Slashdot Mirror
House Panel Approves Bill Forcing ISPs To Log Users
skids writes "Under the guise of fighting child pornography, the House Judiciary Committee approved legislation on Thursday that would require internet service providers to collect and retain records about Internet users' activity. The 19 to 10 vote represents a victory for conservative Republicans, who made data retention their first major technology initiative after last fall's elections. A last-minute rewrite of the bill expands the information that commercial Internet providers are required to store to include customers' names, addresses, phone numbers, credit card numbers, bank account numbers, and temporarily-assigned IP addresses. Per dissenting Rep. John Conyers (D-MI): 'The bill is mislabeled... This is not protecting children from Internet pornography. It's creating a database for everybody in this country for a lot of other purposes.'"
Do I see a pattern?
'The bill is mislabeled... This is not protecting children from Internet pornography. It's creating a database for everybody in this country for a lot of other purposes.'
Conyers hit the nail on the head.
And just wait till the subpoena’s start flying from divorce lawyers
There's a lot of undue hate on Republicans 'round here.
This case? The hate is perfectly justifiable.
No? I thought so...
"The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
Can't see any issues with this. Nope, I've got nothin'.
sig:- (wit >= sarcasm)
I read an article about this earlier today (I think it was on BoingBoing?) and despite trying to follow several govt. web site links to read the actual bill's contents, I wasn't able to view the whole thing anyplace?
If I visit the link the EFF suggests, for example, and click the link claiming to offer the "text of legislation" (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.R.1981:), I get what seems to only be notes about changes made throughout it? Under "Section 4" though, it appears this was put in:
`(h) Retention of Certain Records- A provider of an electronic communication service or remote computing service shall retain for a period of at least 18 months the temporarily assigned network addresses the service assigns to each account, unless that address is transmitted by radio communication (as defined in section 3 of the Communications Act of 1934).'.
That makes it sound like they're simply wanting to collect the IP addresses issued via DHCP of all the customers, not anything else?
What the hell kind of business doesn't keep track of their subscriber's name, address, phone number and billing info?
And furthermore, ISPs already log which IPs they assign to customers. They keep logs for abuse purposes, so they know that at 4:57PM, Subscriber X was given the IP address 172.20.36.173; Webmaster Y said his website came under attack at 5:03PM from IP address 172.20.36.173; and Subscriber X wasn't given a different IP until the next day.
This shit is routine. If you think your ISP isn't already keeping a log of what IP address you have and when, you're delusional.
Great. Now every ISP has to store information that Congress should be focusing on NOT storing.
Wasn't this "new" Congress supposed to be against "unfunded mandates" from D.C.?
Who is going to be checking compliance for this?
Just another government requirement that small businesses have to pay to follow.
This bill will sail through with bipartisan support. Point me to the privacy-invading bill that was unilaterally forced through. The worst and biggest ones were bipartisan, namely the DMCA, which no one would even sign their name to, and the PATRIOT Act, which very few voted against.
I once took an excursion to Reddit, and later HN. Unlimited up/down voting sucks when dealing with a hive-mind.
Are you fucking retarded?
The DOJ wants to collect data, too. And some Republicans like Rep. Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin oppose data retention.
Basically, people need to get off their duffs and agitate to prevent these bills from becoming law. This is so typical of law enforcement, going after the lowest hanging fruit which is the privacy of innocent civilians rather than doing the difficult detective work of hunting down that tiny fraction of criminals.
As for child porn, I don't see how we can possibly prevent its use. It's out there, the internet is huge and uncontrollable, and it's going to continue to be passed around. All we can really do is try to limit its spread and impact on society. There have always been sick individuals and there has always been sexual abuse of minors. We should be focusing on better education and moral training from an early age.
Obviously, just blanket sweeping the usage statistics of every user out there is a huge step toward a totalitarian control over information and that's not acceptable in a free society. China tries to do it in a bumbling, paranoid manner and mainly they're shooting themselves in the foot. We should be better than that.
it's = "it is"; its = possessive. E.g., it's flapping its wings.
this is akin to place a gps on every single person in the States and keep track of where they are going, when, how, etc. I am amazed how civil liberties are constantly being eroded by the "anti big government" party.
in other words, 19 out of 29 of them know how to use TOR
...seems to consist of people who truly believe that whatever you can get away with is kosher. F*** I can't stand them. I can't fathom how a middle class or lower person could even dream of voting for them - all that bullsh** about family values - they couldn't care less, they'll say whatever you want to hear. There are some dems like that as well, Nancy Pelosi (for example) - that b**** is the devil.
Step one to a better USA - abolish the party system entirely. Your only affiliation should be to individual constituents.
Loading...
It would have to pass there too and the Senate is controlled by degenerate Democrats (I kid, I kid). There's still hope.
https://secure.eff.org/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=497
Why this link wouldn't be posted in the summary, I don't know.
