Insanity: CISPA Just Got Way Worse, And Then Passed On Rushed Vote
from the this-is-crazy dept
Update: Several people have asserted that Quayle's amendment actually made CISPA better, not worse. I've now posted my thoughts on that.
Up until this afternoon, the final vote on CISPA was supposed to be tomorrow. Then, abruptly, it was moved up today—and the House voted in favor of its passage with a vote of 248-168. But that's not even the worst part.
The vote followed the debate on amendments, several of which were passed. Among them was an absolutely terrible change (pdf and embedded below—scroll to amendment #6) to the definition of what the government can do with shared information, put forth by Rep. Quayle. Astonishingly, it was described as limiting the government's power, even though it in fact expands it by adding more items to the list of acceptable purposes for which shared information can be used. Even more astonishingly, it passed with a near-unanimous vote. The CISPA that was just approved by the House is much worse than the CISPA being discussed as recently as this morning.
Previously, CISPA allowed the government to use information for "cybersecurity" or "national security" purposes. Those purposes have not been limited or removed. Instead, three more valid uses have been added: investigation and prosecution of cybersecurity crime, protection of individuals, and protection of children. Cybersecurity crime is defined as any crime involving network disruption or hacking, plus any violation of the CFAA.
Basically this means CISPA can no longer be called a cybersecurity bill at all. The government would be able to search information it collects under CISPA for the purposes of investigating American citizens with complete immunity from all privacy protections as long as they can claim someone committed a "cybersecurity crime". Basically it says the 4th Amendment does not apply online, at all. Moreover, the government could do whatever it wants with the data as long as it can claim that someone was in danger of bodily harm, or that children were somehow threatened—again, notwithstanding absolutely any other law that would normally limit the government's power.
Somehow, incredibly, this was described as limiting CISPA, but it accomplishes the exact opposite. This is very, very bad.
There were some good amendments adopted too—clarifying some definitions, including the fact that merely violating a TOS does not constitute unauthorized network access—but frankly none of them matter in the light of this change. CISPA is now a completely unsupportable bill that rewrites (and effectively eliminates) all privacy laws for any situation that involves a computer. Far from the defense against malevolent foreign entities that the bill was described as by its authors, it is now an explicit attack on the freedoms of every American.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: cispa, congress, cybersecurity
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Protect the children is the most convenient excuse ever created.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
What I wouldn't give to be 17 again, so I can have more rights and protections than grown-ups. Hell, maybe with my newfound rights, I'd have the power to actually pass some laws that made sense!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
But hey! We only do this to protect the children...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
... really bad.
hehe.
defenestration is amusing... ideally one uses tall buildings, but using the ground floor window is plenty amusing without those pesky murder/manslaughter charges...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Fuck the children!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
And, just knowing the Truth doesn't guarantee a seat at the GRAND FEAST.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Response to: BreadGod on Apr 26th, 2012 @ 3:46pm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Scary thought, yo.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
next up, the stop online piracy and cyber terrorism defense act...
pirates? / hackers? / hackers? / pirates? hmmmmm...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: BreadGod
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Reply
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Worse, give the present definition of 'hacking'
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Worse, give the present definition of 'hacking'
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Worse, give the present definition of 'hacking'
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Worse, give the present definition of 'hacking'
This is the stupidest thing I think I have ever seen.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Worse, give the present definition of 'hacking'
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Worse, give the present definition of 'hacking'
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hey wait!
Let's find out.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hey wait!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Hey wait!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Hey wait!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hey wait!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Hey wait!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Hey wait!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Hey wait!
probably unlikely though.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Hey wait!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hey wait!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Hey wait!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hey wait!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Hey wait!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Hey wait!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hey wait!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hey wait!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hey wait!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hey wait!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Probably not
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hey wait!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hey wait!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Er, never mind...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Sorry, failed analogy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The statute holds until it's challenged, which allows plenty of abuse of the 4th (How many thousands of warrantless GPS were there?)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
I'm thinking about drinking a 5th after reading this article.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Or maybe you are just wrong.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
wait.....I am not suppose to be reading this?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
But, yes, I worded it somewhat bluntly - after watching C-SPAN for the past two hours, I have very little patience left for circumlocution and tortured phrasing...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Here here!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Here here!
It's enhanced interrogation phrasing!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
This is a problem now as well, but privacy policies and other restrictions prevent the government from abusing this power. However, CISPA indemnifies private companies for sharing information with the government, so most of these protections lose their effectiveness.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall be issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Article VI paragraph 2 of the Constitution
This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.
Nowhere in the 4th amendment does it say that the law is limited to just the government. Anyone who took an oath to protect the Constitution is obligated to fight against lwas like this.
Oath of the enlisted
I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.
