Where do the current candidates fall when it comes to internet policy?

In 2015, flooded by petitions of overwhelming public support, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC)  ruled in favor of Net Neutrality. This decision effectively classified broadband as a utility, subject to government regulations that ensure fair access to the public. The Internets, which had been vocal in opposition to monetizing faster speeds and better access, gave a collective sigh of relief. A battle had been won, but the fight to keep the Internet free continues. Barack Obama, referred to by Fortune as our “digitizer in chief,” has been a champion for Net Neutrality. Earlier this month, he threatened to use his veto power to shut down another Republican-led assault on the unfettered Internet. This conservative offensive comes in the form of House Bill 2666, known as the “No Rate Regulation of Broadband Internet Access.” And yes, it’s exactly what it sounds like. Masterminded by telecommunications industry lobbyists, the bill would undermine current FCC efforts to classify broadband as a utility and exempt the industry from rate regulations. Obama’s not letting this one get by on his watch, but his time in the executive seat of veto power is nearly up. What does the future of the Internet look like under the next President? And how do the candidates view hot button topics like cyber security, broadband access, and the controversial NSA’s domestic surveillance program. The opinions on these issues from 2016’s presidential candidates are as varied as the rainbow, from supportive to misinformed to eerily silent. Let’s take a tour of the politicians whose opinions have the power to outflank industry opposition and win the war to set the Internet free.  

24256666951_1df86eaf78_z

Hillary Clinton: The Pragmatist

Clinton has come out in support of Net Neutrality on several occasions, but with caveats. She gives voice to the industry’s repeated concern that providers will not be incentivized to innovate. However, her nuanced argument on Net Neutrality clarifies that a free market approach cannot come at the cost of access to the public. In an exclusive op-ed for Quartz, Clinton wrote, “Being pro-business doesn’t mean hanging consumers out to dry.” She stated she was in favor of “enforcing strong net neutrality” and expressed a commitment to fighting broadband monopolies. Hillary Clinton’s platform does include a commitment to ensuring 100% of households across America have access to affordable broadband services by 2020. However, her positions on cyber security and mass surveillance have supported domestic spying programs in instances where she felt national security risk outweighed an individual right to privacy. She’s referred to recent controversy surrounding the FBI-Apple debacle regarding a backdoor to the iPhone as a “legitimate dilemma,” but hasn’t been clear about how she would resolve the issue as president.  

25946025531_2c3d45aa1e_zTed Cruz: The Opponent

Cruz has expressed frequent and vocal opposition to Net Neutrality. He believes that regulating broadband as a utility actually threatens the flow of information. In a Washington Post op-ed, Cruz stated that Net Neutrality would result in “fewer choices, opportunities and higher pricing” for the average consumer. Ted Cruz went even further in his assessment in a Facebook post from November, 2014, referring to Net Neutrality as “Obamacare for the Internet.”   Cruz has yet to weigh-in on telecom monopolies and his current platform doesn’t have any specifics about broadband infrastructure. However, in a letter to the FCC in 2014, he expressed strong opposition to the government regulating broadband as a utility. Ted Cruz’s recent position supporting law enforcement’s request for a back door to the iPhone is puzzling, given his support of the USA Freedom Act, which ended the NSA’s ability to collect phone records in bulk.  

24616087404_8baa138730_zJohn Kasich: The Unknown

Kasich has yet to take a particular stance on Net Neutrality. His campaign thus far has very little to say on technologyperiod. Kasich has, however, been a vocal opponent of the NSA’s domestic spying program and his views generally align with less government regulation across all sectors. He’s dodged direct questions on the Internet, which has led to some speculation that Kasich may not be exactly sure what the internet is. During the debates in February of 2016, Kasich was questioned about his stance on cybersecurity and recent efforts by the FBI to get Apple to create a “backdoor” into the iPhone. The governor responded, “I just have to tell you that it’s best with some of these things [that they] not be said.” John Kasich suggested that the USA Freedom Act was a “step forward” but has been elusive about what other steps he might take to ensure privacy in the face of domestic spying programs.  At this point, the silence from Kasich’s campaign on technology has been deafening. He’s suggested consumers are responsible for broadband rate increases, but beyond that, Kasich doesn’t seem to have much to offer about the future of the Internet.