And why Slashdot can't automatically turn addresses into links, I'll also never know.
Or is that the one that's really going put the boot on our necks?
Laws in the US resemble an authoritarian police state. The usual thing to do is to go away. Europe is the first and obvious choice (just don't go to London, the place is as full of cameras as 1984 described). Alternatively, go to South America, either Brazil, Chile or Argentina: people are more open and easygoing, if not chaotic :). The culture shock may be greater with Asia. Run while the state still issue passports!
I rarely respond to comments. Also, don't ask for clarifications: a brain and Google are faster, believe me!
It's a scare-the-voters-silly-to-expand-surveillance-powers issue. The Democratic administration won't veto this.
To a Lisp hacker, XML is S-expressions in drag.
I don't surf porn, and I don't do anything illegal online or otherwise, but this is WAY too SS for me. I'll simply quit using the internet. I got along fine before it, I'll get along fine without it.
Where the hell is the tea party? They talk about keeping the government out of our lives, but when it really matters they aren't anywhere to be found.
They can hold the entire country hostage with this ridiculous debt limit kabuki (it's ridiculous because congress already authorised the spending when they passed the bills spending the money earlier this year), they are trying to have their cake and eat it too) but they can't stop one minor bill that directly contradicts their stated ideology? Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
Considering a Democrat president ordered the assassination of a US citizen I'd say the Democrats are just as evil as you think the Republicans are.
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge"
- Charles Darwin
This is clearly an attack on Democrat sleazebags, who use the internet to carry out their peccadillos. Republican sleazebags are smugly confident this won't affect them, since they're still rocking it old-school in airport bathroom stalls. But the next generation of Republican sleazebags will be much more tech-savvy -- and they will rue this day.
A full list of the criminals erm congress critters that voted in favor of the bill. I would even wager this may get snuck into the debt increase bills floating around if they really wanted to be sneaky as one of them has to pass eventually -
Lamar Smith, Howard Coble, Elton Gallegly, Bob Goodlatte, Dan Lungren, Steve Chabot, Randy Forbes, Steve King, Trent Franks, Tim Griffin, Thomas Marino, Trey Gowdy, Dennis Ross, Sandy Adams, Howard Berman, Sheila Jackson Lee, Pedro Pierluisi, Mike Quigley, Ted Deutch
we have 14 replicans and 5 democrats in that list.
you act as if the democrats don't on poewr grabs too. sorry to see that your head is in the sand. but i will agree that the party system needs to be abolished.
Obama's administration hasn't been good at all about protecting freedoms. The only way I seem him threatening a veto is as a bargaining chip.
Pain is merely failure leaving the body
I thought it was Hoover who ordered JFK's demise...?
...Russian cyber crime organizations have signaled a change in market focus. "The ISP now represents the Walmart of data shopping. They have everything we need: names, addresses, phone numbers, credit card numbers, and bank account numbers. Why should we attack anyone else?"
If the senate fails to crush this bill Obama may well veto it. The privacy issue is one item but assigning that kind of expense to ISPs does not seem reasonable.
LOL
Two and a half years and Obama has only vetoed two bills. One was some political game with defunding and the other was a bill regarding forcing federal court recognition of notaries from states different from where the court is. Lowest percentage since Lyndon Johnson.
In other words, the odds every reader of this text will win the lottery is slightly better than our doormat president vetoing this one.
P.S. this is the same kind of "free pass" that works for warrants... the amount of warrant requests that are denied are amazingly small.
It would surprise me if someone hasn't already embedded tor into a botnet.
Dub this the Hacker Empowerment Act of 2011 and see how quickly it goes down. I mean, that's what they're effectively doing. They're telling ISPs to turn themselves into nice juicy targets for hackers.
Once this is in place how long before [insert hacking group of the month] breaks into an ISP and posts this online? The more of this stuff which is collected the more Sonyesque cases we are going to see. The eternal optimist in me says that maybe that will cause a rethink of these types of laws; the pessimist has a quite different opinion...
Requiring them to store names, addresses, credit card and banking info, and even phone numbers????? The ONLY thing they should store in the logs are a user account ID, the user's IP address, and maybe the destination IP address. Names, addresses, and phone numbers should be kept completely separate from the logs, not even stored on the same machine, and preferably not on the same network. Storing CC and banking info should be discouraged, or at the very least require that is be stored separately from the previous 2 categories, that it's not accessible from the network, and that it be encrypted all times when stored.
BTW, keeping that information will not protect a single child, ever! This is complete nonsense.
make imaginary.friends COUNT=100 VISIBLE=false
What Anthony Wiener thinks about this bill? Wasn't he a congressman who was having nefarious internet photo sharing sessions with teenage girls? Maybe the republicans are trying to protect children from liberal politicians!
So, is this what the Republicans meant when they said they believed in 'small government'?