Nowhere does it say to obey the senators or representatives or the laws they make.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
or put 'em in a situation of picking between the president and the constitution, i guess.
i mean, at this point 'enemies... domestic' pretty much covers 90% of your corporations and government, no?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Actually, you'll never see the data sharing, so you'll never know the harm done. Any effort to bring it up in court will be shushed with the 'State Secret' trump card.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Therefore:
The fourth amendment doesn't protect anything on the internet, because it is all exposed to ISP's, service providers, etc.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
FYI from IT Law - http://itlaw.wikia.com/wiki/Fourth_Amendment
Determination of reasonableness depends on the judicial balancing of the individual interest, generally regarded as a privacy interest, against the governmental interest, including law and order, national security, internal security, and the proper administration of the laws.
Due to passing of new laws and regulations in regards to national security the definition of probable cause has changed quite a bit and US citizens have been desensitized by very public searches via TSA and Security.
Before you say the 4th amendment protects you, you better understand that warrants are no longer required, they are encouraged. That probable cause has very new definitions and interpretations since 911.
Though I would absolutely love for you to be right.
I have personally witnessed searches that did not have probable cause. That were "random" in the name of avoiding racial profiling and targeting.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
To them it's just a piece of paper.
Has been for 150 years.
And even the founders didn't much like the constitution.
When told of the constitutional convention in Philadelphia which was a secret closed-door meeting of the elites which dictated the government structure to the rest of the society, Patrick Henry refused to take part and said "I smell a rat in Philadelphia".
The things you all cite as "good" about the constitution are NOT PART OF THE CONSTITUTION.
The bill of rights are a separate document that "amends" the constitution to protect us FROM the constitution's central government. The irony was many of the people who wrote the constitution, like Hamilton, actually said the Bill of Rights (the 10 amendments) was un-necessary, because he said the federal government would never overstep it's authority.
Basically it was written by a bunch of power hungry elites behind closed doors just as CISPA was today. Some things never change.
And we thought a tea tax was bad.
Now we have genital groping at airports. What idiocy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
-Oz
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Also- Mike didn't write the post.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Response to: Chris ODonnell on Apr 26th, 2012 @ 3:58pm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Evading The 4th Amendment
It's also that CISPA lets the Feds and maybe other police demand information from your ISP on extremely flexible grounds, just as wiretaps let them get your information from phone companies, so they can collect all your Internet traffic just because they feel like going fishing, even if they don't end up accusing you of a crime, as long as they might be able to link it to protecting children from interference with their rights to license protected Disney intellectual property, etc.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Makes you wonder
Seems kind of shady that Iran is threatening our cyber security and the same day this thing passes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Makes you wonder
"There should be little doubt that a country that kills innocent people around the world, guns down its own people, and threatens Israel would not hesitate to carry out a cyber-attack against the U.S.," said counterterrorism and intelligence subcommittee chairman Patrick Meehan
Perhaps the only doubt should be that as Iran is the only country that seems to be suffering under a deluge of cyber attacks, is the doubt about precisely what it is that Meehan is smoking?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Makes you wonder
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Makes you wonder
Another form of WMD's and aluminum tubes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
familiar...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wow, a Canadian wrapping himself in the American flag. How cute. Why not save your self-righteous bullshit for matters in your own fucked up country?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Prolly believes this song, too.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZuPqN498G_w
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
options?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The Canadian Race
What are the distinct genetic markers that identify Canadians as a genetically divergent population?
;-) ('just playing along with the fun)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
This bill does not bode well for Canada. It will be another one we have to try and defend against one day like we are still doing with bill C-11.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I hope to god im wrong, but.......???
remember, our best offense is communication, where else can you have whisperings of a protest in one part of the world, and have those same whisperings reapeted within mintutes in the other side of the world?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Yeah, that's what I thought, dip-stick.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
its that republicans are a virus.
note: this does not apply to republicans with commen sense.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
'democracy' at least of the representative sort, hardly seems to be all it's cracked up to be (whatever the hell that means) either... so i don't think democrats are really any better.
personally, i'm quite happy being a monarchist :P
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Yes, you're part of North America but you are not part of the United States of America. You're part of the Great White North, eh. So, hail to the queen because you follow England's politics. You should be more interested in what they're up to instead of us.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:O.M.Gawd!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Wait, so you disagree with the article, and think CISPA is a good thing? Really? Care to explain?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Response to: Anonymous Coward on Apr 26th, 2012 @ 4:24pm
So my question is, do u not want help from fellow human biengs to stop sucha notrosious bill that will essentailly limit every action done by everyone on the world wide web?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Response to: Anonymous Coward on Apr 26th, 2012 @ 4:24pm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Response to: Anonymous Coward on Apr 26th, 2012 @ 4:24pm
Ah, how I enjoy my unmetered bandwidth. Oh, wait... Canada doesn't get that. :)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'll take a freedom loving Canadian over a freedom hating American any day...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's finally time
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It's finally time
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: It's finally time
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: It's finally time
other governments you need to also exclude 'scammers and conartists' before it holds, but not much else.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: It's finally time
I am certainly motivated, after reading recent articles on NSA's Bluffdale, Utah facility which included the fact that Stellar Wind uses at least 10 to 20 intercept points in our telecom infrastructure. This certainly has undercut and continues to undercut the 4th amendment I am motivated because CISPA will legitimize, unless it is found contrary to the 4th amendment, arbitrary surveillance leading to a surveillance state. A surveillance state, for sure, provides the tools to protect from terrorism, cybercrime, etc. but at the same time provides the infrastructure for a totalitarian state. I am now motivated and will be sending in my resume tonight to work full time on the TOR project as I saw this week they have a software opening.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: It's finally time
As always, it has a start point, and an end point. The nodes in a given country would be subject to that country's laws.
