
Dear Congress, It's No Longer OK To Not Know How The Internet Works - nextparadigms
http://motherboard.vice.com/2011/12/16/dear-congress-it-s-no-longer-ok-to-not-know-how-the-internet-works
======
meric
We're talking amongst ourselves, agreeing with each other. This letter is
targeted at us, not congressmen.

I am almost certain every letter any MPAA lobbyist sends to any congressman
does not call the congressman a "jack-ass" in the second paragraph. Or any
paragraph at all. I tentatively suggest we might have more success if we do
the same.

What do congressmen want? Influence, votes and praise. What are we doing?
Criticising ("stupid", "jackass", "corrupt", "ignorant") and telling them how
to do their jobs. ("They should X, they should Y"). Naturally any congressman
will feel defensive as soon as they read our "internet engineer" writing.

I propose a three point plan, to ensure the long-term security of our
internet:

1\. Tell congressman how important they are, because our personal freedoms and
privacy are at risk, and they are the only ones who can protect us.

(Rather than important because they protect content owners from piracy, or
being important because of some potential job at Universal when they retire)

2\. Offer congressman the choice of being "Defender of personal
freedom/privacy" vs "Distributor's stooge".

(Rather than champion of artists' rights vs protector of pirates)

3\. Educate public of SOPA and tell congressman how many votes they are going
to get by defending the public against the SOPA law that cracks down on small
businesses on the internet, many of which are operated by your everyday man.

 _I'm sure every congressman, when first elected, thought to themselves about
how they are going to change the way the government works and always represent
the best interests of the people. I suggest we re-ignite this vision that
exists in every congressman._

EDIT: I just realised I'm republican, with all my talk of "freedom", "privacy"
and "small businesses". :)

~~~
charlieok
It bothers me how, when writing my congressman, the advice is almost always to
write in terms of how business will be affected. Sure, that's important, but
what about freedom? It's as if citing freedom as a reason to do or not do
something is too "abstract" when compared with a predicted effect on business.

------
noonespecial
I just wish they'd stop thinking of it as a funny, cute, or self-deprecating
bit of humor to stand up and say "I'm no tech wizard, I can't even set my
(vcr|alarm clock|mobilePhone).

Its not funny.

It should be as shameful and troubling as getting up and saying "I'm no
'student' and I don't know how to do this 'reading' thing, but here's what I
think about books."

~~~
mjwalshe
You could say the same about "techies" who have the same or less knowledge of
how politics works.

~~~
raldi
I don't see techies wearing political ignorance as a cute badge of honor. When
they want to restrict the rights of politicians, they _learn about politics._

~~~
samstave
Do we not have a standardized org structure for the support staff of each
politician:

Who is in the following roles as an aide to each congressman?

* Technology Consultant

* Foreign Policy

* Energy

* Agriculture

....

etc.

We should be able to reach out to EACH layer of aides for all of congress and
say "To all the congressional technical advisors, as silicon valley reps, this
is our stance on issue X"

These aides should then go to each congressman and say "this is what the tech
on the street is saying" and inform them of opinion and reality.

The current system is DESIGNED to keep stupid.

------
GuiA
Most of us perceive this huge aberration because we are in tech, but the
average person is completely oblivious to that and probably thinks that
legislators know what they are reasoning about.

The scary part is when you realize that they are statistically just as
uneducated in many other areas that they take decisions in (especially those
that might touch on scientific issues and require rigorous analysis: ecology,
medecine, etc.) and there's not much done to prevent that.

~~~
nkassis
Actually looking at the latest approval ratings for congress I don't think the
average person is oblivious. They just feel powerless to do anything about it.

------
GigabyteCoin
In all fairness, "knowing how the internet works" is a gargantuan task. I
doubt even many HN members could comment without making a mistake at the SOPA
hearings as well.

The fact remains that something like congress (a group of people to vote on
literally everything we do) is required in a democracy, and "a group of
people" is never going to know everything there is to know about everything.

There are probably a million farmers out there as well who strongly believe
that congress should understand the genetic modification of seeds, for
example.