Yeah, that's right, Obama orders the assassination of a Yemeni/US dual citizen who happens a senior Al Qaeda member, that's EXACTLY the same as Republicans holding the country hostage over 'raising the debt ceiling' (which they did every year for that a**hat Bush without question - suddenly it's critical to the future of the nation's economy to be fiscally conservative LOL.) The same as the Republican, sorry NeoCon party using every dirty trick known to man to enact "Tort Reform", to elect/steam-roll State Supreme Court judges around the country. The same Republican party that is vociferously anti-gay and yet several times recently has congressional leaders being outed as paying or participating in luridly gay sex. The same Republican party that eviscerated the EPA, that lied to us to go to war in Iraq, that created this national debt issue, that outed a CIA operative in revenge for her husband speaking the truth, that is anti-regulation in Wall Street, that has no problems with taxes on the poor, or middle class, but demands that tax cuts for the wealthy continue despite tax shortfalls nationally! FFS, I could go on an on.
F***, like I said before, I don't like Democrats either, but at least they just come across as either stupid or bleeding heart. Republicans come across as Machiavellian, greedy, and downright evil.
Abolish the party system entirely. NO Democrats, NO Republicans, NO business contribution, individual contribution caps.
Loading...
I don't mean I like them, but they are just so far out insane crazy whacked-out liberal that they provide entertainment value, like Wasserman Shultz and Jackson Lee.
But there is a copyright enforcement angle. Republican dinosaur Howard Coble is a MAFIAA butt-buddy, and a cosponsor. I'd also be very suprised if the wholly-owned Democratic MAFIAA subsidiary known as Howard Berman didn't vote for it.
Write your applicable representative and give them a piece of your mind about HR 1981.
Funny, I seem to recall calling Nancy Pelosi the f***ing devil...
Loading...
I happen to agree with your first sarcastic sentence. The value of a life is more important than money.
Both Democrats and Republicans voted FOR this.
Both Democrats and Republicans voted AGAINST this.
I don't know why the author decided to attach this to "Evil Republicans are doing this" when both sides are. What shocks me Hank "Guam will tip over and capsize" Johnson voted against this. I'm shocked he wasn't voted out of office.
if (it != oneThing) it = another;
I could see keeping it for a week. 18 months is a different story. And there's no reason for my ISP to store my bank account or credit card numbers.
Obama orders the assassination of a Yemeni/US dual citizen who happens a senior Al Qaeda member
Let me bring it down to the important part for you:
US citizen
There are no circumstances whatsoever in which it is acceptable to wantonly assassinate a citizen of the United States.
Kindly get the fuck out of my country.
The Republicans are out to service the rich and powerful, by making them more of each at the expense of all other Americans.
If you think otherwise you are either stupid, simply ignorant of what is going on or you have an emotional loyalty to the GOP blinding your otherwise good faculties ( i.e. being born into a GOP family ).
It will be really funny once these ISP's get hacked and all the dirty little websites these congressmen have been visiting get posted to the internet. The unintended consequences of there actions will most certainly end up destroying there political careers.
When China engages in spying on its citizens it is Totalitarianism.
When U.S.A engages in spying on its citizens it is Public Safety.
When China engages in spying on its citizens it is Suppressing Freedom Of Expression.
When U.S.A. engages in spying on its citizens it is Protecting Public Morals.
Is there any difference at the bottom line?
Is it time to change our form of government? Back to what it Constitutionally designed?
Is it safe to say things like this on the internet still today?
Will slashdot need a credit-card number from me before it can post it tomorrow?
Will I need to show ID to listen to the satellite-radio musak at Burger King?
Just askin'...
I've said it before. Just put Linus Torvalds in charge and it will sort itself out.
3:1 Republicans to Democrats
Loading...
Of course it is, but unless you think no one ever deserved assassination what is your point? If you believe no one ever deserves assassination then you're what I would refer to as a zealot.
Loading...
There are enough big-government authoritarian Democrats there to pass it too.
Yep, this is what the small-government people want. More regulation and requirements on business so it can continue to innovate. This is government getting out of the way.
I hate the way this group lies blatantly. The rampant hypocrisy and lying is endemic to this movement. I hope you small government fiscal conservative types take note here. Or maybe you should stop telling yourselves that's what you stand for.
Need a Python, C++, Unix, Linux develop
I can explain for myself. I'm not trying to open a debate, but just to give an explanation:
My primary reason is that Republicans generally vote against abortion rights, and Democrats for them. (Let's not debate this here; there's no hope of changing each other's minds right here and now.)
That being said, I'm finding it harder to justify voting for either Republicans or Democrats now. Republicans strike me as amazingly short-sighted regarding environmental issues and workplace safety. They appear clearly in the pockets of oil companies and others. And they almost never end up following through on their grandiose claims about state's rights and smaller federal government.
