
EFF, Reddit, Mozilla, others launch Internet Defense League and Cat Signal - mtgx
http://internetdefenseleague.org
======
victork2
Well it embodies the best and the worst of internet movements.

While the foundations are good: protecting the web from bad laws, restrictions
etc... the execution is really ridiculous. Imagine you're an old style Senator
or representative and you see that website with a weird ass looking cat... Do
you really think it's going to make them think you're anything but a joke?

I find that the words used are equally ridiculous: "League", "XXX signal".

It really feels like a little club of geeks trying to have an impact in the
world and it leaves a bad taste in my mouth. It could have been a great idea,
it's ruined by a poor execution.

 _edit:_ I have seen a lot of negative reactions and I appreciate people
taking the time to answer to me. I won't edit my previous comment but let me
add some things:

I didn't mean to be insulting but if you want it to be a democratic movement
you have to avoid inside jokes at all cost. It's literally filled with Reddit/
geek pop culture references and it won't take off _in the general public_
because a very large portion of the population do not understand or don't like
it. It's like saying a meme out loud: you feel ridiculous.

For old style senators I am talking about basically any person over 35 that
has no idea what reddit/ twitter/ cat facts are and who will find that
ridiculous. Yes Senators and representatives are supposed to work for you, but
it's like for everything they have to take you seriously. We belong to the Z
generation but in order to talk to other generations we have to use common
references and avoid cats or internet memes or super hero folklore for what it
matters. Serious business in two words.

~~~
chez17
What's important is that you've found a way to feel morally superior _and_ do
nothing about the problems we face today. A true internet warrior.

~~~
MSM
Whoa whoa whoa... Don't act like signing up on a website is equivalent to
_doing_ something.

It's literally the _absolute least_ you could do.

~~~
chez17
No, the least you could do is make snarky comments about the people who are
actually trying to do something. This isn't about 'signing up' for a website.
This is about trying to mobilize a group of people that often times is not
that involved with politics. The idea is that when you sign up, you'll take
action on the items that the site informs you about. There is literally
nothing like this on the internet for this demographic and the OP gets the
most upvoted comment complaining that they used the term 'cat signal'?
Politics and protesting can be fun and inviting. This has zero effect on
anything except for grump old people who think that they know better. We
stopped SOPA with a few days of action and a few big names stepping up. This
is simply an attempt to harness that power and dedication. People who are
_already_ shitting on this, on day one, while typical is still extremely sad.

~~~
MSM
> We stopped SOPA

This is what I'm worried about. Who _really_ stopped SOPA? You can bet that
anyone who signs up for this will go around touting how they stopped SOPA,
just like the guy next to me pretty much single handedly saved Haiti in 2010
with his $5 donation to the Red Cross.

There is a disparity between giving money so that others can continue to do
work and being the one doing the work. I want that distinction clear, and to
remain clear. The doctor who flew down to Haiti to personally help is
infinitely more valuable than someone who donated.

EDIT: I'm not saying that this is useless or dumb. It's a step in the right
direction, albeit (IMO) a small one. I just don't want to see "I signed up-
I'm going to save the internet!" I think the people who really devote
themselves to these causes should be respected on a different level than those
that, for instance, sign up for this.

~~~
guelo
Why? Why do you need to make those distinctions? The doctor couldn't fly to
Haiti if he hadn't been funded. You need a lot of different pieces working
together to make big change.

~~~
stinkytaco
But someone who posted "Like this if you love Doctors in Haiti" did very
little, just as people signing up for a website do very little. I don't like
to belittle "raising awareness" campaigns because I know how important they
are. But there is no substitute for getting your feet on the ground or your
money from your wallet. I worry that we are creating a generation of people
who think posting something in their facebook feed is saving the world. It’s
certainly helpful, but it has to be in conjunction with real work.