~~~
delinka
I don't think knowing how the internet works is a gargantuan task. The basic
concepts, though abstract compared to the physical world, are rather simple:
addressing, routing, name resolution...

The tough part is knowing how unpredictable humans and their demands will
affect network performance at any given point at any given time. What's worse
is mixing in geography and politics, corporations and "peering agreements,"
etc.

~~~
GigabyteCoin
Fair enough, as my grandfather wouldn't consider learning seed germination and
modification techniques a gargantuan task either, it's quite simple in his
eyes.

To fully understand a new topic every day enough to vote on is the gargantuan
task I should have been referring to.

~~~
icebraining
Isn't that why there are committees responsible for coming up with specific
legislation? You shouldn't need all the members to understand all the topics.

~~~
rat87
I thought that this is what aids are for, congressmen hire young hopefully
smart ideologically compatible aides who reasearch topics and write good
summaries explaining the issues involved.

------
tlb
From a sufficiently conservative point of view, SOPA outlaws piracy. Of course
they're not interested in the pirates explaining technical details of
pirating. They know it when they see it.

~~~
Joakal
From a sufficiently lucrative point of view, SOPA outlaws potential
businesses. Of course, they're not interested in the entrepreneurs explaining
technical details of more businesses. They know it when they see it.

------
einhverfr
I wonder how far we should take this. TCP/IP training for all Congressmen? How
about including detailed briefings of how MPLS works as well?

Actually the tubes metaphor is closer (particularly regarding MPLS backbones)
than people are willing to accept both because of the pipe metaphor (a socket
being two pipes) and the use of label switching (which acts logically as a big
series of pipes).

And along these lines, bandwidth was originally a technical term in
plumbing.....

~~~
zb
The complaint here is not so much that they don't know, but that they're
unwilling to consult anyone who does before making a decision.

And 'bandwidth' is a technical term from electrical engineering that refers to
the width of the frequency band that is usable in a communications system, to
which the information rate is directly proportional. There is _no way_ it
originally came from plumbing.

~~~
TeMPOraL
Maybe GP meant 'throughput'?

------
JoshTriplett
Actually, I have no problem with Congress lacking knowledge about how the
Internet works, as long as they keep their hands off of it.

~~~
wtallis
They can't. Congress is responsible for regulating interstate commerce and
creating intellectual property laws. Even a blanket statement that US laws
don't apply to the Internet would have a detrimental effect. In the long run,
the only way for Congress to not harm the usefulness and freedom of the
Internet is for legislators to understand the Internet and specifically craft
laws to avoid negative side effects.

~~~
anamax
> Congress is responsible for regulating interstate commerce and creating
> intellectual property laws.

They're not obligated to do either of those things - they merely have the
authority to do so.

> In the long run, the only way for Congress to not harm the usefulness and
> freedom of the Internet is for legislators to understand the Internet and
> specifically craft laws to avoid negative side effects.

Was that true for electricity? How about railroads or telephones?

Heck - I'd argue that the only thing that Congress has ever "understood" is
alcohol, and they've botched that at least twice.

------
cmcewen
Dear Congress,

It's no longer okay (and never has been) to listen to people who are paid to
convince you to pass a law that benefits only them. Instead, you should listen
to the people who know what they are talking about and aren't being paid.

------
dcaldwell
I understand the author's frustration that Congress does not understand how
the internet works. But does anyone know of any simple article or books that
would be able to teach non-tech savvy Congressmen how the internet works? The
material would probably need to be short enough for them to digest in 1 full
day at a maximum. If anyone has any great suggestions, I would be happy to
pass them along to my Congressman.

~~~
nkassis
They don't seem to care about learning any of it, in fact seeing how a lot of
those congressmen were against having technical experts comment on the bill, I
don't see why they would care about reading anything on how DNS works and why
securing it from tempering is important.