The Democrats, on the other hand, are also acting so unwisely in my mind that I can't happily vote for them either. There's the abortion thing as mentioned above. But I think there's lots of evidence that their desire for a welfare state just doesn't work well. And Obama fulfilled none of my hopes for him: prosecuting the NSA for illegal wiretaps; prosecuting the CIA for torture; etc. And they appear to have made extremely poor decision regarding economic stimulus and bank bailouts. In fact, the bank bailouts appear to have greatly favored bank welfare over borrower / mortgage-holder welfare, which betrays the populist reputation the Democrats' seem like holding.
He'd never take that job...
Loading...
As long as the bill also requires the ISP's and connections of all members of the Federal government, Congress, Senate, Whitehouse, everyone, to be tracked to the same level of detail and published openly (Since we the tax payers actually pay for those connections we should know what they're being used for...)
Oh wait, it doesn't? Well, think we found where all the vile stuff is being downloaded... When's the raid on the House Judiciary Committee?
"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence."
6th amendment to the US constitution
Some of us take those words seriously. I imagine you would have too had GWB been the one to do it.
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge"
- Charles Darwin
I can't wait to sell information proving the Representative's marital indiscretions with a tranny hooker in Atlanta last week and the shocking results of his HIV test to the Soviets. Also, why did he go to that fringe social networking site for people who like to be slapped silly and have warm, greasy motorcycle chains stuffed down their pants? It's not like he was just curious, because he hits it every day for hours on end, chats with some guy named "Vinnie", who if his public profile is to be believed, lives near DC.
On a more realistic note, there will be more "accidental disclosures", wikileaks and lulzsec style. At least this means half of congress will have to resign in shame once their misdeeds are made public.
Think of what this will do to companies like Playboy, Penthouse, Hustler, etc.!
Don't feel safe surfing for nekkid ladies at home? Time to buy that subscription!
I take the constitution and its amendments very seriously, but I read them a little more literally than you probably do.
"In all criminal prosecutions..." - He hasn't been prosecuted for anything. He's been targeted for assassination as a clear and present danger to the country.
Next thing you'll be arguing that the 6th amendment means Cops can't shoot people who are shooting at them...
Loading...
No one deserves assassination. You are what I would refer to as a sociopath, or perhaps just very simple minded.
Imprisonment has much, much more propoganda value.
Think how much more damaging to Al Queda releasing a weekly photo of Osama looking sad and dejected in his prison cell would be, and yet being properly taken care of, than the "trust us we killed him" story, that is only believed by those who want to believe it.
Assassination makes martyrs and escalates conflict. (Which is exactly why we didn't take Osama alive, if you think about it... We need this shit to go on FOREVER)
Anyone who claims tea party affiliation and votes for this is the hypocrite.
A couple of years ago after my employer went bankrupt, I was warned by an Employment Insurance case worker that I my Internet use was being monitored and I was not showing enough aggression in my job hunt.
I honestly didn't know how to respond. Should I be outraged? Should I defend my every minute of activity with logs of what I was doing each day? Should I just swalllow my pride, take the swipe and ask for suggestions of what more I could be doing? Had my euphamisms about "vaction" or "sabatical" on Facebook to hide how depressed I was about being unemployed been read and taken seriously? Should I ask for clarification in case I misunderstood what had just been said?
Instead I remained silent and sort of stumbled out of the office in that "what just happened to my world?!" state of confusion. A part of me died inside. I stopped looking for work. I stopped claiming benefits. For over a year I just curled up in ball, nibbling on my savings. The only contact from EI I had after that was a notification my benefits were being discontinued for non-use.
(sorry about the self-pity story ... but I think it's important to state the real impacts of how monitoring plus bureaucracy and/or vulnerability can quickly become toxic and oppressive)
You're even moreso stupid, ignorant or blindingly loyal.
For example, who do you think pushes most of the copyright legislation to restrict our freedoms for the purpose of enriching and expanding the power of the MAFIAA? Yes, mostly Democrats.
I told you so.
FIN
Credits
You really do *NOT* understand the difference between "we tried to arrest him but had to kill him in self defense" and "the president of the United States ordering the death of a citizen without proof, trial or oversight?"
BTW, who was it who told you and proved to you that he was indeed a clear and present danger? A man was ordered put to death on the word of bureaucrats!
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge"
- Charles Darwin
If any of them do actually believe in small government, that belief is usually subordinate to pandering, enforcing religious morality and paying back their campaign contributors.
Businesses already store personal information about their customers. We hear how some was stolen by crackers every other week. It's good to see how USA politicians are making the internet safe for sheeple: By not putting the burden of security onto corporations. How does recording DHCP IP assignments differ from the geo-tagging information collected by Google, Apple, Microsoft? Some people jump up and down about geo-tagging though. Or at least, when Google does it.