People who aggravated against SOPA certainly did something -- an important
thing -- but people who made hard decisions, called or emailed their
representatives and really coordinated this effort did more.

~~~
chris_wot
This is a little different. For every person who felt they contributed to
defeating SOPA, that's a person that politicians have to consider when
enacting legislation. That's called _paticipatory democracy_ , and it's pretty
awesome!

------
nikcub
This part makes me uncomfortable:

> Our organization and network helped to defeat SOPA/PIPA [..] The Internet
> Defense League continues this work. But it depends on its members' donations

It then goes on to ask for a donation to support staff who 'work behind the
scenes'.

I think to people who are unfamiliar with what happen around the community
action with SOPA and PIPA this section can be interpreted as the Internet
Defense League taking credit for the defeat of the bills.

It also suggests that without financial contributions from members that this
work wouldn't happen and SOPA/PIPA/what-comes-next may just succeed next time,
even though this organization wasn't even around during the SOPA debate.

There is also no transparency around how this money that is raised will be
spent. Who will be hired? What will they do? What will be volunteer roles and
what will be hired roles? Weren't SOPA and PIPA defeated by volunteers in ad
hoc communities and not paid salarymen working for a quasi online charity? Why
is this not structured as a charitable organization? Why is my donation not
tax deductible? Who are the people behind this? Where are they based? Why is
this so United States centric? Who is backing this financially so far? Where
is the about page? Is this a scam?

There should be _a lot_ more details on that page before you ask people for
money.

I would have preferred that donations were directed to the EFF, and that the
online organization is done by volunteers - as, you know, it has worked just
fine in the past.

~~~
ralfn
Considering the list of supporting sites, that are behind this project,
claiming to play a crucial part of the defeat of SOPA, would be totally
correct.

But they dont actually do that. They use "we" in a politically rethoric form,
where they try to convince the reader what their position already is. Its like
saying "we the american people, need lower taxes to be free".

Its a marketing trick.

------
dholowiski
Just donated - now a member. Will be installing the code on my blog.

If you think this is stupid and ridiculous, what exactly are _you_ doing to
save the Internet?

[edit]I just became an EFF member too.

~~~
lmm
>If you think this is stupid and ridiculous, what exactly are you doing to
save the Internet?

I'm holding my rock. It keeps internet-killers away.

------
vipervpn
NEWS FLASH: Being bitter, apathetic and contrarian does not make you sound
smart. This is undeniably an awesome idea. Stop searching for flaws and help.

~~~
mcguire
But, but, I _am_ bitter, apathetic, and contrarian!

------
zimbatm
Why make the tracking code so complicated ? Couldn't it be simply written like
this ? :

    
    
       <script async src="//members.internetdefenseleague.org/include/?variant=banner">
    

Also the url is the referrer no ?

~~~
rwhitman
The async property doesn't work in IE

------
dtjohnnymonkey
It seems a little strange that they want their users to put hosted JavaScript
on their sites. Just doesn't feel like "freedom" to me. Couldn't they control
a lot of sites or steal information by changing that script to something
malicious?

~~~
radagaisus
Do you have g+ / tweet / like buttons on your site? Google Analytics? Disqus?
jQuery CDN?

~~~
dholowiski
For that matter, have you ever run "yum update httpd" without reviewing the
source code first?

------
whichdan
Really? A giant cat?

~~~
ralfn
It is not supposed to be a lobbyist. It is supposed to be a poltical movement.

Its political marketing aimed at voters. It should target the type of teens on
facebook, that you and i may look down upon.

As far as im concerned, they dont even go far enough. We need a comic. We need
memes.

RESCUE MONORAIL CAT FROM THE CLUTCHES OF THE EVIL INTERNET HATE LEAGUE. FIRE
UP YOUR MEMES AND BLAST THESE CORRUPT SENIORS OUT OF CONGRESS.

That kind of stuff!

~~~
wickedchicken
> It should target the type of teens on facebook

The type of teen who legally can't vote? Sounds effective.

~~~
ralfn
Many of them can. And they are still easier to convince, that an 80 year old
that still uses racial slurs.

------
sageikosa
Any idea on how this league will be governed? Does each participant vote on
what should become actionable? Will it's governance be by elective
representation?

~~~
ybother
Any idea on what it actually does? How does it detect "danger"? It seems more
like an attempt to co-opt internet freedom movements than actually do anything
at all.

~~~
ralfn
Theyll be able to spam, hopefully millions of websites, at once, with the same
exact political message.

If they use this sparringly ( only for things as big as SOPA ), most site
owners wouldnt mind.

And the impact, together with all major cities suddenly blasting a cat light,
will likely reach the news.

At which point, people like the EFF ( which are also part of this initiative
), will likely have serious, well spoken individuals available for interviews
and such.

------
tatsuke95
I can't believe there is so much negativity. I'm usually the guy who has
something negative to say about everything, and end up in these threads where
other people ask, "why so negative?"

