Creed Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 So with the crisis in Egypt right now, the talk has often been shifted towards talk of an "internet kill switch." A bill regarding this has been brought up in congress and debate is supposed to take place at some point in the near future. What do you feel about it? Approve? Disapprove? Can't decide? Why do you feel the way you do about the subject? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CreAtioN Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 They cannot do this in countries like America and Australia. If they do people will lose billions of dollars in minutes, and very little people will approve of it. I think if they did it they would be assassinated very quickly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crasher Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 ^I think that's an exaggeration, but there would be a big protest, at least here in America. Pretty much the whole country runs on the internet, so if it were to be cut off someone's going to be out of a job. Or someone(s), most likely that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDuck Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 an internet kill switch is only needed during times of emergency. Such as cyberattacks right? A cyber attack would happen so fast by the time we realize we needed to cut off internet, the damage is already done. An internet kill switch is ONLY going to be used to take down the internet in areas where riots occur. Or rebellion. It will make it harder to coordinate or to share information about atrocities being committed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Creed Posted February 2, 2011 Author Share Posted February 2, 2011 an internet kill switch is only needed during times of emergency. Such as cyberattacks right? A cyber attack would happen so fast by the time we realize we needed to cut off internet, the damage is already done. An internet kill switch is ONLY going to be used to take down the internet in areas where riots occur. Or rebellion. It will make it harder to coordinate or to share information about atrocities being committed. Exactly. It would be used to attempt to mute the rights of freedom of assembly, speech, etc. I think there would be a large number of protests should this even be ratified in our country given how much of our countries infrastructure relies on the internet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anarchist Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 it simply wouldn't happen in the US because many would see that as the government's boot on the throat of the first amendment. the reasoning usually used is the that they would need to curb cyberterror. an article i read earlier on gizmodo was talking about the plausibility of a cyber attack on the hoover dam's control systems Here Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PHANTASM Posted February 6, 2011 Share Posted February 6, 2011 You guys may find this interesting: from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Flash_Crash A stock market anomaly, the major market indexes dropped by over 9% (including a roughly 7% decline in a roughly 15 minute span at approximately 2:45 pm eastern time on May 6, 2010[36][37]) before a partial rebound.[5] Temporarily, $1 trillion in market value disappeared.[38] While stock markets do crash, immediate rebounds are unprecedented. The stocks of eight major companies in the S&P 500 fell to one cent per share for a short time, including Accenture, CenterPoint Energy and Exelon; while other stocks, including Sotheby's, Apple, and Hewlett-Packard, increased in value to over $100,000 in price.[4][39][40] Procter & Gamble in particular dropped nearly 37% before rebounding, within minutes, back to near its original levels. The drop in P&G was broadcast live on CNBC at the time, with commentator Jim Cramer declaring live, "That is not a real price. Just go buy Procter & Gamble. When I looked at it, it was at 61, I’m not that interested in it. It’s at 47? Well, that’s a different security entirely."[41] [edit] Congressional hearingsThe NASDAQ released their timeline of the anomalies during U.S. Congressional House Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Insurance, and Government Sponsored Enterprises[42] hearings on the flash crash.[1] NASDAQ's timeline indicates that NYSE Arca may have played an early role and that the Chicago Board Options Exchange sent a message saying that NYSE Arca was "out of NBBO". The Chicago Board Options Exchange, NASDAQ, NASDAQ OMX BX, and BATS Exchange all declared SELF HELP against NYSE Arca.[1] S.E.C. Chairwoman Mary Schapiro testified that "stub quotes" may have played a role in certain stocks that traded for 1 cent a share.[43] According to Schapiro, The absurd result of valuable stocks being executed for a penny likely was attributable to the use of a practice called “stub quoting.” When a market order is submitted for a stock, if available liquidity has already been taken out, the market order will seek the next available liquidity, regardless of price. When a market maker’s liquidity has been exhausted, or if it is unwilling to provide liquidity, it may at that time submit what is called a stub quote – for example, an offer to buy a given stock at a penny. A stub quote is essentially a place holder quote because that quote would never – it is thought – be reached. When a market order is seeking liquidity and the only liquidity available is a penny-priced stub quote, the market order, by its terms, will execute against the stub quote. In this respect, automated trading systems will follow their coded logic regardless of outcome, while human involvement likely would have prevented these orders from executing at absurd prices. As noted below, we are reviewing the practice of displaying stub quotes that are never intended to be executed.[44] [edit] Circuit breakersOfficials announced that new trading curbs, also known as circuit breakers, will be tested during a six-month trial period ending on December 10, 2010. These circuit breakers would halt trading for five minutes on any S&P 500 stock that rises or falls more than 10 percent in a five minute period.[45][46] The circuit breakers will only be installed to the 404 NYSE listed S&P 500 stocks. The first circuit breakers will be installed to only 5 of the S&P 500 companies on Friday June 11, to experiment with the circuit breakers. The 5 stocks are EOG Resources, Genuine Parts, Harley Davidson, Ryder System, and Zimmer Holdings. By Monday June 14, 44 had them. By Tuesday June 15, the number had grown to 223, and by Wednesday June 16, all 404 companies had circuit breakers installed.