But you certainly also gave the Democrats a bit of a pass in your subject too. Obama not only extended the Patriot act but expanded its powers. If the Republicans were evil for passing it he's more evil for enhancing it.
Who said he would have a choice?
You obviously don't.
The decision of a police officer to take a life in order to prevent death or serious injury to people other than the US citizen he/she is going to shoot IS different from the decision of the President of the United States of America to take a life in order to prevent death or serious injury to people other than the US citizen he is going to have shot.
The difference is that the President gets to make a much more reasoned, weighted, and thoughtful consideration, and he is very likely (at least in this particular case) going to be saving many more lives.
Loading...
Wait till this list gets cracked and leaked. Names, addresses, phone numbers, credit card info, bank info. This is a gold mine for any identity thieves best part is that if someone does crack and steal this info the ones in charge won't release that it has been stolen or start any investigation as it would make this idea stupid and the same to the people who made it happen.
But anybody else is fair game ?
The same "same government" republicans willing to let the US default over that matter are the ones backing this. They do not have your interests at heart, they don't want a small government: they're fascists and elitists, plain and simple. If you believe otherwise, please look more closely at their actions.
Great Intellect...
How else are they going to gather this data to sell?
Maybe this is how they should pass a bill to keep us from defaulting. Say "But the children will starve!!! Think of the Children" BAM!! Bill passes. Obama, Reid and Boehner, are you all listening and taking notes?
Life is not for the lazy.
"Step one to a better USA - abolish the party system entirely. Your only affiliation should be to individual constituents."
I'm largely sympathetic to your position. But on this point -- How is this not an abridgement of free assembly? How would it be feasible to enforce? How would it work any better than Washington's departing plea against "factionalism"?
If anything, we need either a different voting system or a parliamentary system that actually accepts, understands, and deals with the existence of party groups.
We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
You should be suspicious of anyone who seeks to obtain the office.
Can someone please provide a list of these treasonous congress people? It would be useful for the public to identify them and confront them about their treason.
This way they aren't identified as the coward ass "House Panel" anymore, but individuals committing crimes against United States citizens.
Side Note: Why do people still think political parties are different? I laugh at any "democrat" or "republican" blame. Seriously, if that's how you identify with being an American, you should be fucking ashamed.
You couldn't eradicate fraternization but you could certain ban group funding, group advertising, et cetera. The goal wouldn't be to eradicate people in government working together, the goal would be to ban these total f***ing deadlocks between presidents, senates, houses, polarist supreme courts, et cetera.
Loading...
The Ask Slashdot article about living without internet access at home sounds more relevant to me suddenly.
"Bonjour, je voudrais devenir un citoyen franÃais."
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.R.1981:
There is no mention recording name, address, credit card numbers or any of the other stuff. The only part of the bill I find distressing is the use of the term "unregistered sex-offender". Who is that supposed to be?
I knew a cop who once referred to everyone around him that wasn't a cop "a perp who hadn't been caught yet."
Otherwise, you have to go through an unbelievable number of existing laws to figure out what this bill is really trying to do because of the way they have this thing written. To me it looks like the bill is trying to give the U.S. Marshalls a free(er) hand in going after those involved with witness intimidation.
I remember a contract negotiation I was involved with that was written like this, and it was the worst contract "proposal" any of us had seen. BTW, the contract was rejected.
The biggest problem I see is that ISPs would have to store an unimaginably huge amount of data at (ultimately) customer cost. Don't forget the cost of back-ups and security for same.
----------
Any problem can be made unsolvable if there are enough meetings made to discuss it.
No one?
Hitler didn't deserve to be assassinated? Stalin? Mao?
How many MILLIONS of people would be alive today if someone had managed to kill them?
Imprisonment? Are you for real? I guess someone could just step up and arrest Hitler in 1934, right? LOL.
You're likely one of those people who suddenly changes their mind one of those types of people kills someone you love.
Assassination only makes martyrs out of people in the eyes of the people who already worshiped them to begin with.
Loading...
I was very confused at first, as the first linked story suggests that the bill is requiring ISPs to collect credit card information, etc., in addition to logging the IP, but the text of the bill doesn't appear to state that. Likewise, the EFF article that is linked didn't say anything about it.
It appears that the confusion comes from a (rejected) amendment proposed by one of the people who voted against the bill. In the current form, the bill only requires that the IP be linked to the customer name. The rejected amendment would have explicitly prohibited further linking to information like billing address and credit card info. Since there is no prohibition against this, it appears that the concern is that ISPs will do this on their own.
