially, besides some education and communicating long distance? Nothing, if you look at reality, it your device.

We spend the majority of our time here; the controllers are still out controlling and pushing agendas to take away our freedom and rights. You know, those things that mean being free and Human.

The Internet was a grand creation for controllers, kept everything eye humping illuminated screens, while the reality went on. An escape of reality is all the Internet truely has become.

Now look how close the globalists are to controlling everything. All it took; TV, Internet, sports, games, sexual influence, and propaganda while meddling with terrorists in the real world.

Guaranteed, those controlling militaries, governing our minds (govern-ment), "leading" nations, organizing religions, operating vast/rich companies... don't spend their past time opinionating and being 'entertained' on the WWW.

Internet = internal net. We have been trapped.

a reply to: ForteanOrg

Engineers really haven't protected us from being spied on? Oh, ok.. yeah, that's what I thought.

As Zbigniew Brzezinski would say, nation states are an outdated concept. The real power brokers aren't bound by national borders, in the long run they have far greater ambitions. And here's a hint: it's not a cabal of engineers(the Oompa-Loompas of science, we're not even talking about mad scientists here(because they're all working on deep black projects)).

Honestly, they wouldn't do this if the internet was just this useless waste of time, instead of something that is enabling information and awareness to cross the globe quickly. Its a threat to them.

And we need to keep having our internet free and clear of their controls.

The concept of doing something, who is going to be thrown in the nut ward, murdered, beat to death or within an inch of their lives by the police, disappear, or be shoved in prison next. There is nothing you can do unless enough wake up and act all at once.

I'm sorry, keep hearing this call to act. Um....that is what they are trying to get people to do, so as to clamp down NWO martial law, on everyone. Aside from the steps of locally doing things if you have the health and ability to do so, getting groups going, solving problems, electing only mayors and local authorities that will change land usages so you can create eco farms for the homeless and poor, and start to take back your power ( a slow process by the way) there is no short cut at all. It takes that kind of work, it always took that. On every planet in the universe it takes that, it takes unity and people working OR it takes intervention from Higher Powers/Teams. But you can't do anything that won't get your family killed or harmed on the nazi planet unless the dough rises and enough wake up to have everyone tee'd off enough to start acting on phone calls, write ins all at once.

So talking about things, is not wasted. Its not a waste of time. It is the thing that is needed.

And some groups.

Without the internet almost impossible.