24349401534_3bdc739f9a_zBernie Sanders: The Champion

The Vermont senator has been a passionate and vocal champion of Net Neutrality from the beginning. He’s categorized so-called fast lanes as “grossly unfair,” and he hailed the 2015 FCC decision as “a victory for consumers and entrepreneurs.” Sanders made his position on Net Neutrality crystal-clear in a press release following the FCC decision. “The proposal would ensure that the Internet remains a space for the open exchange of ideas and information, free of discrimination and corporate control.” – Bernie Sanders This position aligns closely with the ideology of his candidacy. Sanders believes the public’s right to information trumps any argument about the free market approach to incentivizing competition among providers. His budget proposals also include funding to support bringing broadband to a wider portion of the American public. The American Society of Civil Engineers indicates Sande’s’ proposal is the only one that comes close to the estimated 3.6 trillion they believe is necessary to upgrade infrastructure. Senator Sanders has also sent letters to the FCC expressing concern about mergers and broadband monopolies. Bernie has also been a fairly staunch supporter of public privacy in the face of security threats and his legislative record proves it. Unlike Clinton, he’s voted against The Patriot Act twice and committed in a recent debate that as president, he would “end domestic surveillance” by the NSA.  

25715575431_59e9d3eac2_zDonald Trump: The Confused

Trump has made it clear that he strongly opposes Net Neutrality. But the reasoning behind his stance is rather ambiguous. In a tweet back in November, Trump insisted that Net Neutrality was a “power grab” by Obama, similar to the Fairness Doctrine.   The Fairness Doctrine is an FCC policy introduced in 1949 that required radio and TV broadcasters to present both sides of an issue of public importance in their programming.  Because Net Neutrality is not about the content of the Internet but access to it, it’s unclear exactly how it might affect conservative media. We might need to wait until the wall is built before “The Donald” will have time to clarify his position on the fight to free the Internet. While Donald Trump hasn’t made any official statements in regard to his proposed policies on technology issues, he’s alluded plenty to an aggressive stance on cybersecurity. He infamously commented that he’d like to “shut down the Internet,” and Trump’s ongoing comments support that he would always err on the side of security rather than privacy. In response to questions about the iphone backdoor, “The Donald” blasted Apple. ‘Who do they think they are?” he asked at a rally in February. Trump has since called for a boycott of Apple products until such time as the company cooperates with the FBI.