I'm still not clear on this point; is the concern that the ISPs will just dump the IP lease info into an existing database with customer info, or is it that by putting the customer name in the logs this automatically opens up any other information maintained by the ISP on that customer to subpoena? Meaning, as it stands now (without this law), someone subpoenas the ISP for such and such IP at such and such date and time, the ISP responds that they don't log the name of the customer the IP was leased to so they can't provide any more information. If this law is passed, they now have the name of the customer who held the IP at the specified time - so at that point would law enforcement (or anyone else) be able to subpoena any other information the ISP has on the named customer? That is my reading of the situation, just curious if anyone can explain it more clearly and/or confirm/deny.
If I have to choose between Little Timmy getting buggered by Uncle Slippyfist, and the integrity of the 4th Amendment and protection against McCarthy 2.0, well, Little Timmy had better grease up. On a national level, yes it IS worth enduring the existence of "that kind of picture", because cops with carte blanche to invade anyone's home and lives at their whim is far more harmful than child porn.
Think of the children? How about thinking of leaving them a country that isn't the most totalitarian Big Brother society in the world? How about leaving the children a society which is not going to require armed revolution to remain worth living in?
Everybody gets what the majority deserves.
And some extreme Republicans against it.
When it comes to screwing the people, bipartisanship is always in season.
they should charge everyone a fee up front. this is to 'enter the internet'.
then, you get on and ride. I mean, surf. have fun, but 'be good'.
now, you want some of that money back in your 'refund'? PROVE to us that you didn't do bad things. then you get your fee back.
(wakes up from nightmare)
man, I hope I was dreaming that. I was, right?
this is actually not too far fetched. in the US, the 'new normal' is that you're guilty until you prove otherwise.
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
Democrats, by not being willing to reign in the spending that is killing our economy. But, to be honest, they're being aided by many Republicans.
Democrats, remember when Obamacare cut $500 billion from Medicare?
If the senate fails to crush this bill Obama may well veto it. The privacy issue is one item but assigning that kind of expense to ISPs does not seem reasonable.
You are under the assumption that Obama actually cares?
From the same guy who promised "Change you can believe in".
So that change you can believe in thing, how's that working out for ya?
ANd I happen to disagree. I'd rather have the budget done than worry about whether a Yemeni was killed.
"Step one to a better USA - abolish the party system entirely. Your only affiliation should be to individual constituents."
Actually that is step two.
Step one is getting rid of 546 lawyers in DC
All's fair in love and war, but an American citizen performing acts of war against Americans is half of the definition of treason ("shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort").
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
Funny, I seem to recall calling Nancy Pelosi the f***ing devil...
You mean she 's not.
The 19 to 10 vote represents a victory for conservative Republicans, who made data retention their first major technology initiative after last fall's elections.
Republicans: Always want less government intervention unless it involves tracking citizens, telling people what they can't do with their own bodies, or removing rights from people their religion doesn't approve of.
Fucking scumbags.
This is why I use my neighbors internet.
If you have nothing to hide you have nothing to worry about.
Considering a Democrat president
Using Republican code words undercuts any valid points you may have. I'd respectfully suggest you knock it off if you want to have a serious conversation.
"All these years believing you're the signified monkey, only to find out you're just a big hunk of nobody cares."
Of all the people in the world you could paraphrase, you chose Sarah Palin, holy shit.
...is what your apostrophe is saying.
Hey, congressfuckers,
We all hate child rapists/pornographers. We don't need or want you looking at everyone's privates. You are the evil bastards in this country. We should punish you by letting the pedophiles assfuck you with baseball bats. Of course that would be unreasonably cruel punishment for the bats.
Fuck off and die.
A verdict of "treason" can only be determined by a court of law. The US had opportunities to arrest al-Awlaki, but its objection to him is his ideological teachings, which aren't grounds for conviction, so it put a mafia-style hit out to shut him up. It did the same thing with bin Laden in the 90s, and certainly no good came of that--for Americans at least
I am curious to see if the following series of events will play out:
1. This bill is proposed.
2. Major ISPs form a coalition and raise hell about costs.
3. Politicians offer to include government money to defray the costs of data retention. (at a ludicrously high profit margin for the ISPs)
4. Major ISP coalition lines up in support of the bill.
That's pretty much how it went with the telcos when the government granted itself monitoring rooms.
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
There's an election coming up. Imagine the TV ads you'll see against any senator or rep who dares to vote against this bill.
HE SUPPORTS CHILD PORNOGRAPHY!!
because people doing shady things on the internet don't know what a vpn or proxy is? i mean cmon.... why do they even bother with these laws that only punish the innocents and do nothing for criminals.
This is another dark chapter of the erosion of Bill of Rights and the Constitution.