~~~
Lewisham
This is the important thing. Would it be useful if they read some Wikipedia
entries before they started writing legislation (or, perhaps more accurately,
accepting legislation written for them by the MPAA)? Yes. Do they have to? No.
They just need to accept that they should bring in experts, and have the
experts sit and explain everything to them. They can ask questions and find
things out. This is actually accepting that you are not knowledgable with
everything, and this is OK.

What they have done is said "No, we don't understand this stuff, because we're
not socially-inept _nerds_ like you _chortle chortle_ and if we have you sit
here, we'll have you say one thing, the guy from the MPAA say the opposite,
and then we'll be right where we started and not know who to believe. So why
bother?"

This is amazingly unacceptable. What I find particularly galling is the idea
that any single opinion has the exact same weight as any other. The other
thing that frustrates is that if, for some reason, you don't trust the private
sector to tell things to you straight, there are countless government entities
that do know how this all works and are theoretically more impartial. Have a
guy from the NSA sit down with you and tell you what's up.

But they haven't done any of this. It's quite amazing that they don't even
bother to do any of the song and dance just to give the _impression_ of any
due process. It's just "voters don't pay for my new kitchen, but these lovely
_donations_ do."

------
ggchappell
I don't agree.

It's quite acceptable to me for Congress not to know how technical stuff
works. But they _do_ need to pay attention to the input of their constituents
and experts in the field. They also need to make sure constituents get enough
information, in a timely manner, to allow them to advise Congress
appropriately.

P.S. Why the endless mockery of the late Ted "Series of Tubes" Stevens?
(Because he said "tube" instead of "pipe"?)

------
jen_h
Dear Congress, it may be okay to not know how the Internet works. "Math is
hard!" and all that. However, your oath of office dictates that you uphold the
Constitution, including and especially the Fifth Amendment.

------
aj700
rather than post lists of ip addresses somwhere (which, btw, won't work on
virtual servers that have multiple sites on one ip) we need something the rest
of the world can link to if we expect Americans to use the links on our site,
so we can write for example href="

    
    
          http://uncensoredsite.de/redirect?siteiwant=thepiratebay.org

which returns http-equiv refresh; url=194.71.107.15

\-- essentially a web-based, but trustworthy dns service.

there are sites like

<http://baremetal.com/cgi-bin/dnsip?target=thepiratebay.org>

but they're presumably just doing a lookup on a us-based nameserver, we need a
site that uses an uncensored server and that provides an http redirect.

Is there to be direct blocking of ip addresses at all? Will everyone nerdy in
America just be able to change their OS DNS settings to something outside the
US?

------
vaksel
Frankly, it's about time Google gets into politics, and starts throwing their
weight(and money) around.

Google makes more money than the entire opposition combined. Create a internet
freedom pac, fill it with a few hundred million, hire a few lobbyists, and buy
back the government.

~~~
hornokplease
For what it is worth, Google _has_ begun throwing its weight around in
politics, although not to the tune of a few hundred million dollars:

This article [1] in the _San Jose Mercury News_ from September reports that
Google has ramped up its lobbying spending and notes that 14 lobbying firms
have now listed Google as a client:

 _Google has also ramped up its spending on lobbying, with the company
spending $3.5 million in the first half of 2011, according to U.S. Senate
records -- a pace that if continued over the course of the year would boost
Google's lobbying spending this year by more than a third over 2010.

Google has hired well-connected lobbyists, both on the Democratic and
Republican side of the aisle, including the Gephardt Group, the firm founded
by former Democratic House Majority Leader Richard Gephardt, and a firm headed
by the son of Indiana Republican Sen. Richard Lugar._

[1] Google's Schmidt to Testify Before Senate Panel

<http://www.mercurynews.com/business/ci_18938739>

------
suprgeek
Yes Congress it is perfectly OK to not know how the Internet works.

If congressmen/women can pass all manner of legislation without knowing how
Medicine or Medical care works, How Car manufacturing works, How basic
economics works, How Basic Science Research works, How Global climate works,
etc, etc - Why should the Internet be a special case?

Face it Median Age at which Senators take office is 51* years (with a few
exceptions) Ignoring all the special interests, Politics, etc etc - How many
51+ year olds (non -IT) are really comfortable with the Web?

[*][http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_United_States_S...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_United_States_Senators_by_age)

------
SODaniel
Actually, it's 100% OK to not know how the Internet works. What is NOT OK is
to have no idea, but still vote on Internet exclusive issues.

THAT is just outright stupid!