Good look. TOR is just another way for those who want to break the laws to try to help each other do it. Not very cool, really.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: It's finally time
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: It's finally time
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: It's finally time
A middle node lets people access hidden services provided anonymously.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: It's finally time
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: It's finally time
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It's finally time
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It's finally time
But since it was designed by the U.S. Naval Research Laboratory it's not exactly a viable method to circumvent US spying.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It's finally time
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Adding reasons like 'protecting children' for why the government can gather lots of data with no warrant isn't about protecting the kids, it's about claiming Obama and democrats are against protecting our kids.
This bill is sadly looking more and more like the PATRIOT act to me. An unnecessary bill that violates Americans rights to privacy pushed through in the name of protecting America from someone evil.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
You may have yelled down SOPA, but you didn't get rid of reality. This bill (and others to come) will have the same effects, will do the same things, and will change the way you do things online in very basic ways.
Because there is no "taking away youtube videos" angle to play on this one, there is little real outrage out there. Yes, Mike and a few of his friends are getting pissy, but the reality is that this law (or one similar to it) is pretty much a given considering the lawlessness of the online world.
I think of this (and SOPA for that matter) as an attempt o go out and get rid of all the silly legal blinds and foxholes that have blocked successful prosecution online. Further, it does it in a very eloquent way, by completely bypassing the 4th amendment due to third party involvement.
It's a very swift and very direct kick in the balls to all the people who thought they could hide by doing things "on the internet" instead of in person. Sorry, the time bell jsut rang, last call at the ok corral.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
You've got some serious issues.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
God Bless America, or else.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Why do you hate freedom?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I'm STILL not convinced it's better than an updated feudal system... (please note: serfdom and feudalism are NOT the same thing.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Wow, that says it all. By the way, even Mike Masnick- the creator of Techdirt is against this bill.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
btw all conversations in all homes with children under 18 will now be listened to via your computers microphones by nsa to insure that all children are safe.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Yes.
Can the Internet survive a bunch of self-serving politicians?
Doubtful.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Larry's, that is, not AC's. not even if you squint and look at it sideways.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"Protection of Children"
No one really wants to spend money trying to explain why that's not true, and with a promised veto from the White House, the Dem leadership probably did a quick count, wrangled enough members into voting no on the final bill to make sure that it would be short of the 2/3rds necessary for an override, and released everyone to vote how they liked (for their own protection) on the amendment, and the folks in the vulnerable seat to vote for the final bill.
Now it gets kicked over to the Senate, which is slightly less vulnerable to this sort of election blackmail. If it doesn't die there, it gets vetoed, and not overridden.
Sound and fury, signifying nothing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "Protection of Children"
I honestly think that anyone coming out against porn will lose in a close race. It won't be covered on the news. It won't be on polls because people won't want to admit to it.
However... there is obviously a massive demand for porn in the United States. If there wasn't, there wouldn't be so much porn directed at us. I think it would be one of those "silent majority" losses that no one wants to admit to and few people see coming.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: "Protection of Children"
I think the solution for this is for all American parents to take their (Sugar pre-loaded) children to the Whitehouse (or some Govt facility), wearing "My parents can't raise me, so the Govt will" T-Shirts, and leave them at the security office/reception/loading dock.
On the plus side, the parents can have a child-free day, while the kids run amok!!
:D
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
To paraphrase Ross Perot ...
I don't hear much talk in these pages about the NDAA that Obama already signed which effectively repealed the Habeas Corpus Act. (Read The NDAA: a clear and present danger to American liberty in The Guardian where it says The US is sleepwalking into becoming a police state, where, like a pre-Magna Carta monarch, the president can lock up anyone)
Now CISPA is pushed through is another nail in our coffin.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: To paraphrase Ross Perot ...
Indeed. It's time to STOP voting, folks. Seriously.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bad, but not the worst
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Bad, but not the worst
I fully expect the douchebags of Anonymous to step in shit by taking down Congressional websites and the like making passage even easier.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Bad, but not the worst
That's also the point. Most of Congress still think it's cute to "not understand" the net when they've had over 20 years to figure out it's not cute anymore. They are not the ones writting these bills. Private corporations are. That's a gimme for abuse right from the gate.