The Scorecard

[wpsm_comparison_table id=”3″ class=””] If you’ve ever purchased tickets on TicketMaster, made a free email account with Google, or created a Facebook page, chances are you’ve seen a reCaptcha—a little box with two words in a distorted image you have to type in to prove you’re not a robot. Though sometimes inconvenient, this program is surprisingly effective at stopping computers from making transactions meant for people. But did you know that every time you fill out a reCaptcha you are contributing to humanity’s knowledge base? A History of Captcha First developed in the early 2000s by a team of Carnegie Mellon computer scientists, Captchas were a simple way for companies offering online transactions to avoid computerized scams. For example, TicketMaster didn’t want scalpers buying up thousands of concert tickets—something easy to do with the right program—and needed a way to weed out the programs from the people. Using Captcha, users only took a few seconds to type out wavy, fragmented characters, completing a simple task computer algorithms just couldn’t figure out. This easily proved that users were people and not robots. Seeing the potential in this novel concept, Google acquired the Captcha startup early on and started selling its effective services to thousands of websites; however, after a few years, head developer Dr. Luis von Ahn looked at the numbers and started feeling guilty. He realized that people across the world were collectively wasting hundreds of thousands of hours per day proving they were humans. So he and his team came up with a brilliant idea: what if we use those ten seconds to produce a useful result, something that will give back to society? Thus was born reCaptcha. Making it Meaningful with reCaptcha As Dr. von Ahn’s team looked for other problems computers fail to solve, they stumbled upon the challenge of digital archiving. According to “The New York Times,” the typical process for converting old books, newspapers, and other print materials to digital format involves scanning in the pages and running text recognition software. This only works, however, with about 70-90 percent of the words. The remaining words have to then be manually transcribed by people. Von Ahn and his team decided to try adding snapshots of these rejected words to Captchas, turning wasted time into a useful scholarly endeavor. Called “reCaptcha,” this new human-verifying program shows you two words—one control word that is typically hard-to-read gibberish, and one real word that is a digital archive reject. The former proves you’re a human and the latter lets you contribute to human knowledge. You can test this next time you get a reCaptcha by spelling the control word perfectly, then misspelling the real word slightly. Your “wrong” answer will still be accepted. Don’t worry—you won’t ruin the digital archives either; your test-word answer will be rejected after comparison with a few others from around the world, and when the correct answer is sorted out it will be incorporated into the now digitized book. Benefits to Society But how effective is reCaptcha? According to a 2011 TED talk by Dr. Von Ahn, “The number of words digitized is about 100 million per day, which is the equivalent of about 2.5 million books per year. And this is all being done one word at a time by just people typing Captchas on the internet.” So what began as a simple tool for verifying real from artificial intelligence has now converted millions of books, pamphlets, and newspapers into searchable, digital text archives. And books are just the beginning—recently Google Maps has used reCaptcha to decipher street addresses, making their mapping technology more accurate than ever. Basically any image that’s too blurry, angled, or musty for a computer to read can be put into a reCaptcha where someone in the world will figure it out. Adapting to the Present Day Despite Captcha’s success in the past, a recent study reveals that Google Street View algorithms can now read reCaptchas with 99 percent accuracy. What does this mean for the program’s future as a verification tool? Luckily, the brains behind reCaptcha have developed new technology that no longer relies solely on image or audio problem-solving. The new system uses advanced risk-analysis tools, watching how you solve the problem before, during, and after encountering the image or audio stimulus. This proves beneficial to users as well, because it allows the program to use easier-to-solve puzzles while still providing reliable verification. At the same time, reCaptcha will continue using the contributions of millions of Internet users to make digital archives of rare print materials. On to the Future Now that reCaptcha has succeeded in digitization of out-of-print materials, street addresses, etc, what other terrains can the concept explore? In 2012, Dr. Luis von Ahn began a new startup to develop an app called “DuoLingo.” It’s a program that teaches foreign languages to users, but like reCaptcha, simultaneously does something productive—translate the internet. Companies go to DuoLingo with websites to translate, DuoLingo breaks down the material and uses it as stimulus for language learners, and then gets paid for their completed service. Meanwhile, users can enjoy free language learning. It’s a win-win! There’s plenty more to talk about with this technology, but the best source is the inventor himself, Luis von Ahn. For an explanation of how it works from the creator, and some hilarious examples of reCaptcha fails, see Luis von Ahn’s TED talk. [zipfinder] Photo: Adam Gerard/Flickr Find John on Google+ Hacking into a wireless network is easier than you might think. And changing default passwords isn’t enough. With a recent report finding vulnerabilities in several bestselling home routers, it’s now even more important to ramp up your defences. So follow these 7 tips to keep hackers at bay.

Update firmware regularly

Routers don’t download the latest software automatically like computers. If a manufacturer finds a security flaw and addresses it with new firmware, it’s your responsibility to download and install it. Log in to your router and scan for updates ASAP. Scary Network Name

Change the SSID

If an attacker knows the brand of your router, it makes their life much easier. Switch it to anything you want, as long as it doesn’t contain any personal information. We encourage something along the lines of lifehacker’s discouraging network name. </ br> </ br> </ br>

Scrap the SSID

Alternatively, your SSID can be hidden. This means that it will no longer be visible on Wi-Fi scans. You will have to manually enter it to add devices to your network though.

Firewall on

You’ll no doubt have a software firewall on your Mac or PC. A hardware firewall on your router is an added layer of protection against unauthorised use. It’s usually switched on by default, but check in case it isn’t.

Wireless MAC Filter

To stop any devices other than your own connecting to the network, enable your router’s MAC filter. It only lets devices whose MAC addresses have been manually entered to connect. Cumbersome perhaps, but worth the extra hassle.

Disable wireless administrating

If router settings can only be changed with a wired connection, wireless hacking becomes pretty impossible.

Monitor your network

Monitoring applications like Observium let you know who and what is using your network. Fing (for iOS and Android) is a mobile equivalent which reports all the vital details, such as IP addresses and hostnames. Both are free, so there’s no reason not to download them now. Photos by:elhombredenegro and Satish Krishnamurthy
Back to top

This site is a U.S. Consumer site. You can learn more about our site and privacy policy here.