The terrorists won, and their adversaries aren't much better. We are heading into a fasiost state people. /fæzm/) is a radical, authoritarian nationalist political ideology.[1][2] Fascists advocate the creation of a totalitarian single-party state that seeks the mass mobilization of a nation through indoctrination, physical education, and family policy including eugenics.[3] Fascists seek to purge forces, ideas, people, and systems deemed to be the cause of decadence and degeneration and produce their nation's rebirth based on commitment to the national community based on organic unity where individuals are bound together by suprapersonal connections of ancestry, culture, and blood.[4] Fascists believe that a nation requires strong leadership, singular collective identity, and the will and ability to commit violence and wage war in order to keep the nation strong.[5] Fascist governments forbid and suppress opposition to the state.[6]
From Wikipedia:
Fascism (play
https://www.youtube.com/c/BrendaEM
Pelosi takes more flak than she deserves because she brokers deals. All speakers and senate majority leaders look more evil than they really are because they have to go around pretending they like the sausage they just made, or alternatively get absolutely nothing done. Heck I'll even say the Orange One is probably a more decent guy than he appears by his actions.
That said, there's simply no excuse for Wasserman-Shultz. She's great with polemic on camera and then turns around and craps all over Democratic Party principles.
Someone had to do it.
Where did you find the list of who voted? Maybe I just got lost, but I was unable to find
If she wasn't african american, she'd be working in a 7-11 working the lotto machine (her view on vietnam and slavery reparations are straight out of "MAD Magazine")
And Shultz hates personal freedom; hence per position on the Terri Schiavo case.
These aren't the worst politicians, but your favorite? Seriously?
Fuck this....
Geez! Hell *must* have frozen over.. I *never* thought I'd agree with a dumb-o-crat, especially Conyers.. It sounds as its the repubic-crats behind this Orwellian effort.. Glad I dumped that damned party during the middle of Bush2's second term.. Seems I'm now disenfranchised.. As much as I believe in/admire the Teaparty, they haven't a fart in a windstorm's chance in getting anybody significant elected in 2012.. God, I hate to watch this country circling the drain, but *there* it is....
THANK YOU, Edward Snowden!! Americans owe you a debt of gratitude (whether they know it or not..)
Hitler is a rather bad example. The CIA had several opportunities to assassinate him, but chose not to because his possible replacements were all more competent than he was.
The sum of the intelligence of the world is constant. The population is, of course, growing.
... how come i never run into it?
I run across everything on the internet.
Pirated software, music, games.
We got government leaks, banks emails, etc.
We got dogs fucking chicks, dudes fucking ducks, 2girls1cup, and we even had a black hole of an anus.
I'm offered a done of spam, but none of them ever has been related to child porn.
so I ask, where is this child porn that is so bad on the internet, that we need laws made using it as an excuse?
oh, here we can find them, on the peeps in charge:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-20011494-38.html
http://www.uaff.us/pentagon_workers_tied_to_child_porn.htm
http://dailycaller.com/2011/07/07/child-pornography-found-on-assistant-u-s-attorney%E2%80%99s-computer/
I think the only problem with child porn is in the government.
Be seeing you...
Spending all this money and effort chasing around crime scene pictures--of which infinite copies can be made--does not prevent child abuse. There are real children suffering from abuse right now that would probably appreciate a little more effort being spent on them.
If we criminalize the ownership of murder scene photos, how many murders does it prevent?
If we criminalize the ownership of drunk driving photos, how many drunk driving incidents does it prevent?
If we criminalize the possession of bank robbery photos, how many bank robberies does it prevent?
How about we spend all that money that we would have spent on hunting down people with pictures of crime scenes and actually spend it on something that HELPS LIVING, BREATHING CHILDREN, like educating children and adults about detecting and reporting child abuse, or hiring more investigators to catch people who are abusing children?
In favor of the bill: 14 Republicans, 5 Democrats
Against the bill: 3 Republicans, 7 Democrats
As you can see, 82% of Republican the representatives supported this bill, while only 42% of Democratic representatives did. If you're trying to make a point about the equivalency of the two major parties, you're grasping at the wrong straw. Not that the Democrats have a great record on this issue, but it's basically twice as good as the Republicans' record.
Wish we actually had people who knew how to use technology in the white house. The simple fact remains that I can use I2P and Tor to get around this.
I am endlessly entertained by Jackon Lee's ability to pull the race card for pretty much any situation. She just shot someone in cold blood on the Capitol steps, she's arrested, she'll claim she's only being arrested because she's black.
It's like watching a comedy sketch, only it's a congressional hearing.
But from what I hear in person, she's about one of the nastiest people you could ever encounter. She screams at her aides as if she were an 18th Century slave master. She's superior, they're sub-human dog meat to be abused at will.
Finally a victory for the people. I'm so fucking glad our legislative body, whose job is to protect the electorate, has found the time to tend to such an imperative foot-rub-under-the-stall issue. Thanks guys. ..always in the name of child pron...
GWB did. Did you raise a hue and cry then?
--
$tar -xvf
"Help the children, save the children, protect the children." You know what I say? Fuck the children!"
That pretty much covers my first reaction.