But this? This political action is literally what killed SOPA; that's not me
talking, that's straight from Dodd's mouth. Now they've developed an easy
call-to-action for future, similar bills? It's genius. Politicians thrive on
the historical forgetfulness of the public. It was a matter of weeks before
another bill similar to SOPA was in the works. The politicians will adjust
their strategy and count on less political action the "next-time-around". I
hope this can prevent it.

Who cares if it's about cats and comics? That's the theme of a generation and
internet culture. And (combined with their high unemployment and lower
expectations of future standard of living) this generation is going to be a
political force. Bank on it.

------
mherdeg
Oh man, oh man, oh man, I miss putting little blue ribbons on all my Web
pages' footers!!
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Ribbon_Online_Free_Speech_...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Ribbon_Online_Free_Speech_Campaign)

------
tokenadult
As a multicultural person who has lived in more than one country, as usual
when I see initiatives like this, I wonder how well they will work in China,
behind the Great Firewall.

<http://www.greatfirewallofchina.org/>

<http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-17910953>

I posted a Chinese saying attributed to Confucius the last time we discussed
an effort to use the Internet to bring about more transparency.

始吾於人也，聽其言而信其行。今吾於人也，聽其言而觀其行。"At first my attitude toward people was to listen
to their words and to trust their deeds. Now my attitude toward people is to
listen to their words and observe their deeds."

I listen to the words "Internet freedom should not be restricted" and I say,
as people did during the 1960s civil rights movement, "Right on!" But then I
observe deeds and I wonder if anyone has an effectual plan to stop the prior
restraint of all print publications in China or the direct party cadre
oversight of all broadcast media in China. I can access the Chinese media (and
do) just fine, via the World Wide Web, but the common people of China, even
the many who now have Internet access, are far from being able to access any
available news source from anywhere around the world to the same degree that
most Hacker News participants can.

All kinds of tough world problems would be easier to solve if the common
people of China (and Russia, and a few other countries) had less restricted
access to news and information, both about the country they live in and all
other countries, and more opportunity to practice political dissent and open
discussion of public policy, culminating in voting for national leaders in
free and fair elections. If an Internet Cat Signal helps bring that about, I'm
all for it. But if the Cat Signal serves mostly as yet another silly publicity
tie-in for a Hollywood movie, I have better uses of my time and the server for
my personal website than to link into the project.

I would really like to see an Internet freedom project that has significant
advice and direction from political dissidents experienced with one-party
dicatorial regimes, such as the current regime in China. Such a project could
help Western Internet freedom activists better understand what issues really
matter, and what technical means can overcome determined governmental
opposition.

See

[http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/world/july-
dec12/dictators_07...](http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/world/july-
dec12/dictators_07-16.html)

for examples of research on this important topic.

Best wishes to everyone working for more free flow of information to more
people all over the world.

~~~
slurgfest
I think the point of the cat signal is nothing to do with promotion of
Hollywood movies and everything with trying to rally the people who have a
strong understanding and interest in the freedom of the internet.

Think something like the NRA or NAACP, but for the internet. Things like the
EFF are cool but not nearly as popular and accessible as things like NRA.

Unfortunately there is very little which western political groups can do to
force the hand of the Chinese government with regard to censorship.

------
mtgx
From Techdirt:

 _"Earlier this year, I wrote about the Hacking Society gathering, put on by
Union Square Ventures. During that discussion, Clay Shirky brought up the idea
of an "Internet Volunteer Fire Department" and Tiffiniy Cheng, from Fight for
the Future, explained the IDL and how they were already working on it. You can
watch that discussion to get a sense of the thinking behind this effort:"_

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=X...](http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=XDTD9laPQWo)

------
tomp
Too bad this seems very US centric...

~~~
iuguy
If you're in the UK you could do a lot worse than join the ORG[1]. Maybe non-
US resident HN'ers can co-opt this thread to post their own local feline alert
movements.

[1] - <http://www.openrightsgroup.org/>

~~~
petitmiam
It's a shame non-US residents would have to set up something locally.

I had hoped for a truly global 'Internet Defense League', which then could
have smaller branches for country/region specific issues.

------
tommorris
Cripes, they've still got that shitty name.

Anyone from the United Kingdom will immediately associate the name with the
English Defence League, a violent far-right Islamophobic street protest
movement.

As branding ideas go, having a name that has that connotation is a really dumb
choice.

------
shmerl
Did they avoid using bats for copyright reasons?-) Cat doesn't cut it as much
as bat I guess.

~~~
juan_juarez
It's the internet. We like cats. Cute cat pictures make the internet work.