Back in 2003 some wireless providers were caught editing and not forwarding texts that were critical of going to war. Now that's legal. How can the US support or criticize other governments that do that and turn around to impliment the same?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Bad, but not the worst
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Bad, but not the worst
The genius of the constitution is that it can be changed, however, depending on what changes the government allows, this could also be it's biggest flaw.
The constitution, in it's current state, allows the supreme court to stop a bill in its tracks if deemed unconstitutional. And according to the bill or rights, Mainly the 4th amendment, CISPA is unconstitutional. And even if it wasn't, America does not own the internet, and therefore has no right, whatsoever, to regulate it.
You know your country is falling apart, when the elected officials are dumber than it's overall population...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Protect the Children.
While they seem to think the people are the problem, I think the bigger threat is bills being passed or amended that allow Corporations to do things that could have adverse effects on children.
I think it is high time we remind them they are still just regular citizens and it is their duty to support this new overreaching legislation. I can think of nothing better coming out of it than to know who is offering who money to vote certain ways, who is making investments with insider information, who is voting to secure a position after they leave office.
I am think of no nobler purpose for them in office than to become 100% transparent in everything they do, say, and think. Just think of all the crime we could prevent, and how much more secure we would be when these leaders know every thought they have is immediately viewable by average people.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Protect the Children.
but it's a good thing to hope for :]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Protect the Children.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Protect the Children.
And that's why the US wants Assange (Wikileaks) so badly.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Governmental access
Plan of action:
1) All cell phones will transmit all communications, text messages, location data, and randomly send pictures and video to ensure you are safe from terrorist.
2) All computers will automatically route information to government systems first. This ensures that malware is not on your system. Just like EA did with Battlefield 3
3) Any device with a camera or audio will transmit data to the government without the user having to give consent or permission. This reduces the time individuals need to read stuff.
4) The government is also authorized to add/remove files from any of your electronic devices at will. Doing this while you sleep ensures that your valuable time will not be wasted.
* We promise to protect you from all the evils that you are not aware of. And will try really hard to protect everything about your personal life. And will not use this information to deny you medical coverage, insurance, or career employment. We will also try hard not to use this information for blackmail. We have submitted request to everyone on the planet to not hack our almost strong security system (70% of the time it works all the time) and gain complete access to everything about you and the millions of others in this country. We may use this information to assist in fabricating evidence to ensure the DJAZ.com, TVShack and MegaUpload individuals go to prison for ever and ever though they did nothing wrong. We also humbly request that foreign nations do not bring democracy to the USA as the USA had with other countries such as Iraq, and Afghanistan. Our spying on everything you do is much more high tech, so it cannot be wrong.
Capt ICE Enforcer
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Governmental access
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Feeding the new NSA Utah Datacenter
NSA Boss: We need to feed the new Utah datacenter. I want you to install a wiretap for all internet traffic through ISP X.
NSA Lackey: National Security Letter?
NSA Boss: No, there's political heat on us because some loose-lipped Senators mentioned the secret interpretation of the Patriot Act. Use CISPA instead. It's easier anyway.
NSA Lackey: Okay. Will do. Heil USA!
--
NSA Lackey: Hey, you blueshirt! I need a word with you...
Homeland Security Guy: You again?! What do you want this time?
NSA Lackey: We have info about a cyberthreat involving ISP X. Contact them and let them know we need a wiretap installed on all their internet traffic.
Homeland Security Guy: And what are you gonna do with all that traffic?
NSA Lackey: None of your business! Just git r done like a good little cable guy, would ya'?
--
Homeland Security Guy: Hi.
ISP X CEO: Hello. How can I help you today?
Homeland Security Guy: We need to have some of our friends in black come and install a wiretap on all your internet traffic.
ISP X CEO: Huh? What about all the trouble AT&T got into with their San Fran datacenter? What about wiretap law? I think I'll have to call my attorney first...
Homeland Security Guy: No, you don't need to do that. It's because of a "cyberthreat". Did you hear that magic word I uttered. Let me say it again: "CYBERTHREAT". You are immune from any civil or criminal liability for cooperating.
ISP X CEO: Oh. I see. But this will take some labor on our end. It's going to be expensive.
Homeland Security Guy: We'll reimburse you at a very healthy rate.
ISP X CEO: Oh, so we can make some money off of this too?
Homeland Security Guy: You betcha! Do you agree to voluntarily cooperate then?
ISP X CEO: Do we have a choice?
Homeland Security Guy: Work with us, you get money and no liability. Refuse and you not only lose the money, but you might get the liability, and your company just might become a "cyberthreat" itself.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Feeding the new NSA Utah Datacenter
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Feeding the new NSA Utah Datacenter
I am absolutely certain that is where the Ministry of Love will be located.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
CISPA discourages more arab springs
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: CISPA discourages more arab springs
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The rollcall vote as recorded.
