When Can the Government Shut Down Wireless Networks?
The FCC is trying to balance the threat of terrorism against the benefits of having wireless networks in an emergency, e.g. to aid first responders. And what about free speech rights?
What's the Latest Development?
The Federal Communications Commission has opened an investigation which seeks to determine when a public agency, if ever, can shutdown wireless networks. The investigation is the result of a 2011 event in which the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) police ordered that wireless service be shutdown to confound a protest against the killings of Oscar Grant and Charles Hill by the BART police a few days earlier. In addition to determining if the BART police should be reprimanded, the FCC wants to find a balance between legitimate instances in which wireless service should be shut down and the protection of free speech.
What's the Big Idea?
Concerns over infrastructure being particularly vulnerable to terrorism have motivated public transport agencies including BART to recommend they be given the authority to shutdown wireless networks if they have knowledge of an imminent crime which will be carried out with the help of wireless networks (such as bombs which can be remotely detonated via cell phone signals). Such claims must be balanced against the benefits of having working wireless networks during an emergency, when they are often the primary communication tool for first responders. Free speech advocates have demanded the strongest justifications for network shutdowns.
Photo credit: Shutterstock.com
The ability to speak clearly, succinctly, and powerfully is easier than you think
The ability to communicate effectively can make or break a person's assessment of your intelligence, competence, and authenticity.
Antimicrobial resistance is growing worldwide, rendering many "work horse" medicines ineffective. Without intervention, drug-resistant pathogens could lead to millions of deaths by 2050. Thankfully, companies like Pfizer are taking action.
- Antimicrobial-resistant pathogens are one of the largest threats to global health today.
- As we get older, our immune systems age, increasing our risk of life threatening infections. Without reliable antibiotics, life expectancy could decline for the first time in modern history.
- If antibiotics become ineffective, common infections could result in hospitalization or even death. Life-saving interventions like cancer treatments and organ transplantation would become more difficult, more often resulting in death. Routine procedures would become hard to perform.
- Without intervention, resistant pathogens could result in 10 million annual deaths by 2050.
- By taking a multi-faceted approach—inclusive of adherence to good stewardship, surveillance and responsible manufacturing practices, as well as an emphasis on prevention and treatment—companies like Pfizer are fighting to help curb the spread.
Progressive America would be half as big, but twice as populated as its conservative twin
- America's two political tribes have consolidated into 'red' and 'blue' nations, with seemingly irreconcilable differences
- Perhaps the best way to stop the infighting is to go for a divorce – and give the two nations a country each
- Based on the UN's partition plan for Israel/Palestine, this proposal provides territorial contiguity and sea access to both 'red' and 'blue' America
SMARTER FASTER trademarks owned by The Big Think, Inc. All rights reserved.