[47] On June 16, 2010, trading in the Washington Post Company's shares were halted for five minutes after it became the first stock to trigger the new circuit breakers. Three erroneous NYSE Arca trades were said to have been the cause of the share price jump.[48] As of September 10, the SEC approved new rules submitted by the national securities exchanges and FINRA to expand the circuit breaker program to include all stocks in the Russell 1000 Index and certain exchange-traded funds. The SEC also approved new exchange and FINRA rules that clarify the process for breaking erroneous trades. A list of the securities included in the Russell 1000 Index, which was rebalanced on June 25, is available on the Russell website. The list of exchange-traded products included in the pilot is available on the SEC's website. The SEC anticipates that the exchanges and FINRA will begin implementing the expanded circuit breaker program early next week. The erroneous trade rules were developed in response to the market disruption of May 6. The rules will make it clearer when — and at what prices — trades will be broken by the exchanges and FINRA. As with the circuit breaker program, these rules will be in effect on a pilot basis through Dec. 10, 2010. /endcopy I had about $20,000 in Intel stock that day, expecting to make some money from an expected rise in price that day. When the flash crash happened, the price dropped sharply, but my stop limit order could not be executed as it plunged past my sell price due to the lockup. When the lockup ended, my stop order was automatically executed, and my stocks were sold at the new low price. So my Stop Order, designed to protect my investment, ended up costing me about $800 in loss for no reason. The Intel stock quickly rebounded, but I was no longer holding it that day. I was at work and did not know what had happened until around 3PM when I had time to check my computer. Needless to say I was very pissed off, I rarely ever lose money in the market and this shook my confidence in the whole system. So my $800 was a tiny, tiny part of that $1 trillion lost that day. Now imagine if they shut off all internet trading, on purpose, without telling everyone ahead of time. This was only for 15 minutes. And if they told everyone, we would all sell in advance, and the market would crash anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slayerz Posted February 7, 2011 Share Posted February 7, 2011 Three out comes of this IF it happens (in the us) 1.) Economy gone Most banks Depend on internet Stock market etc 2.) Unconstitutional So it probably wont happen 3.) Riots = Marshal law basically the country would shut itself down from the inside so i don't think this will happen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pici Posted February 7, 2011 Share Posted February 7, 2011 You guys may find this interesting: from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Flash_Crash A stock market anomaly, the major market indexes dropped by over 9% (including a roughly 7% decline in a roughly 15 minute span at approximately 2:45 pm eastern time on May 6, 2010[36][37]) before a partial rebound.[5] Temporarily, $1 trillion in market value disappeared.[38] While stock markets do crash, immediate rebounds are unprecedented. The stocks of eight major companies in the S&P 500 fell to one cent per share for a short time, including Accenture, CenterPoint Energy and Exelon; while other stocks, including Sotheby's, Apple, and Hewlett-Packard, increased in value to over $100,000 in price.[4][39][40] Procter & Gamble in particular dropped nearly 37% before rebounding, within minutes, back to near its original levels. The drop in P&G was broadcast live on CNBC at the time, with commentator Jim Cramer declaring live, "That is not a real price. Just go buy Procter & Gamble. When I looked at it, it was at 61, I’m not that interested in it. It’s at 47? Well, that’s a different security entirely."[41] [edit] Congressional hearingsThe NASDAQ released their timeline of the anomalies during U.S. Congressional House Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Insurance, and Government Sponsored Enterprises[42] hearings on the flash crash.[1] NASDAQ's timeline indicates that NYSE Arca may have played an early role and that the Chicago Board Options Exchange sent a message saying that NYSE Arca was "out of NBBO". The Chicago Board Options Exchange, NASDAQ, NASDAQ OMX BX, and BATS Exchange all declared SELF HELP against NYSE Arca.[1] S.E.C. Chairwoman Mary Schapiro testified that "stub quotes" may have played a role in certain stocks that traded for 1 cent a share.[43] According to Schapiro, The absurd result of valuable stocks being executed for a penny likely was attributable to the use of a practice called “stub quoting.” When a market order is submitted for a stock, if available liquidity has already been taken out, the market order will seek the next available liquidity, regardless of price. When a market maker’s liquidity has been exhausted, or if it is unwilling to provide liquidity, it may at that time submit what is called a stub quote – for example, an offer to buy a given stock at a penny. A stub quote is essentially a place holder quote because that quote would never – it is thought – be reached. When a market order is seeking liquidity and the only liquidity available is a penny-priced stub quote, the market order, by its terms, will execute against the stub quote. In this respect, automated trading systems will follow their coded logic regardless of outcome, while human involvement likely would have prevented these orders from executing at absurd prices. As noted below, we are reviewing the practice of displaying stub quotes that are never intended to be executed.[44] [edit] Circuit breakersOfficials announced that new trading curbs, also known as circuit breakers, will be tested during a six-month trial period ending on December 10, 2010. These circuit breakers would halt trading for five minutes on any S&P 500 stock that rises or falls more than 10 percent in a five minute period.[45][46] The circuit breakers will only be installed to the 404 NYSE listed S&P 500 stocks. The first circuit breakers will be installed to only 5 of the S&P 500 companies on Friday June 11, to experiment with the circuit breakers. The 5 stocks are EOG Resources, Genuine Parts, Harley Davidson, Ryder System, and Zimmer Holdings. By Monday June 14, 44 had them. By Tuesday June 15, the number had grown to 223, and by Wednesday June 16, all 404 companies had circuit breakers installed.