It's time to tell the people that voted for it that they wont be re-elected.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The rollcall vote as recorded.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The rollcall vote as recorded.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The rollcall vote as recorded.
but the USA is an epic example of the fail that is the two party system... fairly substantial evidence that the entire point in political parties is to undermine the democratic functions of the system. proportional representation partially counter acts this, but has it's own issues.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The rollcall vote as recorded.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The rollcall vote as recorded.
"the reality is that this law (or one similar to it) is pretty much a given considering the lawlessness of the online world."
Just not for the reason you say.
The reality is that this law, or one similar to it, is pretty much a given because politicians/lobbyists don't quit. They never quit. If one thing is struct down they'll rewrite it in a different language and try again.
I respect Ron Paul's oldness on not voting about that intertubes webinet thing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The rollcall vote as recorded.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The rollcall vote as recorded.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Haha.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"2. Conyers (Ml): Would strike the exemption from criminal liability, strike the civil liability exemption for decisions made based upon cyber threat information identified, obtained, or shared under the bill, and ensure that those who negligently cause injury through the use of cyber security systems or the sharing of information are not exempt from potential civil liability."
1. How far does this actually help?
2. And what exactly does "negligently cause injury" actually mean?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The votes
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2012/roll192.xml
I'm proud to say my Republican rep was one of the few who voted NO on this bill... amazing. I'm glad I sent him a letter.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The votes
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
hmm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Will There Be A "Secret Interpretation" Too?
Personally, I think the vagueness of the terms in the Act is intentional, best to facilitate a secret interpretation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Even more astonishingly, it passed with a near-unanimous vote
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Perhaps this is not quite clear, but the "near-unanimous" part is about the amendment that was voted on before the bill - and that was indeed a near-unanimous vote (i forget the count now but it was around 400 in favour)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Just told my congress critter
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Just told my congress critter
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Just told my congress critter
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Alpha Centauri
-- Commissioner Pravin Lal, "U.N. Declaration of Rights"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iY57ErBkFFE
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Alpha Centauri
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
a) The powers that be (and their software) count the votes, not you.
b) More importantly:
1) Company A writes law that benefits them.
2) Company A pays congresscritter to vote for law.
3) You write congresscritter a letter opposing the law.
4) Congresscritters' staff member gives him a summary: "A bunch of people sent letters opposing this law." Congresscritter shrugs, as this is not relevant to him.
5) Congresscritter votes the way company A told him to.
6) Congresscritter is now rich and happy. His family is going to have a bigger house. His children will go to fancy colleges.
7) You cast your vote against the congresscritter next time you're asked.
7a) Computer ignores your vote?
7b) Computer counts your vote?
Doesn't matter, because:
8) Congresscritter now gets a cushy job at Company A. He is further secured in the top 1% of the population.
Explain to me why congresscritter will give a damn about your letter, phone call or vote?
People need to learn to do a lot more than vote. Recognize when a system is deliberately oppressing you. Don't be a sucker by following the rules set up by the same oppressor.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Civil-disobedience won't work any better if the Politician's are beyond the reach of the vote, though it is quite useful while they can be influenced. Granted, in this case, route-around is the best you can do.
Riots and revolution, well, I'd like to avoid the bloodshed if at all possible.
Another tactic we can try: contact other countries diplomats. You know, countries that still have an ounce of morals but fear the US not liking them. Send them petitions, from the American public, that they can throw in our diplomats faces. Get other countries to pressure the US for a change.
A third tactic: Boycott any company that doesn't explicitly forfeit the immunity granted by CISPA in their privacy policy (yes, I know, hardest of the three).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Response to: Pay attention on Apr 26th, 2012 @ 6:56pm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Response to: Pay attention on Apr 26th, 2012 @ 6:56pm
Ok, I'm ready when u guys r.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
pedos the new jews
> 3) protection of individuals from the danger
> of death or physical injury; 4) protection of
> minors from physical or psychological harm;
Note the lack of reference to any criminal activity, and the radical lowering of the bar to "psychological harm."
This law will enable anybody at any computer network decide to hand over information voluntarily on the activity of a so-called pedophile, whether that activity is illegal or not. It is an attack on political speech, on the right to assembly.
Pedophiles had better flee the country. There is no time left. Reason will not prevail.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
umm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This STILL doesn't violate the 4th amendment
Under the third party doctrine, any information exposed to third parties is not subject to 4th amendment protection. Basically, the Supreme Court held that the government did not need a warrant to obtain the phone numbers people dialed, because they had to reveal the phone number to the phone company.
That has evolved into, the 4th amendment does not protect any information you put online (including email), because you expose it to your ISP or other service providers.
