ubuntu-us-ohio team mailing list archive

[more powerr <morepowerr@xxxxxxxxx>]

 No office to the water company. But any critical systems that manage
infrastructure that is connected to the public network is asking for
trouble. If there putting those network out there for the public to access
them. Then the administrators of the networks need to be fired. And the
company need to be fined for endangering public safty.

 But I very much hope your right. And it is just grandstanding. I just hope
that what has come to pass in China. Doe's not come to pass here. Under the
premise that government knows what is best for the people. And that we need
to be saved from or self.

 Because for the past 8 years I have seen thing that would have been called
human rights violation. In the 20+ years before. All in the name of saving
the people from terrorist. Will the defanishen of terrorist change on a
daily basses.


On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 9:34 AM, <ben.wonders@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> It seems like more grandstanding by Aussie politicians trying to make
> people think they are making the internet safer for the general public. It's
> a fool's errand to attempt to censor or block web content, but it scores
> political points with the people who vote, namely the older, less tech-savvy
> among us. I'd like to point out that it's probably not wise to take the
> prisonplanet.com article at face value, as Alex Jones, who runs the site,
> tends to be a bombast. I find that people like him tend to stretch stories
> to conform to a particular worldview, even if there is no evidence to
> support a connection.
>
> If people really want to get critical systems that manage infrastructure
> protected from hackers, why not make it a crime for those systems to be
> connected to the public internet? I recall reading that a power company had
> a Windows machine get hacked that was managing generation a few years ago,
> and it struck me that they shouldn't have allowed that vulnerability in the
> first place.
>
> I can't really believe that there is a stealth agenda to ban Linux driving
> this, although I'm sure MS wouldn't shed a tear if that was the end result
> of such legislation.
>
>
> Ben
>
> ben.wonders@xxxxxxxxx