Slashdot Mirror


Net Companies Consider the "Nuclear Option" To Combat SOPA

Atypical Geek writes "Alec Liu of Fox News reports that Amazon, Facebook and Google are considering a coordinated blackout of the internet to protest SOPA, the Stop Online Privacy Act being debated in Congress. From the article: 'Such a move is drastic. And though the details of exactly how it would work are unclear, it's already under consideration, according to Markham Erickson, the executive director of NetCoalition, a trade association that includes the likes of Google, PayPal, Yahoo, and Twitter. With the Senate debating the SOPA legislation at the end of January, it looks as if the tech industry's top dogs are finally adding bite to their bark, something CNET called "the nuclear option." "When the home pages of Google.com, Amazon.com, Facebook.com, and their Internet allies simultaneously turn black with anti-censorship warnings that ask users to contact politicians about a vote in the U.S. Congress the next day on SOPA," Declan McCullagh wrote, "you'll know they're finally serious."'"

119 of 507 comments (clear)

  1. Such an option is going to cause panic... by vikingpower · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...not among politicians, but among all the kiddies who can not communicate anymore but via Facebook. Under-18 Doomsday guaranteed.

    --
    Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
    1. Re:Such an option is going to cause panic... by BetterThanCaesar · · Score: 4, Interesting

      They should start with just targeting DC. If that doesn't get any reactions, then do the whole US for a day. Or the world, for that matter.

      --
      "Stop failing the Turing test!" -- Dilbert
    2. Re:Such an option is going to cause panic... by AngryDeuce · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They should start by targeting the entire U.S. and other "pro-SOPA" countries and leave the other countries alone. Why punish people all over the world just because a small minority of people in the U.S. are corrupt douchebag cockheads?

      Targeting only D.C. isn't going to do much...the vast majority of the people, particularly legislators, that are supporting this legislation hardly even use the web.

    3. Re:Such an option is going to cause panic... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      ...not among politicians, but among all the kiddies who can not communicate anymore but via Facebook. Under-18 Doomsday guaranteed.

      Cross your arms and huff all you want to, Facebook usage and traffic is not what you want to think it is. I'm sorry that you and I and everyone else here built the internet and other wonderful devices, but nerds are in the minority in usership and influence. The internet is now following the market, and our good old friend the Invisible Hand has made Facebook traffic number two. Sure, there are people who post about their breakfast on FB. There are also mini ego battles of enormous banality here. It's okay to be initially upset that a message on Facebook has more inluence than an article on slashdot. It's not okay to embrace your cognitive dissonance and perpetuate the incorrect model in your head and huff and puff over here to get more support for your particular brand of bigotry.

    4. Re:Such an option is going to cause panic... by Hadlock · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You must be new here, just last year we wrote the copyright legislation for Spain and New Zealand, and shoved it down their throats (they passed it, grudgingly). We've twisted China's arm about movie piracy in the past, and plenty of other countries as well. We're terrible about installing dictators in countries, but we're really good at writing laws and making them law in other countries. What copyright law passes here in our bellwether country becomes law in 20-70% of the rest of the world.

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
    5. Re:Such an option is going to cause panic... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Our government (NZ) passed it eagerly. We also did some blackout-style protesting, but the bill was passed anyway because of the emergency powers available to the politicians after the devastating Christchurch earthquake.

      That move alone absolutely sickened me, and I have lost all faith in our politicians.

    6. Re:Such an option is going to cause panic... by russotto · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They should start by targeting the entire U.S. and other "pro-SOPA" countries and leave the other countries alone. Why punish people all over the world just because a small minority of people in the U.S. are corrupt douchebag cockheads?

      Because

      A) These are American-based companies and will have to follow SOPA even in their overseas operations.
      B) Once SOPA passes in the US, the copyright industry will immediately move to have it implemented in Europe in the name of harmonizing. And the European corrupt douchebag cockheads will go for it. The rest of the world will follow, because no country has any shortage of corrupt douchebag cockheads.

    7. Re:Such an option is going to cause panic... by gman003 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Make it global from day 1. SOPA would be a problem not just for Americans, but for everyone.