Kagan indicated she'd be willing to scrap that rule in her recent concurrence in the GPS tracking case, however, it hasn't happened yet. Until it does, this bill is entirely constitutional...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: This STILL doesn't violate the 4th amendment
Obtaining the number dialed is a far cry from obtaining a sound recording of your call, which does require a warrant. Similarly, all data below that IP header has not been released to the ISP. The government can already obtain IP addresses (though private entities must go through the courts). The information shared under CISPA is far, far broader.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: This STILL doesn't violate the 4th amendment
Hmmm. So maybe this is the reason Congress wants to destroy snail mail?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Incompetent net criminals that can't cover their tracks deserve to suffer greatly under this just for being typical sleaze I'd keep my children fro.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I will talk to them under three conditions:
a) I called them
b) They have a warrant
c) I have a judge signed and lawyer approved paper declaring my immunity in all matters discussed sitting on the table in front of me
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Showa
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This doesn't end the 4th Amendment
No one can say the 4th Amendment doesn't apply online. If this passes the Senate and is signed into law as is then it will surely be challenged in the courts and should be overturned and blatantly unconstitutional.
That said this is completely ridiculous and yet another sign that our govt doesn't work for us at all. Anyone who still believes that is delusional.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: This doesn't end the 4th Amendment
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: This doesn't end the 4th Amendment
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Good write up on one consequences of all these actions
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Now some of you are thinking unlikely, others will argue the fact purely because they can't stand an opposing opinion to their own, which I encourage to be honest, one day im sure they'll be fighting for a noble cause, but in my eyes, that's the kind of world that i see SNEAKING upon us all
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
248 congress droids
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Next Poll date is the end of July!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Glory to freedom
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Glory to freedom
We do need to protest this, but we should do so nonviolently. At least, while thats still legal/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Americans have become the monster
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Americans have become the monster
I'd rather stay and fight. I'm not giving this country up to a bunch of cowards and marxist die-hards.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Worst possible CISPA, best possible invitation for CISPA takedown
They think three hundred million Americans can be served whatever rancid, even toxic, borsht comes off the legislative menu without consequenses: It's PIPA one week; SOPA the next; ACTA, for breakfast and lunch the following month; and, for supper a year later, you too can look forward to washing down the past years gastronomic nightmare from our American Congress with the delightfully fecal aroma of CISPA in the air.
In a sense, it's good that with this latest passed version of CISPA, these Legislators have come out of the closet and told us more clearly than ever EXACTLY what the THINK.
More of the sleeping American Democracy Should hear and begin to REALLY understand their message. Only then will the REAL power behind three hundred million voices be heard. Perhaps then the legislatures will be cleaned out from floor to ceiling in both houses; down to the skanky fleas and ticks and lice the live their; washed down in every nook and crany with disinfectant; and a new generation of leaders invited in who have been born again to the REAL meaning of the American Constitution.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Worst possible CISPA, best possible invitation for CISPA takedown
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
CISPA is great ....
You never cared about the Others, now you are the Others, too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: CISPA is great ....but
And with the world imitating the U.S., I will bet $10 this type of law will b passed elsewhere, the world will still get the shorter end of the stick.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: CISPA is great ....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Now, Now
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Well Shit
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Question
I usually have kneejerk reactions of opposition to this stuff, but I'm starting to look more critically at things. Trying not to blindly believe whatever someone says on a status update.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Explain, please?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Explain, please?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
GUN
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
List of who voted for CISPA
Check to see if your congressman voted for CISPA (HR3523). If they did, vote against them in the coming elections. Also, look up other parts of their record, and use that information to help convince others to vote against them. Examples include NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act of 2012), the cosponsors of PCIPA (HR 1981): http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d112:HR01981:@@@P , those who voted for HR 347 http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d112:h.r.00347: , and the cosponsors of the Stop Online Piracy Act (HR 3261): http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d112:h.r.03261:
The congressional and Presidential Primary in Texas is May 29th. Michael McCaul [R-TX 10th District] voted for CISPA. Vote against him in the primary!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Instead of the republicans being able to hold it up as them 'doing something to protect the internet, and children, and puppies', all the while painting Obama as a terrorist for trying to shut it down(and thereby weaken the internet of course), at that point the democrats would have a pretty easy time of painting Obama as a champion for the internet(whether or not it's true), which would be a massive boost to his reputation for the election.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I would say you might want to control your laughter until the whole thing plays out. There isn't anywhere near the backlash on this one compared to SOPA.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
I wouldn't count the backlash out quite yet though, once this little tid-bit gains enough steam online and really starts getting noticed, I imagine it'll be enough to make the SOPA blowup look mild in comparison.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Just keep running in circles of denial
Yet still everyone runs around talking, talking, talking.
Hey! The Criminal Elite Ziombies are breaking down the last barriers. Don't you see it?
It's shotguns or nothing, now. The only way to defeat zombies is to blow their heads off. Talking DOES NOT WORK.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
REBEL TODAY LEAD TOMORROWS
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No ones gonna stop me from d
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Well I didn't vote for this!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Tor
This is a claim often made, but it isn't true. The Tor Project is not a part of the US government, and Tor is opensource. If there had been any backdoor, it would surely have been discovered.
