Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

House Panel Approves Bill Forcing ISPs To Log Users

Posted by Soulskill on from the uncle-sam-wants-to-know-you-better dept.

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.'"

50 of 277 comments (clear)

  1. No kidding by grimmjeeper · · Score: 5, Insightful

    '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.

    1. Re:No kidding by Batmunk2000 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Every year I have to fill out countless government forms detailing every facet of my personal finances and business finances so the State & Federal government can collect taxes "fairly" from businesses and employees alike.
      Now suddenly Mr. Conyers isoutraged over ISP tracking? People need to be consistent with their privacy thoughts. The ISP tracking is absolutely ridiculous, but it is nothing compared to what the Feds already collect from people. This battle was long lost.

    2. Re:No kidding by h4rr4r · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is not all or nothing. Having to fill out forms to calculate taxes seems fine. That data should also not be used for anything else. Keeping track of citizens speech is not any where near the same thing.

    3. Re:No kidding by ElectricTurtle · · Score: 2

      If you think your 1040 is a big deal, try an SF86.

      --
      I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
    4. Re:No kidding by llindy · · Score: 2

      So, I wonder what reasons can be given to obtain this information, and then how will that be done? Will they have "trigger" words in their data bases to look for online suspicious activity? Warrants? Illegal wiretapping? And then all that need be done since this will be a database is simply type in a name? Why stop there? Oh, I see "so-in-so" facebook page talks about WikiLeaks and posts docs, they could be a threat to US security... or, maybe, next proxies will be forbidden. Who knows. Land of the free my a**

      --
      "Stand up for what you believe in, even if you stand alone"
    5. Re:No kidding by 0racle · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Detailed? Really? Like what the name of the person who checked you out at Lowes was? You submit that you bought 16 feet of duct tape right before you went and bought those sleeping pills? Which, coincidentally, was a week before that girl was found tied up and drugged in your area.

      The level of detail your ISP would be logging would far outweigh any amount the IRS keeps about you.

      --
      "I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
    6. Re:No kidding by grimmjeeper · · Score: 2

      There's a big difference. Everyone who earns some minimum income in this country is required by law to fill out the 1040. You only need to fill out an SF86 if you want to get a government clearance. If you don't fill out the form, you don't get the clearance and nothing else. If you don't fill out your 1040 and the government figures it out, men with guns come to your house and lock you up.

    7. Re:No kidding by modmans2ndcoming · · Score: 2

      Lets draw a distinction here.... there is the THEORY of free markets and the proponents/practitioners of it.

      The Proponents/Practitioners are corrupting the free market theory of economics to fit the ideals of Fascism but calling it free market capitalism. The people are stupid and believe [private company = free market].

    8. Re:No kidding by kj_kabaje · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I agree--in a true free market, all parties are supposed to be equally well-informed and in equitable positions of power so that they aren't forced to make decision, right?  In such cases, employees would be able to freely move from country to country just as well as employers/corporations.  I'm pretty sure that doesn't exist anywhere, but I could be wrong.  In the US case, the "free-market" people really just mean, rules that allow me to legally screw other people--e.g., a kleptocratic corporate plutocracy.

    9. Re:No kidding by tsotha · · Score: 2

      The party out of power tends to rail against things that the party in power is doing. You'd think, therefor, that when they party out of power becomes the party in power they would make some changes. But you'd be wrong.

      Remember USA PATRIOT? When the Democrats were swept into power you'd have thought, based on their campaign rhetoric, they would make substantive changes. Maybe even repeal it outright. And then... they extended it, with even more powers.

      It's almost like... and stay with me here... it's almost like both parties want essentially the same thing, which is a more powerful central government, and they allow members to vote against that more powerful government when those votes aren't going to matter. So your 51-49 senate vote really represents, say, a 90-10 vote with 39 senators voting "nay" because that's what their constituents want. But willing to flip if the measure has a chance of failing.

    10. Re:No kidding by nschubach · · Score: 2

      I feel as though I should share some experience here... (feel free to point and laugh at me pissing away interest if it makes you feel good.)

      tldr; version: I've found the Federal IRS doesn't seem to care, but when your state is trying to figure out how to clean up billions in debt, they'll send you a bill and hold your checks if you don't file... even if you don't owe.

      I've found that the Federal government doesn't care as much as the State of Ohio (not sure about other states.)