      I'm pretty sure that if Google, Facebook, Youtube, Twitter and Wikipedia all went down for a day, even Washington would realize that SOPA can't stand. And if they went on a blackout until SOPA was defeated (with the implied or explicit threat of shutting down permanently should SOPA pass), defeating SOPA would become the #1 priority of Congress. Because *NOBODY* would vote for "the Senator that killed the Internet".

    8. Re:Such an option is going to cause panic... by ancientt · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I hope they do and I hope you are right. Nothing could be better for the future of our country than for the impressionable youth to realize that their freedoms and access are protected only at the whim of corporate policy and fickle government oversight. I could actually hope the coming years would reflect the will of the people if the youth of today were sufficiently shocked.

      --
      B) Eliminate all the stupid users. This is frowned upon by society.
    9. Re:Such an option is going to cause panic... by Surt · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Well for one thing, maybe we could get someone to come in and do some regime change for us if they get pissed off enough about their loss of internet?

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    10. Re:Such an option is going to cause panic... by fche · · Score: 2

      Don't fear, this sort of "nuclear option" only changes the CSS. It's not like google et al. would actually shut down for a while. Whew.

    11. Re:Such an option is going to cause panic... by AngryDeuce · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I'm still waiting to hear why things like Minimum Wage and EPA regulations are "job killers" while things like SOPA aren't...

      The companies that are going to be most effected by this stupid bullshit are the few American companies that are actually doing well right now. I thought we had to make America "open for business"? Are these not businesses as well, or do they not donate enough to qualify for that kind of consideration?

      It's just so retarded on so many levels. The web brings in 100 times more revenue than the MAFIAA does. Why are we going to cripple it? It makes no sense whatsoever...

    12. Re:Such an option is going to cause panic... by Cat_Herder_GoatRoper · · Score: 2

      http://www.altavista.com/ It is only for a day!

    13. Re:Such an option is going to cause panic... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      From the companies' perspective?

      Minimum wage 'kills' the 8 jobs that would have been around if McDonalds could pay only 2$ an hour instead of minimum wage.

      EPA regulations prevent companies from hiring more people with the money they use to clean up and meet regulations.

      Both of the above are reasons why corporations need to be beaten into the ground and held to very strict, and very punishing legal standards. And why the should NEVER EVER be allowed to participate in politics in ANY WAY.

    14. Re:Such an option is going to cause panic... by khallow · · Score: 2

      People who say that they've "lost all faith in X," when it's obvious they never had faith in X.

      I don't see the problem. Makes it very easy to be right.

    15. Re:Such an option is going to cause panic... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Same here dude. It blows my mind how little awareness there was of the issue. We desperately needed a nation-wide blackout of internet services to wake people up. But it never happened. And well, now we have both censorship and copyright cops.

      New Zealanders really sucked it all up. The information is out there (wikileaks) but noone takes notice or cares. New Zealand has a real apathy towards politics.

    16. Re:Such an option is going to cause panic... by Yvanhoe · · Score: 2

      Because SOPA is already branded as an excuse for politician in several EU country to make a similar legislation. Many EU countries are US-followers when it comes to technological laws, especially those that pretend to deal with copyright infringement.

      Please do it worldwide. Then I won't see Sarkozy saying things like "The US did SOPA and everything went alright"

      --
      The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
    17. Re:Such an option is going to cause panic... by wagnerrp · · Score: 5, Informative

      They're not trying to persuade the senators directly, they're trying to make the issues known to the general public. The average internet user likely hasn't even heard of SOPA, much less realize the implications it entails. On the other hand, hundreds of millions use sites such as google, yahoo, and twitter daily. If instead of their normal behavior, all of those people using those pages get a notice about SOPA, a quarter will likely read it at least once, and a quarter of those might actually understand why that's a bad thing, and a tenth of those might actually take the time to try to contact their representatives about it. You're looking at potentially millions of constituents, all trying to contact their senators within a couple hour time frame, the day before the issue goes to a vote.

      The vast majority of politicians are in it to make money, not make the country a better place. That means accepting donations and favors, and staying in office as long as possible to accept more donations and favors. Argue that all you want, but the fact is that politicians don't get paid all that much, yet Senators all live very well, well beyond what a $175k/yr salary would suggest. If a particular bill becomes unpopular, they aren't going to support it and risk losing their position in the next election, regardless of how much lobbyists are otherwise pushing it.