And no Tor is not just for "criminals" with something to hide. Law enforcement, political dissidents and whistleblowers even in civilized nations use Tor.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So here's a suggestion
They want to know, so tell them, see how long they still want to know for...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: So here's a suggestion
So like everytime I post images on /a/, /b/ and /h/, everytime I send emails, everytime I actually do something on the net? Like that?
I'm game!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Full coverage on thier website. It's actually pretty insightful.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What do you expect?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
that's it, I am outta here
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Fools
F this country. We have a~holes making incedibly stupid laws.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Fools
I concur. (I just had to chime in on that one!) >:-D
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
oh come the f on!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
They just proved that they'll do anything... event bend their own constitutions for their own needs...
I feel sorry for the Americans who will suffer from this action...
Their rights to privacy in their own computers just got vaporized....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
About tor...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Guess it's time we secure our shit, hunker down for the CISPA winter, and wait till hollywood collapses.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Motherfuckers
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2012/roll192.xml
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yeah, right
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Perhaps we should start writing our comments and emails in Pig Latin. Maybe if a lot of people do it, it would give the snoops a big huh? moment when they see it all over the place.
It'say imetay orfay usay otay outeray astpay esethay illsbay, incesay echtay isay alwaysay asterfay anthay awlay. Ethay etnay illway eesay isthay illbay asay amageday anday outeray arounday itay. Imetay orfay anotheray etnay ackoutblay! Amenay!
Anday obbay isay egacylay ediamay illshay., asay eway allay owknay.
And that's just normal Pig Latin. We could always come up variations, too, to keep them guessing and make the words less obvious.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'm gonna dumb this down....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
There is a legal remedy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What can you say
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
When a law is in the making, every person it applies to should have the right to vote on it (and of course that vote has to be taken into account significantly). That's what freedom and democracy are.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Amazing..
Himmler and Beria would really be proud of the House of Representatives.
The SCOTUS will definitely approve it - there will be some nice fat gifts involved. Wonder how much you have to pay to get a favorable decision from SCOTUS? Cash? Drugs? Hookers? Offshore real estate? Stock?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Baloney...
If one person does something, they ban it across the board.
If you hit your head, the world has to wear hard hats from now on. Drop something on your foot? Steel toed boots for everyone.
Also...
Three of the biggest catch phrases of the year:
It's to "Protect The Children". If you are against the bill, you are against the children and you are against America, which makes you a terrorist.
It's "for the troops." If you are against the bill, you are against our troops and you are against America, which makes you a terrorist.
It's "for your protection". WOW! I didn't know that after 53 years I wasn't capable of protecting myself! But I need the government to protect me from becoming a terrorist!
Suddenly, everyone is a criminal, a terrorist and a child molester. When did this happen?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Baloney...
"I'll have the Charred Ostrich with deep potato shoots and a glass of the methane water."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
cispa bill
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: cispa bill
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
cispa bill
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
fascists
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Express your dissatisfaction
http://mycountrymyass.com
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Also
Almost everything you do is stored in a database somewhere by somebody. This gives the US Govt the ability to access all of that information *WITHOUT A WARRANT*. This is a massive dismantling of privacy in so many cases that do not involve your presence or activities online. As a society, we use our digital computing technology to aid in almost everything, and because of that, almost every action you take IN THE REAL WORLD will be visible to the government at any time for any reason if this bill passes.
They will know:
1. What you eat when you pay for dinner with your credit card.
2. Where you are every time you make a non-cash transaction (or worse, even then with surveillance or any kind of "rewards" card you use)
3. Every person you've ever called, for how long
4. Every transaction you've ever made on your credit card
5. What kind of lingerie, underwear, or other personal items you purchase.
6. etc etc etc
Fantastically useful information for a "cyber security" bill, am I right? "Privacy" is something that will no longer exist in this country if this bill isn't crushed in the senate. This is the worst bill I have ever seen proposed. It makes SOPA/PIPA look like a fucking joke.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
RE:
So what??
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: RE:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: RE:
I guess you've never had someone elses garbage reported under your name. It is amazing how many organizations think that if you are John Smith, and somewhere somebody named John Smith broke a law it is your problem, and you should be in jail until it gets sorted out!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
mad
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
If that is all we can do, urge, that is actually funny! Get it? I urge all of you.. do something about this bad, bad bill?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
a 17 year olds view
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
CISPA
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: CISPA
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This sh*t is useless
A better metaphor is a drowning person, thrashing to stay afloat, but alas, they cant swim and will soon be dead.
People will simply start to use encryption/stenography to do their daily tasks, like downloading terabytes "intellectual property" absolutely 100% free as always. This in fact, will ACCELERATE, and NOT be mitigated.. Not one bit, regardless of these demonic bills that get passed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: This sh*t is useless
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: This sh*t is useless
Try as they might, then cannot EVER stop us now, it's far too late for that. They will either have to RADICALLY change their business model, or be face obsolescence. Either way, their profits will diminish steadily as they have been for the last decade.