------
lee337
<http://i.imgur.com/K5Y88.png>

------
SleekoNiko
At the risk of being productive, what is the benefit of using this "service"
over posting my own message on my website? (Honest question)

------
rufugee
Oddly, signing up wouldn't work for me in chrome...only Firefox worked. When I
submitted the form in chrome, is just reloaded the page.

~~~
warmfuzzykitten
Worked for me in chrome.

------
dotborg
"bad monopolies".. so which monopolies are good?

~~~
RobAtticus
Monopolies are not inherently bad. A monopoly on some good or service might be
that way because it provides the best product at a fair price and there's no
way somebody else could beat them. It's only when a monopoly starts using its
position of power to either unfairly gain advantage in a similar market, start
screwing over customers that they become "bad," or some other tactic that
ruins competition or hurts consumers.

~~~
__alexs
> Monopolies are not inherently bad.

Yes they are. They are bad because they are a massive risk center to their
customers. For a small industry this is just kind of annoying, but for a
massive one it can have a detrimental effect on the entire economy and not
having massive single points of failure in your economy should be (and
sometimes is) considered a matter of national security.

~~~
stinkytaco
What about wireless spectrum? Should we just give access to spectrum to
everyone who wants it? Your radio, cell phone and wireless Internet would stop
working within weeks, I'm sure. Sometime monopoly is not only good, but
necessary.

~~~
__alexs
That the status quo for RF spectrum is that of government granted monopoly in
most of the world is not evidence that this is a necessary way to operate. In
fact there have been numerous proposals to change the regulation of important
RF ranges into a more typical commons based usage model. e.g. the "whitespace"
wireless broadband systems that are still fighting their way through the FCC
regulatory quagmire in the US.

I'd even argue that the regional monopoly system we currently have actually
frequently does have to act in communal ways in the best interests of
different providers across regulatory regions. People without billions of
dollars on the table just aren't allowed in those conversations.

~~~
stinkytaco
I'm not entirely sure that we have locked out people without billions of
dollars. I followed closely and commented on the low power FM rollout (I
managed a college radio station at the time) and though it wasn't perfect, I
do feel it was a major step. It allowed many small broadcasters to enter the
market that would not otherwise have had an opportunity.

I don't have anything against whitespace spectrum (though I do feel it becomes
a shoving match of who has the biggest tower), but there are certain
applications that demand a monopolized spectrum, such as cell phones. If
providers were not able to provide national, dedicated networks, the cell
phone industry as we know it could not exist. This is not to say that cell
phones wouldn't exist (perhaps just a patchwork of regional providers), but
the level of seamless service that consumers have come to demand would not.
Even a patchwork of regional carriers would require regionalized monopolies.
Why would you go to the trouble and cost of building a tower if someone can
just build another, larger one next to it?

------
wickedchicken
Haha yeah! Fuck 'thinking,' I want a cat on the internet to tell me to yell at
senators! Absolutely nothing about this feels like mob rule!

~~~
mcguire
You're not terribly familiar with the concepts of democracy, right?

------
zwdr
I just cant take such initiatives seriously if they have Facebook-Buttons...

~~~
Xavura
How else do you propose they get the word out without Facebook/Twitter etc.
buttons?

~~~
zwdr
I'm not against using these buttons, the harmful/annoying thing is that
they're used to set tracking cookies. The most simple solution would be to put
them on an extra page or only enable them when the user clicks some button.
But I'm sure if smart people think about it they find much more solutions.
Obviously the designers of this site didnt, and thats what I dont like- being
against "bad monopolies" and giving FB more data? Seriously?

~~~
nikcub
use a browser that blocks third party cookies by default. safari does, opera
does and google has an option buried somewhere 9 clicks away in the settings.

~~~
lukejduncan
I think the poster has a legitimate point. As an end user you can protect
yourself, but as an organization that cares about Internet freedom it's a
legitimate concern to consider: "Are we enabling tracking through the use of
our advocacy, and if so can we avoid that."

Although, I wouldn't go so far as to say that I can't take them seriously
because they decided to use the buttons.

~~~
alex_c
And this is why movements fail, because everyone wants to add their own
agenda.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that privacy is not a worthwhile concern,
but this movement seems to be about protecting the Internet from government
abuse, not about privacy practices of private companies. Sure, it _could_ be
about both, but that would dilute the message and create a handicap,
especially if it means having to avoid some of the primary methods of
communication online.