[47] On June 16, 2010, trading in the Washington Post Company's shares were halted for five minutes after it became the first stock to trigger the new circuit breakers. Three erroneous NYSE Arca trades were said to have been the cause of the share price jump.[48] As of September 10, the SEC approved new rules submitted by the national securities exchanges and FINRA to expand the circuit breaker program to include all stocks in the Russell 1000 Index and certain exchange-traded funds. The SEC also approved new exchange and FINRA rules that clarify the process for breaking erroneous trades. A list of the securities included in the Russell 1000 Index, which was rebalanced on June 25, is available on the Russell website. The list of exchange-traded products included in the pilot is available on the SEC's website. The SEC anticipates that the exchanges and FINRA will begin implementing the expanded circuit breaker program early next week. The erroneous trade rules were developed in response to the market disruption of May 6. The rules will make it clearer when — and at what prices — trades will be broken by the exchanges and FINRA. As with the circuit breaker program, these rules will be in effect on a pilot basis through Dec. 10, 2010. I think they miscarry part of the information. They didn't fairly display that most of the money lost was due to it being private equity. The major news outlets know that the internet is becoming more popular than they are, despite their use of glamor girls as news anchors. I don't think our Gov't would shut off the internet, quite the opposite. The corporate controlled government is scared to death of the internet. They'll keep up their attacks to control it, too. But if it were to happen here, I suggest you take a look at Directive 51. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PHANTASM Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 The major news outlets know that the internet is becoming more popular than they are, despite their use of glamor girls as news anchors. I don't think our Gov't would shut off the internet, quite the opposite. The corporate controlled government is scared to death of the internet. They'll keep up their attacks to control it, too. But if it were to happen here, I suggest you take a look at Directive 51. scary stuff... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_and_Homeland_Security_Presidential_Directive Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thoracic Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 While I don’t fully understand the feasibility of shutting down the internet I do think a market shutdown is fully logical and essentially what happened after 9/11. If a shutdown were to occur it would most likely happen during a crisis and market makers and traders would take action and hedge appropriately. For example: John Paulson and his housing bet in ’07 and mortgage bets in 2008 netted him multibillion dollar gains. However the general public would most likely not be as agile and suffer the most losses once the market reopened. So markets can be shut down and as for the internet I don’t think the gov’t would shed a tear if people couldn’t update their facebook page. The question is, what would the general public do if everything were shut down…..Judging by how long it takes for chaos to ensue after a crisis (a week?) I wonder if option 3 from Slayerz would become reality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PHANTASM Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 While I don’t fully understand the feasibility of shutting down the internet I do think a market shutdown is fully logical and essentially what happened after 9/11. If a shutdown were to occur it would most likely happen during a crisis and market makers and traders would take action and hedge appropriately. For example: John Paulson and his housing bet in ’07 and mortgage bets in 2008 netted him multibillion dollar gains. However the general public would most likely not be as agile and suffer the most losses once the market reopened. So markets can be shut down and as for the internet I don’t think the gov’t would shed a tear if people couldn’t update their facebook page. The question is, what would the general public do if everything were shut down…..Judging by how long it takes for chaos to ensue after a crisis (a week?) I wonder if option 3 from Slayerz would become reality. Well, the lucky guys who get told in advance can make trillions (yeah trillions) shorting the market in advance, since they will have a day or two to sell all their stock at a normal price, and then use the proceeds, and any money they can borrow (most money in the stock market is borrowed) to buy "put options" (short selling derivatives) to be executed after the market reopens. They will be able to make 100-fold their investment in a few days time. For everyone else, either they will have stop limit orders in place, which will backfire, since they will become pending orders the moment the market reopens (at a much lower price than the intended stop loss price), or they will have no limit orders in place and just watch helplessly as their stock drops down to nothing. They will be afraid to sell because nobody wants to sell a stock after it's gone down twenty or fifty percent, people get irrational at that point and hold onto them for years waiting for them to go back up so they can recoup their investment. Goldman $achs would get the inside warning and start placing massive short calls on every stock in the market, that would be in essence an early warning system for the rest of the world that something bad is about to happen. If you watch short call activity, you can get an advance warning of pending market expectations from the insiders, and react before the rest of the daytrading herd knows what stock is about to go up or down. This is a common strategy for advanced daytraders. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Razzled Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 If used properly, I'm for it. Some of the kids nowadays need to get out more instead of spending all day in front of these here screens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crasher Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 If used properly, I'm for it. Some of the kids nowadays need to get out more instead of spending all day in front of these here screens. ...In the winter time? No thank you lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.