~~~
bgentry
To that I'll add:

Active refusal to seek out or listen to those who actually _do_ know how the
internet works.

------
drunkenmasta
I know that this is slightly off topic, but can someone tell me what the site
is built with? I looked at the source did not figure it out. Back on topic, I
agree that no law should be passed in ignorance and with no intention of
expert testimony. The way it is done now makes it seem as if they already made
up their mind but they want and go through the motions to make it look like
they are debating.

~~~
oinksoft
If you trust the response headers,

    
    
      X-Powered-By: Phusion Passenger (mod_rails/mod_rack) 2.2.10
    
      Server: nginx/0.7.65 + Phusion Passenger 2.2.10 (mod_rails/mod_rack)

------
megablast
I don't agree with this. Congress can only know so much, and I would prefer
them to understand how health care works, how wars work, and how spending
money works way before they understand the internet. In fact, there are dozens
of things they should know before the internet.

Actually, if they just outlawed lobbyists that would be a big start.

~~~
ScottBurson
They don't need to understand it, but they need to know that they don't
understand it and that they need to listen to people who do.

~~~
megablast
So who do they listen to, the experts from the RIAA/MPAA, or the experts from
Google?

Do you guys actually think about this stuff? If you do not know what you are
making judgements on (you are the government), how do you find the right
experts? You can't. You trust advisers, but everybody has an agenda, including
the Universities Professors. This is not a solved problem, and anyone who
thinks it is easy is wrong.

~~~
narcissus
I don't know about you, but if I were writing a law about the internet, I'd
probably talk to Google over the RIAA. The problem here is that they're
writing a law about the internet to solve a problem somewhere else. So,
instead of asking the people that are being affected, they're asking the
people who they're trying to help.

But yeah, to answer your question? If it's a law about the internet, you ask
Google, just as if it were a law about the Billboard Top 100, you ask the
RIAA. For expert advice, at least.

~~~
megablast
Why would you choose Google? Because you are an expert in the field. Once
again, you don't seem to understand what it is like for a non expert.

------
meow
"well meaning"

I don't think we can assume that any more. Not with every amendment being shot
down with glee and contempt.

------
chrisbennet
I really doubt that they are hell bent on passing this (just) because they are
ignorant of how the internet works. I imagine they need to pass this in order
to justify certain campaign donors.

------
yuhong
I have been thinking about dividing Congress/Parliament into working groups
focused on a specific topic instead of political parties focusing on a
specific ideology for a while now.

------
nsomaru
This is what happens when you let companies contribute to the campaigns (i.e.
ability to rise to power) of politicians.

The American system is broken, get with the program.

------
radarsat1
Not that this would solve _all_ the issues raised by this bill, but it's
really way past time for a decentralised replacement technology for DNS.

------
shingen
Quite frankly they don't even know how a normal economy works, how
manufacturing works, what generates real middle class job growth, how wealth
is created (hint: not from insider deals via political connections). They're
like captains of a ship that know nothing about how a ship is built or what
makes it float.

~~~
grannyg00se
Or like developers that got promoted to management and have no idea how to
actually manage.

~~~
meatmanek
Actually, if you want to continue the theme, the better analogy would be
people managing developers who have no idea how to make software.

------
meanJim
"This used to be funny, but now it’s really just terrifying. We’re dealing
with legislation that will completely change the face of the internet and free
speech for years to come. Yet here we are, still at the mercy of
underachieving Congressional know-nothings that have more in common with the
slacker students sitting in the back of math class than elected
representatives. The fact that some of the people charged with representing us
must be dragged kicking and screaming out of their complacency on such matters
is no longer endearing — it’s just pathetic and sad."

THISSSSSSS