    18. Re:Such an option is going to cause panic... by biodata · · Score: 4, Interesting
      >politicians tolerate being bribed but they are highly allergic against being blackmailed.

      I think you are wrong about this. History shows that Newscorp has a long record of invading politicians' private lives, digging dirt they want to keep quiet, and using threats of publication of said dirt to affect politicians' votes.

      I think if you made a list of the politicians supporting SOPA you would find it correlated strongly with the list of politicians which Newscorp have some dirt on.

      --
      Korma: Good
    19. Re:Such an option is going to cause panic... by Rakarra · · Score: 5, Funny

      Make it global from day 1. SOPA would be a problem not just for Americans, but for everyone.

      I'm pretty sure that if Google, Facebook, Youtube, Twitter and Wikipedia all went down for a day, even Washington would realize that SOPA can't stand.

      I'm not sure, you have to balance the dislike for having those sites down... against the amazing productivity gains that would result! If they all went down for a day, we'd have flying cars, cold fusion, and warp drive the next day.

      But I didn't think the actual sites would be down, just the front pages.

    20. Re:Such an option is going to cause panic... by gman003 · · Score: 2

      Which ones?

      Who could replace Google? Yahoo is against SOPA. Microsoft doesn't seem to have taken an official stance, but I suspect they'll ultimately go against it. Which leaves what, Ask Jeeves?

      Facebook? Their biggest threat is Google+, and Google's doing it too. Same for Twitter. Unless Myspace jumps back into supremacy, nobody's well-suited for conquering the social scene.

    21. Re:Such an option is going to cause panic... by HiThere · · Score: 2

      That move alone absolutely sickened me, and I have lost all faith in our politicians.

      Well, at least one good thing came out of it.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    22. Re:Such an option is going to cause panic... by bfandreas · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ooooh, this is actually a scary prospect. This is a scenario where corporations threaten to shut down infrastructure in order to interfere with Congressional decision making process.
      It fills me with great satisfaction when congress critters can't google for the closest ladyboy escort service on their smartphone while they are supposed to pursue this nations best interests. And yes, I intentionally imply gross negligence, rottenness and hypocrisy when talking of elected representatives.
      But the line being crossed here is scary. They could also threaten a black out in favor for SOPA and the likes. We can't on the one hand complain about undue influence of corporations on the political process and on the other hand welcome it when it suits us. This is hypocrisy, too.
      Now black out that Google front page already!

      --
      20 minutes into the future
    23. Re:Such an option is going to cause panic... by Fujisawa+Sensei · · Score: 3, Funny

      No, in Middle Earth Sauron actually lost.

      --
      If someone is passing you on the right, you are an asshole for driving in the wrong lane.
    24. Re:Such an option is going to cause panic... by TheRedShirt · · Score: 2

      "Such an option is going to cause panic..." but not enough, not in the right places.

      While blackouts in protest are a noble gesture, I fear that it will not be significant enough. Certainly if it only lasts for one day. If they really serious in wanting to send a message in no uncertain terms to Washington, the big dot com CONTENT providers need to partner with the major SERVICE providers.

      Like has been mentioned, it should be tiered and last over several days. Start at Zero Hour with Google and Facebook going dark. Six hours later more sites go dark. At Z+18, ISPs should start throttling the backbones. At Z+24, start shutting down the backbones. By Z+36, only the most critical infrastructure communications should be allowed to have traffic.

      If Congress is going to let their bad policy making decisions be steered by corrupt and greedy corporations that refuse to embrace the new paradigm of online content, corporations who would rather cripple the greatest content delivery system ever conceived... they need a blunt wake up call from those who really control it. Show them who REALLY is in charge.

    25. Re:Such an option is going to cause panic... by rtb61 · · Score: 2

      Ultimately that is the catch no point blackmailing a politician to vote your way if as a result they lose the next election and the law is thrown out and other laws end up being reviewed. So the challenge here is to make them feel the teeth of angry voters where it counts in the primaries. Every SOPA supporting politicians should have a strong challenger appearing now, a challenger who has popular support ready to go into the next primary. So who really can win mass media and the 1% or the 99% and the internet. Need more than just talk, you need a bona fide challenger in each and every senate and congress seat up for grabs and anti-SOPA challenger, a representative of the 99%, whether Democrat, Republican or Independent or even all three simultaneously.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    26. Re:Such an option is going to cause panic... by BJ_Covert_Action · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Argue that all you want, but the fact is that politicians don't get paid all that much, yet Senators all live very well, well beyond what a $175k/yr salary would suggest.

      When the fuck did $175,000 / year get classified as not "all that much." Both of my parents combined never made even close to that amount and we grew up fine and dandy.

  2. And when they don't? by gazbo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    And when they don't in fact do that, are we expected to be at all surprised?

    1. Re:And when they don't? by Kjella · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Nope. That doesn't mean rattling your sabers didn't have an effect. Nobody launched a single nuke during the Cold War, but both the explicit and implicit threats obviously had a huge effect. They don't really want to go nuclear any more than anyone wanted WWIII.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    2. Re:And when they don't? by billcopc · · Score: 2

      Really ?

      Surely, some people must have wanted WWIII, else they wouldn't have started the whole "cold war" cockfight in the first place. Cold War = money and power for the fear factories. SOPA blackout = loss of money for these megacorps. I'd say they stand at polar opposites, as far as analogies go.

      Forget Yahoo, they're a joke, but for Google, Amazon and Facebook to forgo 1/365th of their user-based income probably represents more cash than the sum of all the SOPA lobbyists' payola. If they really wanted to stomp SOPA, they would have bought it out like any other SIG.

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
  3. Editing fail by Travelsonic · · Score: 4, Informative

    "Alec Liu of Fox News reports that Amazon, Facebook and Google are considering a coordinated a coordinated blackout of the internet to protest SOPA, the Stop Online Privacy Act ... *SNIP*

    PIRACY act, it's the Stop Online PIRACY act. Talk about a grammar failure. /GrammarNazi.

    --
    If you believe in privacy, and believe you have "nothing to hide" at the same time, you're a goddammed idiot
    1. Re:Editing fail by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 5, Funny

      "Alec Liu of Fox News reports that Amazon, Facebook and Google are considering a coordinated a coordinated blackout of the internet to protest SOPA, the Stop Online Privacy Act ... *SNIP*

      PIRACY act, it's the Stop Online PIRACY act. Talk about a grammar failure. /GrammarNazi.

      Are you the same guy that keeps pointing out that Micro$oft is not actually spelled with a dollar sign?

    2. Re:Editing fail by Nemyst · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I actually like that name. It certainly reflects the wishes of the politicians better.

    3. Re:Editing fail by AngryDeuce · · Score: 2

      Ditto. First I'd heard it, and definitely using that from now on when referring to it...

    4. Re:Editing fail by Totenglocke · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It should be called SOAA - Stop Online Activity Act, because that's the real agenda here. Companies that failed to adapt to a changed market and blaming the internet for their failures and want it banned.

      --
      "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
  4. Srsly? by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'd love to see it. I could believe it from Amazon and maybe Google, but also Facebook? That's tougher.

    Paranoia check, am I the only one whose links fail to post to their failbook wall only when they're political speech, and never just some vapid crap?

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    1. Re:Srsly? by OS24Ever · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I would think Facebook could implement something geographically that based on what they know about you, tell you who to call to get your Facebook account restored and have it be the senators of the state you live in, and the house of representatives for your zip code.

      That could be spectacular. I mean the phone systems would melt down. I find this idea rather funny.

      --

      As a rock-in-roll Physicist once said, No matter where you go, there you are.

    2. Re:Srsly? by RazorSharp · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I have no idea what you're talking about about this 'failbook wall' thing (I've never used Facebook), but I do know that Facebook, along with Google and Amazon, probably has the most to lose because of SOPA. As I understand it, it would make them responsible for the actions of their users, which would be completely unmanageable for them.

      This is why SOPA will fail. These companies cannot afford to let it pass because even if it did their only option would be noncompliance. This threat of a blackout is a warning. If they do go through with it, SOPA will be dead. Almost every single congressman's mailbox/e-mail server will be flooded with messages, it would be like a legal DoS.

      --
      "From the depths of my skeptical and rationalist soul, I ask the Lord to protect me from California touchie-feeliedom."
    3. Re:Srsly? by Dishevel · · Score: 4, Funny

      I do not think Facebook user are comfortable with phones.
      Unless they can text their representatives.

      "OMG! Stop that SOPA thing and gime back my Facebook!"

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
    4. Re:Srsly? by Grishnakh · · Score: 2

      It's good to see these companies working together on a good cause. Now they need to also work together to eradicate one of the most evil companies on the internet today, and one of the architects of SOPA: GoDaddy.

    5. Re:Srsly? by qbast · · Score: 2

      Or even better do some research first and display: "You congress critter supports SOPA. That's not surprising considering that he/she took $x in donations from media companies. "

  5. Just blackout 4/5 of the screen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Let people access facebook, etc, but only in a tiny little window. Have the rest black with a message "Call your politician right now to remove this".

  6. Better option -- Targeted blackout by DarkOx · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Google, Facebook, Amazon,Yahoo, etc should continue as normal but show the supports of censorship just how much fun being censored can be!

    Google/Yahoo can simply don't return any results that include the names of Senators, and Representatives that supported the act, bonus points if you can still detect NEGATIVE news about them and return those results, don't return listings for products from companies that support the ACT on Amazon/Google/Yahoo, Facebook stop having the profiles come up in searches and don't let any posts hit news feeds even to people who are all ready friends or followers.

    Frankly after such a black out of those organizations I'd be real surprised if the thing passes, and if it does is not repealed in a week. It would also give a big boost to those who don't support this stuff as it will put them front and center before the consumer for a change.

    --
    Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    1. Re:Better option -- Targeted blackout by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 2

      Targeted blackout is the right choice. Also, don't display SOPA backers' ads.

    2. Re:Better option -- Targeted blackout by shentino · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I wonder if Google's anti censorship stance is what got them under the antitrust microscope in the first place?

      Far easier to pass a bad law when you have your opponent by the balls.

    3. Re:Better option -- Targeted blackout by fermion · · Score: 3, Informative
      A full blackout is a reasonable response, because, in the language that is so popular with politicians, SOPA is going to result in excessive regulation that will cost jobs and likely cause significant increases in the cost of services, perhaps to the point where those services will no longer be able to provided on an ad supported or free to consumer basis.

      The only impediment is how to make this coordinated. For instance all the Google, Bing, and Yahoo are going to have cooperate. Otherwise any blackout may simply result in loss of customers for one service, not a clear message to call one's representative. I suspect that if the services choose a minute during the day when no results are returned, only a message to call your representative and state your opinion on SOPA, the bill will die. If Google and MS tell users that search will die if SOPA is passed, no amount of politicking will be able to counteract that message.

      Anything less is a show of support for SOPA by the major players.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    4. Re:Better option -- Targeted blackout by AngryDeuce · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Plus, some of the complaints are bullshit; for instance, the whole "serving information directly" thing, i.e., the way typing in a company's NYSE abbreviation brings up the little Google Finance thing with the current stock price and recent trends instead of giving results to a bunch of financial firms and shit. For the vast majority of users, they don't want to go digging around for a fucking answer to a simple question, they just want the answer. Typing "2 + 2" does not mean "give me links to online calculators."

      The only companies complaining about shit like that are companies that are trying to monetize public information, which is bullshit anyway. Forcing information to be obfuscated so as to force people to dig around on random third party sites seems like a step completely in the wrong direction in terms of progress.

    5. Re:Better option -- Targeted blackout by Steauengeglase · · Score: 2

      Interesting.

      I'd even go a step further. For 24 hours leave up a little button beside each link stating that you feel this person has violated your copyright. Anyone can click it, allow them to leave a small comment explaining why they think "their" copyright has been violated. When the 24 hours is up that page is delisted for the next 24, pointing to a fake seizure page detailing the "reason".

      I'm sure 24 hours of crappy reasons like "I've decided to act on behalf of Colgate and we feel that Oral-B violates Colgate's trademarks concerning the use of the word 'tooth'" or "C-SPAN is partaking in potentially felonious streaming of Random House's content via Book TV" will be more than entertaining enough to make up for a day without Google.

