Slashdot Mirror
Patriot Act Dampening Cloud Computing?
Julie188 writes "Governments are turning the Internet into a cyberspace reflection of real-world geographic conflicts. One report says that the Canadian government is forbidding its IT organizations to use services that store or host the government's data outside their sovereign territory. They especially cannot use services where the data is stored in the United States because of fears over the Patriot Act. What kinds of jurisdiction issues might people face — think Google cooperating with the Chinese government — as cloud computing becomes the norm and your data is stored in 'offshore parts' of the cloud?"
The Patriot Act hurts the US IT industry.
Why should a foreign investor risk it to bring his IP to the US with the threat hanging over his head that suddenly it's declared illegal to export it, should he discover something the US deems "useful for terrorism" (read: something we'd rather have in the hands of US companies than others)?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Actually, it's supposed to work that way under the US Constitution.
The Legislative branch makes the law. Second, the Executive branch executes the law. Last, the Judicial branch interprets the law. Each branch has an effect on the other.
Legislative Branch
Executive Branch
Judicial Branch
These checks are inefficient. And this inefficiency is borne out when one political party in the US system captures all three of the branches (as it has) and then, for the purpose of extending the power of that party, fails to exercise restraint and to provide a check on the other branches.
What I have noted is that the only branch that has actually decided to act in a manner consistent with Constitutional checks and balances is the Supreme Court. To the extent the Legislative Branch (or branches of the various States) have worked to mandate sentencing or require judges to act without their power to interpret, the Supreme Court has ruled these requirements as nothing more than guidelines. And this has gone on despite a rather radical shift in the Supreme Court to the political right. And I would agree with them, even though my own political direction differs strongly from many of their recent decisions and statements.
The Orwellian-named "USA Patriot Act" was a bill that was utterly altered -- in its entirety -- in the middle of the night by Bush's Attorney General, John Ashcroft within a committee that was also completely asleep at the switch. This is part of the rules of Congress, where a committee will take in a b
Gods don't kill people, people with gods kill people.
Not everyone agrees that a free market is what's best for society. There are always going to be political lobbyists, politicians and voting citizens who opt for more regulation. In fact, I'm personally surprised by how many of my peers seem to favour more communist-like systems.
The other day a friend of mine was watching a Youtube video of a speech given by one of the founding members of the Canadian Action Party and he, not being canadian, asked me who this guy was. I explained to him what the CAP was all about. Said that while I agree with their Canadian Nationalist views they feel that globalization is a big conspiracy by the corporations in order to rule the world and make everyone their slaves. His response was "well isn't that already true ?"
It seems that a large portion of the public feels that corporations have far too much power and that free market has failed. They want government to further regulate the markets because they would rather have the government control their lives than corporations (they refuse to see that the public gives the corporations their power just as we give the government it's power).
Since I've failed to remain neutral I might as well just add that I am a pro-free-market libertarian and I think it will take a couple of wars before we can claim that the corporations enslave people. I do agree, however, that they get away with too much, but not because of a lack of regulation. It's because money buys justice and politicians. THAT is what that needs to be fixed. Yet many people don't look that deep into it. I can say with assertion that most people that I know in person certainly don't. They see that money = corporations = free market = evil and thus want more regulation.
Oh and it doesn't help matters when every single case of deregulation has resulted in short term economic upheaval while things balance out. Forget about selling long term advantages if it's going to cost people jobs and higher prices in the short term.
May I sum it up?
The time of enlightenment brought us the separation of church and state. What we need is a second time of enlightenment, separating enterprises and state.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.