The only THIEVES here are the corporations and anyone in their right mind (and who is not a shill for the gov/corp of course) knows that fact. And like I said even if ALL encryption were banned/blocked, then STENOGRAPHIC methods would take over as the next step and basically would be unstoppable. Even if the U.S. (where all the top nameservers are located) BLEW UP AND MELTED INTO THE OCEAN, the Internet would STILL survive as it was BUILT to do just that.
It's over for them. Short of turning the internet into a digital NAZI GERMANY, "FREE STUFF" will continue INDEFINITELY. The internet wasn't built to be taken "in hand", to impose that kind of NAZI status on the global internet is pure insanity.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This is the answer
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Epicness
They are itching to kill off the Net as much as possible.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
THE WORLD OF CYBER MAKE BELIEVE - TO SUPPORT U.S. GOV. CONTROL
What if I use an encrypted email service?
What if a posts some related FOIA logs requests on a doc website?
What if I post my political views on Youtube?
Does this make me a candidate for any website to get the Green Light and send all my private E*TRADE, emails, facebook accounts to strangers to enter in an database (like N-DEx network) for thousands of more strangers to have access to, blackmail me with, commit fraud, identity theft, get privileges to issue an un-related court summons and so on, from the same database you are in-competent to say cannot be safeguard from cyber-attacks, whatever the hell that means?
You have not even given the american people one ACTUAL ATTACK SITUATION or any threat you are claiming. Is there a REAL attack event OR NOT (?) to whatever the hell your broad CISPA bill means, other than deem anybody a threat for their private data to be made open? Are you saying Y2K was hacked to blow-up some generators? Are you saying the Aztec calendar is ready to expire could cause a cyber-attack.
Put some real FACT in your big mouth, instead of the B.S. CYBER HOCUS POCUS coming out of it. Your bill CISPA violates the BILL OF RIGHTS! Did you go to school? People DIED for the BILL OF RIGHTS for all of us to have in the WAR OF INDEPENDENCE. Then you say “people cannot just say whatever they what on the internet”? Oh, I get it, you don't like "freedom of speech" stopping government from being corrupt and for the corporate business, so you can't get your BIG pay-off!
I can only wish you can get you education when you’re sleeping and having a night mirror, fighting that war of independence in the middle of a battlefield, with a knife in your chest, to only wake up to meet the very people you KILLED with the CISPA bill in your hand.
I put it to you this way again Mr. Rogers Show, if this bill passes, I can guarantee you will not need to worry about CYBER THREATS in your WORLD OF MAKE BELIEVE, because you will have millions of Americans shouting "MURRDERER" the your WORLD OF REALITY and for the rest of your life, as long as I’m around.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
land of the ???
So it's "Bye bye Miss American Pie ...the day that freedom died"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
CISPA
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: CISPA
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
CISPA
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1043551540#!/judgecarter
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Spread The Word
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The US Government doesn't have the right to take away the Internet or Internet privacy OR freedom of the people. I'm Canadian and I knew right from the start when I first heard about CISPA is that it would be an international bill and become huge trouble and seeing this just proves how right I am on that thought.
No law has the right for anyone to arrest someone just because they are against this bill. No law has the right for anyone to arrest someone just because they downloaded music or searched up something for a school project. CISPA does not have the right for us to get arrested just because we own and/or use a computer or share art, music, pictures or videos.
I'm saying this because of what I believe and think of this and no one, not even the US Government is going to make me think otherwise. The Internet is a tool for all of us, not for some greedy, corrupted assholes we call a US Government to spy on us just because they want the power to do that and I'm willing to physically fight for that belief if it really has to come down to it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Nothing really changed...
Seriously, whenever I send anything over the internet, I assume that it is traced and read by "the enemy", whoever that may be - mostly governments.
So if it is sensitive information, I encrypt it and if it is really, really sensitive, I wrap it in a steganography layer.
One can add numerous other protections. The point is:
- Assumption #1: the enemy is always trying to get any information that might be useful to them or harmful to you
- Assumption #2: government is always the worst enemy
- Assumption #3: there are plenty of other dangers - Mafia, Muslim terrorists, idiots who just try to wreck havoc...
So do not post what is sensitive or private information. And if you do, protect it!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
They don't want you to know about this
You know what? I think they don't want anyone to know how fucked up this is, and how incredibly invasive this bill is-because if they really wanted you to know, you'd have the document available immediately without the crap.
Don't trust the government ever to do anything right or proper. They can't, don't and won't, especially when you consider that most of them can't even read their own emails without a "expert" to show them how to do it.
Yes, we need more security-from our own government.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
honesty willl get you arrested now.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
For the children, bitches!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Oh, government
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
zgddxdfhxcxhxucgxg
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
brbcounterstrike
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
hmm, so they CAN move quickly
W T F!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
http://baza.vn.ua
I'm proud to say my Republican rep was one of the few who voted NO on this bill... amazing. I'm glad I sent him a letter.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]