      Some time back, I found out that late fees and penalties do not apply if they owe you. Knowing this information was the worse thing I could know. I pushed off filing my taxes (they owed me money) because, well... I'm more than a bit lazy when it comes to filling out paperwork and I didn't "need" the refund check. Of course, once I got started it just didn't end.

      I filled out and sent in my 2010 this year and got a refund check right away. I then decided to sit down and do the prior years... 2008, and 2009. I sent them all in and got my refund checks. (No thank you letter though, in case you were wondering.)

      Now, Ohio was different. They realized I didn't do my 2007 taxes (I'm actually baffled how this didn't get filed and my 2007 Federal was) and they were holding my refund check for 2010 when I did it. Of course, the paper they sent me didn't say why, just that they were holding it. I went back and filled out the 2008 and 2009 taxes and sent them all in thinking that was the reason. I recently got a letter from the AG of Ohio stating I didn't pay my taxes for 2007 with a "bill" for a couple thousand they estimated I owed. (I didn't owe it. I paid it a long time ago but didn't fill out the form to say I paid it.) So I tracked back my records and found out that I did in fact forget to send in the Ohio 2007 form. I sent it to the AG and they filed it for me. I still await my check, but it's only been about 2 months now.

      There, have your fun. ;)

      --
      Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
    11. Re:No kidding by hairyfeet · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Simple: The market starts free, a few groups become uber-powerful, then buy the laws to ensure their monopoly never has to deal with competition. See "forever minus a single day" copyright extensions, DMCA, and a million other examples.

      Sadly, and as much as I thought Rand was a looney, someone should cue up her "making criminals" line because with THIS much data they can make anyone they want into a criminal at ANY time. If they pull up a log that says you visited X server on date Y 2 years ago, how do you disprove it? Hell how do you even prove the data on server Y is the same as what was on server Y 2 years ago? Look at the old Whitehouse.com to see how squatters can take a domain and turn it.

      This isn't getting a warrant to access someone's PC to look for child porn, this is entirely "guilty until proven innocent" wholesale data collection. And the truly fucking sad part? I have a friend that actually works busting CP in the state crime lab and he says the child pornographers don't use the net since that dragnet that made the news a couple of years back. What do they use now? Encrypted DVDs they send each other by USPS. That's right, the fricking mail.

      So I urge everyone here to vote Green or New Whig straight down the line in 2012, and to urge everyone you meet to do the same. It is obvious that BOTH the Ds and the Rs damned near to a man have been bought by the corps, and the will of the people as well as the constitution is being completely ignored by these traitors. our last hope before having our own Arab Spring is to have real third and even fourth parties in this country, and a vote for a D or an R is now a "wasted vote" because they simply no longer listen to the people anymore.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    12. Re:No kidding by skr95062 · · Score: 2

      So what? Honest, intelligent politicians never accomplish anything.

      So what? politicians never accomplish anything.

      There fixed that for ya.

  2. Look out anyone who is married! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And just wait till the subpoena’s start flying from divorce lawyers

    1. Re:Look out anyone who is married! by kwoodard · · Score: 5, Interesting

      By the way, you should also know "Patriot Act" intercepts are starting to show up in divorce court. People should read the text of the proposed statute carefully to note whether the data can only be use for "criminal investigations" (e.g., terrorism) or "all lawful government purposes" (e.g., divorce).

      --
      Ken
  3. Reciprocal? by Teun · · Score: 4, Interesting
    As CP is a global issue it has a clause to share this data with EU authorities.

    No? I thought so...

    --
    "The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
  4. What could possibly go wrong?! by djkitsch · · Score: 2

    Can't see any issues with this. Nope, I've got nothin'.

    --
    sig:- (wit >= sarcasm)
  5. I'm a bit confused about this bill ..... by King_TJ · · Score: 4, Informative

    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?

    1. Re:I'm a bit confused about this bill ..... by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 2

      That's my reading as well.

      The bill amends Section 2703 of title 18, United States Code.
      Section 2703 of title 18 says the government can, with a warrant, ask for records from ISPs.
      The amended part says 1) the ISP must keep a record of temp IP addresses and 2) records must be stored securely to protect customer privacy.

    2. Re:I'm a bit confused about this bill ..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      The entire text of the bill is on the gpo.gov site:

          http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112hr1981ih/pdf/BILLS-112hr1981ih.pdf

    3. Re:I'm a bit confused about this bill ..... by demonbug · · Score: 2

      `(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).'.

      So, if I insert a wireless path between my cable modem and my router, the address would be transmitted by radio communication. Wouldn't this invalidate the rule? How would the ISP be aware that there is radio communication in the link?

      No, because the ISP does't care what the internal IP address on your network is. To them, this only concerns the IP assigned to your modem.

      Now, this does suggest that if you connect wirelessly to your ISP this section doesn't apply, but presumably there are (or will soon be) similar requirements appended to Section 3 of the Communications Act.

    4. Re:I'm a bit confused about this bill ..... by Qzukk · · Score: 4, Informative

      I get what seems to only be notes about changes made throughout it?

      That's how bills work. There's a huge blob of text (the United States Code), the bill is basically a patch to that USC, so you have to get out the entire USC and apply the bill to it in order for it to make complete sense.

      The first change made is adding "Whoever knowingly conducts, or attempts or conspires to conduct, a financial transaction (as defined in section 1956(c)) in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, knowing that such transaction will facilitate access to, or the possession of, child pornography (as defined in section 2256) shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both." (It is interesting to note that growing your own pot in your own backyard for your own use is "affecting interstate commerce" so this will almost certainly be used against everyone touching kiddy porn whether there was any kind of trade or financial transaction at all)

      The second change is to change the money laundering laws to add kiddy porn and facilitating access to kiddy porn to the list of "specified unlawful activities" covered by money laundering.

      Third, the "Required disclosure of customer communications or records" is updated to require that ISPs track which user is assigned which IP address when, for 18 months. And that it is the "sense" of Congress that the records "should" be stored securely.

      Fourth, "No cause of action shall lie in any court against any provider of wire or electronic communication service, its officers, employees, agents, or other specified persons for providing information, facilities, or assistance in accordance with the terms of a court order, warrant, subpoena, statutory authorization, or certification under this chapter." is changed to "No cause of action shall lie in any court against any provider of wire or electronic communication service, its officers, employees, agents, or other specified persons for retaining records or providing information, facilities, or assistance in accordance with the terms of a court order, warrant, subpoena, statutory authorization, or certification under this chapter." This goes from "you can't sue your ISP because the government forced them to tattle on you" to "you can't sue your ISP because they stored information on you, or because the government forced them to tattle on you".

      Fifth, storing information on you is further disallowed as a cause for civil action.

      Sixth, federal marshals are given the power to issue administrative subpoenas regarding "unregistered" sex offenders. The subsection referred to describes various sex offenses that subpoenas may be issued for, but does not define what makes someone an "unregistered sex offender".

      Seventh, additional laws against harassing child witnesses. As part of this, it includes this fascinating nugget:

      (2) For purposes of subparagraphs (B)(ii) and (D)(ii) of paragraph (1), a court shall presume, subject to rebuttal by the person, that the distribution or publication using the Internet of a photograph of, or restricted personal information regarding, a specific person serves no legitimate purpose, unless that use is authorized by that specific person, is for news reporting purposes, is designed to locate that specific person (who has been reported to law enforcement as a missing person), or is part of a government-authorized effort to locate a fugitive or person of interest in a criminal, antiterrorism, or national security investigation

      Eighth, additional levels of sentencing are mandated.

      Ninth, additional punishment is added if the kiddy porn showed someone under 12. (sorry, getting bored of chasing down all the original rules)

      Tenth, the sect

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
  6. Partisanship? Please... by MyFirstNameIsPaul · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  7. Not just Republicans by yog · · Score: 3, Informative

    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.
  8. I foresee the raise of VPN services. by Eglembor · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.

  9. 19-10 vote by SatanClauz · · Score: 2

    in other words, 19 out of 29 of them know how to use TOR

  10. Democrats are idiots but the Republican Party... by Assmasher · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...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...
  11. Emigrate by elsurexiste · · Score: 2

    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!
  12. Re:ISPs Log You Anyway by PickyH3D · · Score: 2

    Not to mention, how do people think that ISPs are able to forward cease and desist letters to people downloading stuff illegally, when they are caught by the *AA?

    If anything, this merely provides a minimum requirement. One that practically everyone was clearly doing anyway.

    I cannot help but wonder why this is a current focus of Congress, but I cannot help to wonder if the random hackings et al have helped lead down this path faster than we might otherwise have?

  13. Yep, this is not a Dem/Rep issue... by alispguru · · Score: 2

    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.
  14. Damn Tea Party! by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.
    1. Re:Damn Tea Party! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Koch bros don't care about this.

    2. Re:Damn Tea Party! by hazem · · Score: 3, Interesting

      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.

      That was my thought. When I used to fit more within conservative politics, the idea of limiting government monitoring of citizens an appealing part of the ideology.

      Now I fit more within the liberal side of things (I've drifted to the left, but I think the country had drifted right), but I still don't like the idea of all of the eavesdropping and records retention used to monitor citizens. The right still talks about how evil and communist-like we liberals are. But it's sad to me that it's the right that's been implementing all these things that I consider hallmarks of a totalitarian regime. It's funny and sad that it's one of the more extreme Democrats (commie that he is, right?) that's challenging this bill.

    3. Re:Damn Tea Party! by characterZer0 · · Score: 2

      You are making the common mistake of thinking the tea party and the Tea Party are the same. The former is a group of people fed up with government excess. The latter is a PR arm of the GOP. The former is against HR.1981. The latter is playing chicken with the Democrats over the budget and the debt limit.

      --
      Go green: turn off your refrigerator.
    4. Re:Damn Tea Party! by marxmarv · · Score: 2

      No, the Tea Party talks about keeping the government out of the Koch brothers' lives.

      Seriously, though, forget the existing power structure for solving your problems. Anyone who stands a chance of gaining any advantage for the little guy gets shot, poisoned, tortured or hit with manufactured rape charges. It's long past time for the class war to get hot again. Okay, actually, the class war's always BEEN hot, but the besieged masses have been too busy playing WoW or watching tv to fight back...

      --
      /. -- the Free Republic of technology.
    5. Re:Damn Tea Party! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      from across the pond is mostly looks like the tea party is so wound up in their hate for Obama that they would gladly burn down the entire USA and p*** on the ashes
      if they could make Obama look bad by doing it

    6. Re:Damn Tea Party! by Nysul · · Score: 2

      This is a committee vote, which I'm pretty sure is based on seniority, so the freshmen tea partiers wouldn't have a part. Save your anger for when the house/senate inevitably vote on it, and call/write (do not email or use chain-letter forms) your congressperson to prevent it from passing, which hopefully we can do, although I'm cynical.

  15. Re:Democrats are idiots but the Republican Party.. by Atzanteol · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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
  16. They'll be sorry by ivandavidoff · · Score: 2

    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.

  17. Re:Don't forget the Senate by j4ckknife · · Score: 2

    ...well, it hasn't passed the House, for that matter. The vote just means it made it out of committee.

  18. Re:Veto by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    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.

  19. Re:Democrats are idiots but the Republican Party.. by Assmasher · · Score: 2

    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...
  20. Re:And keeping credit card info? by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 2

    every AMERICAN ISP.

    I'm moving my data offshore. maybe switzerland, maybe germany, maybe sweden. but NOT in the US anymore.

    anyone have any good pointers to secure offshore email/isp hosters? so far, I've been reading about 'countermail' but not sure I like using java applets.

    I've been thinking of dumping gmail; and this kind of congressional 'push' just pushed this to the top of MY list.

    thanks congress fuckwads; you just helped move an american's data OFF the US and out of your grubby fingers.

    anyone else with me, on this?

    --

    --
    "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
  21. Re:Democrats are idiots but the Republican Party.. by kthreadd · · Score: 2

    I've said it before. Just put Linus Torvalds in charge and it will sort itself out.

  22. Small government Tea Partyers at your service by Omnifarious · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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
  23. Re:Democrats are idiots but the Republican Party.. by kthreadd · · Score: 2

    Who said he would have a choice?

  24. Re:And keeping credit card info? by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 2

    Great. Now every ISP has to store information that Congress should be focusing on NOT storing.

    Hmm, with the notable exception of temporary IP addresses, looks like they're being required to keep pretty much the information required by their billing departments.

    Not sure this is going to accomplish much (no, I'm sure it'll accomplish very little, if anything), but it's certainly not terribly intrusive as such things go.

    Note, however, that it's not law, it's not even been voted on by the House. So now might be a good time to make REASONED arguments against it to your Congresscritter and Senators.

    Note that "reasoned arguments" don't include DDOS'ing someone who disagrees with you, or being rude to them. Just the facts will suffice (assuming anything will).

    --

    "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
  25. congressfuckers by Alien+Being · · Score: 2

    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.

  26. If child pornography is so bad... by Nyder · · Score: 2

    ... 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...
  27. Re:Democrats are idiots but the Republican Party.. by Johnny+Mnemonic · · Score: 2

    GWB did. Did you raise a hue and cry then?

    --

    --
    $tar -xvf .sig.tar