Understood. I'm one of those over-educated folks who believes the DoD should get it's old name back along with a partner-nemesis agency, so we could have both a Department of War and a Department of Peace. As far as funding factions in the Pentagon, the cyber-kids seem far less likely to cause loss of life than the rest of the building. At least until we see the battlefield telepresence/robotics stuff go too far...

Fortunately, my experience as the lead designer of Robotics Club tells me that the Do"D" high-tech warfare program is actually pretty weak. Their robots simply aren't terribly well-built, and from what I've seen of their pure-digital work (failing to obstruct Wikileaks in any noticeable manner, never pulling off a successful cyberattack, and so on) it's too rudimentary to pose much of a benefit or a threat. They could sink more money into it, of course, but none of my computer-savvy friends are considering military, government, or defense-contractor work. Half of them aren't US citizens anyway, and most of them share my beliefs on the matter.

I just ran across this interesting article that sums up what I think of the "Internet Kill Switch".

He has some good points, but that blog is full of vile and fear.

To me? Some degree of validity cloaked in an s-load of paranoia...or vice versa?

I don't trust the government....but I trust foreign governments (just one source of possible threat) even less, and there'd be a defense against cyberattack, or there won't be a Forum to bitch about the fine points of freedom in.

No Dr. JBHL... I don't agree with the Internet Kill Switch either. I found out about it on the Alex Jones page I visit. There are a whole lot of stuff covered there if you'd like to see it. http://www.infowars.com .  An interesting page. You'd be surprised at the things the government is doing or would like to do.

^  Seems to be an ultraconservative (paleo-conservative in his own words) conspiracy theorist. I probably be surprised at the things elements of the government might be planning, but I'd be very surprised if he knew.

And a cyberattack would likely be directed someplace other than Stardock Software.

remember Martin Niemoeller.

I think an emergency off switch for the internet will be the new kind of panic button for the governments. It shouldn't exist!!! It's a confession of failure for the governement in my eyes. A government should always try to get in contact with people. Even if there is harsh criticism and demonstrations.

(Totalitarian) governments (will) tend to rely on internet off switches because it's one of the most used communication platforms these days.
But if you think of China as an example. Besides very strong internet regulations and censorship one of the most important and censorious social scripts was published as a book - at least here in Europe. (as a side note: The corpse walker by Liao Yiwu) [o.k. maybe even this script found it's way out of the People's republic of China by use of the internet, I'm definitly not quite sure about that, but you know what I mean]

There are many ways for critics and dissidents besides the world wide web. One day we'll go back to carrier pigeons you know... or else.

But our's isn't Totalitarian... As a rapid prevention from cyberattack ... I'm not certain I object.

Even with the most favorable candidate imaginable occupying the office, I am certain I object.  I have yet to see anyone immune from the infection of power.

Power corrupts, Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Now Libya's doing it!

http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/220175/as_violence_escalates_libya_cuts_off_the_internet.html

I bet it'll blow up in their face. Maybe even get some international activity. It looked like they were gonna squash the protests, but now I'm not so sure.