Disclaimer: No fucking of said children was ever implied, endorsed or even considered. In fact, fuck you for thinking that it might have been. What are you? Some god damn pedophile you bad man you? What is your IP? ASL?
This post is provided without warranty as to reliability, accuracy or otherwise or fitness for any particular purpose.
Consider this: old URSS KGB never had half the power this bill is giving US agencies both public AND PRIVATE to control people. Think about it!
What about TSA x-ray naked scanners - shouldn't TSA agents be jailed for child pornography?
Shouldn't gov stop this first before going spying on everyone without a warrant like in a totalitarian regime?
All this gives them is the ability to see who is criticizing the gov. ...
And who he talked to.
1984, here we come
Today they spy all because some people may be bad...
Tomorrow they'll start arresting people because gov thought they thought of committing a crime...
Congress says this will help cut down on child porn. Maybe it will help catch the less sophisticated child pornographers, but there are already multiple ways to trade child porn without getting caught.
Freenet is one way.
Tor is another way. Hidden services can be created on Tor. There are already several very popular child-porn trading sites that are hosted on Tor that can't be stopped or tracked down.
I think child porn is disgusting, but ultimately information wants to be free, even bad information. You can't stop people from trading pictures.
This is just a power grab by the government; the incremental path to a police/surveillance state. That's far more horrifying than the trade of child pornography.
If you are truly an innocent citizen, then why does it matter? Every purchase you make with a credit card is recorded by the issuing company. Every hour that you work in a week is recorded by your employer. Your cellphone location can be traced for 911 emergency purposes to pinpoint your location, without your direct consent (look at your cellphone settings). Security camera recordings can be plugged into face recognition software, which I've experienced first hand applying for one job so they could confirm my identity. Several high profile hackers have been mentioned right here on this site as being tracked down and arrested. So why exactly do you think anything you do is actually anonymous? The sheer naivety I see here is staggering.
Time to up my tor usage. That is until they force them to put a backdoor in tor.
Long live the freenetproject.org :)
This is the best solution I have found so far:
1.) Install Vidalia: http://www.torproject.org/
2.) Install NoScript: http://noscript.net/ (Ghostery may be ok - but I'm not too familiar). This blocks Flash, Javascript, etc - but you can selectively enable certain content.
3.) Install the EFF's HTTPS Everywhere plugin: http://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
This will default sites like Google to use the SSL version of their pages if is possible - with Tor Exit Nodes being possibly monitored, SSL is your friend.
4.) Use AdBlock Plus: http://adblockplus.org/
This reduces unnecessary traffic through Tor (banner ads, etc).
Run your browser in Private Browsing mode as well and keep you History clean. Firefox has an option to clear this every time you exit. Tools to keep other things clear (Bleachbit on Linux and C-Cleaner on Windows never hurt)
If you are super-duper paranoid, you can use a Full Disk Encryption suite like Truecrypt: http://www.truecrypt.org/
Just make sure to pick a good passphrase (26+ characters) and keep your computer shutdown when you are not around it.
If you want to help out with Tor like me, I donated a share of my bandwidth to run a Tor Relay: https://www.torproject.org/docs/tor-doc-relay.html.en
PS I also change my IP address randomly every few weeks Simply changing your MAC address, hostname and then resetting your hardware will do this. Most ISPs do not retain data beyond 6mos so this also doesn't hurt.
PPS Fuck the police (with a cactus).
"You couldn't eradicate fraternization but you could certain ban group funding, group advertising, et cetera"
Except for how exactly that was forbidden by the Supreme Court in the Citizens United case last year, as an abridgement of free speech.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._Federal_Election_Commission
We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
Took me a moment to catch the code word, it's been so ingrained. "Democrat" instead of "Democratic".
Yes.
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge"
- Charles Darwin
You obviously don't.
The decision of a police officer to take a life in order to prevent death or serious injury to people other than the US citizen he/she is going to shoot IS different from the decision of the President of the United States of America to take a life in order to prevent death or serious injury to people other than the US citizen he is going to have shot.
The difference is that the President gets to make a much more reasoned, weighted, and thoughtful consideration, and he is very likely (at least in this particular case) going to be saving many more lives.
You don't and can't know whether your last sentence is true. There is no requirement for the president to show any evidence for that. At all. None. Zero. Zilch. That, my friend, is a lot more dangerous than you seem willing to admit.
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge"
- Charles Darwin
Classical liberal economics state 3 very simple conditions for a free market to work:
1. People are rational
2. People are free to choose what to buy, and who to buy from
3. They have perfect information
There are many reasons each of those conditions need gov't help not to be annihilated:
1. People are not that rational when it comes to health and death, or when they are addicted.
2. Monopolies. 'nuff said.
3. False advertising, misrepresenting investment risks, deliberately fucking up accounting, astroturfing, ...
latest HR 1981 activity.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d112:h.r.1981: