Slashdot Mirror
White House Pressuring Registrars To Block Sites
An anonymous reader writes "While the Senate is still debating a bill that would force registrars and ISPs to block access to sites deemed 'infringing,' it appears that the White House's IP Czar is already holding meetings with ISPs, registrars and payment processors to start voluntarily blocking access to sites it doesn't like. Initially, they're focused on online pharmacies, but does anyone think it will only be limited to such sites? ICANN apparently has refused to attend the meetings, pointing out that they're 'inappropriate.' Doesn't it seem wrong for the US government to be pushing private companies to censor the Internet without due process?"
huh.
in my experience... not so much.
In fact, the guy they are busting in colorado was shipping real drugs.
There are plenty of scam sites, but once you get a site that gives you the real thing, you stayed with it.
Cost?
36 Viagra.. 25mg
$360 with a prescription legally...
Go to doctor every 3 months.
33 Viagra.. 100mg (so 132 uses when pill-cut to 25mg)
$100 - go to doctor once every six months.
Thyroid Medicine?
$105 with prescription & insurance
$180 with prescription & no insurance
$50 online.
Dirty secret?
Same medicine legally in Medicine? $20
Same medicine legally in India (by the same damn manufacturer)? $2.00
You can tell pretty quickly if viagra, thyroid medicine, or blood pressure medicine are fake.. you know, in 2 or 3 days your BP shoots back up to 175/100. You can tell pretty quickly if your thyroid medicine is fake, you get really tired and your hair starts falling out. And of course, you can tell within 30 minutes if your viagra/cealis, etc are not real.
---
Now some you can't- cholesterol medicine (Lipitor) for example. Your blood would change in a couple weeks but you'd have to take a test (available for $10 at Walgreens).
Fact is we are GROSSLY overcharged for pills in the U.S. And the government is doin everything it can not to stop bad pills but to stop good pills.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
I've been voting for non-democrap/republishit candidates since the patriot act, which violates the constitution.
If republican's are for a smaller government, why did the federal gov balloon during their era.
If Democraps are for a socialist government, why do the give in to every corporate request that they make?
Why are people so clueless that they can't figure out what these a$$holes are up to?
I take no responsibility for what I say. Even though I'm never wrong
Voting for third-party candidates is actually a viable strategy.
The Democrats and Republicans usually craft their campaigns to differ from each other by the minimum possible for there to be a discernible difference. Presidential elections are frequently decided on the basis of a few percentage points.
This means a candidate that has little chance of being elected can actually have a significant influence on the election, if they can attract a few percentage points of votes -- that means one or the other major party candidates will have to adjust their platform to try to draw those voters, or lose the election. Ross Perot (not someone I admire, by the way) had this sort of influence on the Republicans, after he won 8% of the vote in 1996.
If that actually worked the Democrats would have taken a turn to the left after Nader cost them the election in 2000. But they decided to try to win over Bush voters instead of Nader voters.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Write to your state legislature and request preferential voting ballots. The plurality system we have today causes people to vote for one of two candidates that is most likely to win and offends them the least. With preferential voting you can truly vote your conscience without "robbing" your second- or third-ranked candidate of a vote. Some states already have this; see:
http://instantrunoff.com/
http://www.fairvote.org/