On 06 Jun 2024, at 23:32, Mark Tinka via zanog-discuss <zanog-discuss@lists.nog.net.za> wrote:
While I think that the Internet has become as basic a need for humanity as has been water, power, shelter and food,
I’m hard pressed to use the word “need”, more like “self inflicted harm and destruction”.. refer to the story about an Amazon tribe that got introduced to “theInternet”, and the damage that was inflicted on that tribe through porn and social media… the 2 big things on the internet ;(
The Internet going dark has a dramatic and negative economic impact and should be provided the same coverage.
From a common sense standpoint, I don't disagree.But governments tend to have different priorities from private enterprise when it comes to the basic requirements to sustain life.
I’d use the term “to stay in power”, rather than “life”
So yes, a lack of connectivity would be terribly debilitating for a modern economy.
The problem is not “TheInternet(c)(TM)” connectivity losses, but the reliance on others that you don’t have direct control over to get “Service delivery”… how many here, has any direct sway to operators on the other side of the NAP/INX they connect to? and there in lies the main issue to understand w.r.t. TheInternet: it’s a loose set of connected networks that has no rights nor obligations to any connected party. Just look at the recent Tier1 depeering exercises
I keep telling people (since the 90s) that the S in SMTP stands for Simple, not secure, nor secret and definitely not guaranteed, as if they want that, they should get X.400 from Telkom.
And thus, the debilitating effect, is ‘cause we blindly trust and rely on “the internet” not realising it’s nothing to rely on, but to use, and be happy for the stuff that does work as even though you pay for that line to the ISP, the ISP doesn’t have a way to force anybody to accept nor allow your connection(s) if its’ not on their network(s) other than asking nicely for a resolution.