    6. Re:Better option -- Targeted blackout by eddy+the+lip · · Score: 2

      Neither is G+. When I searched Google, the first three hits were to three different, relevant articles on Wikipedia.

      Neither Facebook or G+ were in the top ten. What I got were articles _about_ social networking, which seems entirely sane and not nefarious.

      --

      This is the voice of World Control. I bring you Peace.

  7. No need ... by PPH · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... to black out an entire site. Just drop the candidates' Twitter, FaceBook accounts and websites immediately prior to various state primary elections or caucuses.

    You want panic? That'll be panic the likes of which you've never seen.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
    1. Re:No need ... by Overzeetop · · Score: 5, Informative

      I can practically guarantee that loss or suspension of an account at the sole discretion of the provider is in their terms of service. Completely legal, and already agreed to by the candidates. Game, set, match.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    2. Re:No need ... by shentino · · Score: 2

      "Pissing off the people in power" is usually pretty much "illegal" no matter what government system you run.

    3. Re:No need ... by Jeremi · · Score: 4, Funny

      The coordinated effort of a group of companies/individuals to deny access to voting information in an effort to deny the vote.

      Around here we don't call that election tampering, we call that Fox News.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
  8. Stop Talking by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... and do it. Either you have a backbone or you don't. Pick a day, middle of the week, say Jan 12th, and just do it. Announce you're doing it, and watch the others fall in line. True leadership doesn't wait.

    --
    Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    1. Re:Stop Talking by elsurexiste · · Score: 2

      The Tao demands that you exert your influence and spend the least possible amount of effort to accomplish a task. In this case, just saying that you consider a blackout may be enough to coax those technologically oblivious people. Leadership is not about acting, but about influencing.

      --
      I rarely respond to comments. Also, don't ask for clarifications: a brain and Google are faster, believe me!
  9. Better do it fast! by Usefull+Idiot · · Score: 2

    Before a law passes that would declare it terrorism! Unless they pass a law retroactively declaring discussing the option a terroristic threat, which I wouldn't put past the lawmakers... Uh oh, I should shut up, I'm giving them ideas.

  10. Re:Pot calling the kettle black by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Not really. A private company can decide to shut down at any moment, there is nothing inherently wrong with this. When a government decides to shut down private companies at will though, that's when shit hits the proverbial fan.

  11. Re:Democracy in Action by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What's interesting is that despite their size and financial power, the technology companies are very poorly organised and do very little lobbying when you compare them to the media companies. Which is why we get such horribly lopsided legislation such as SOPA.

    If the tech. companies actually got themselves organised in Washington instead of pulling silly stunts, they might actually find they can get a lot more done.

  12. This move is lame... by kanto · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... and underlines the travesty that democracy has become. It's bad enough corporations write the legislation now they're going to effectively start voting on them by themselves.. this should scare the living daylights out of us and not be some kind a source for celebration.

    1. Re:This move is lame... by Hentes · · Score: 2

      Because it's so very democratic when the congress of one nation writes the rules affecting the whole Internet? The userbase of these corporations represent the global Internet community much better.

    2. Re:This move is lame... by GreatBunzinni · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You are confused. The fact that corporations do write legislation tailored to their needs is an obvious sign that the government is corrupt. Yet, having corporations react to the legislation that corrupt representatives are forcing onto a country is hardly any reason to worry about. You may complain that these companies are actively engaged in the democratic process, but this is the very definition of activism, which is supposed to be one of those inalienable rights which, when expressed, represent what a democratic system is all about.

      So, why exactly do you believe that activism is somehow worse than having corrupt politicians act as the lap dog of other corporations and special interest groups?

      --
      Slashdot, fix your code or at least hire someone who is competent at it to do it for you.
    3. Re:This move is lame... by naasking · · Score: 2

      this should scare the living daylights out of us and not be some kind a source for celebration.

      When their position is in the interests of all citizens, it is cause for celebration. When their position is not in our interests, then it's cause for protest. There's no need to always consider corporations as the enemy. Sometimes they're on the right side.

    4. Re:This move is lame... by Hentes · · Score: 2

      The problem is that American laws already affect foreign sites. The US won't hesitate disrupting the Internet if it serves its perceived economical interests.

  13. What about the rest of the world? by shabble · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "...and their Internet allies simultaneously turn black with anti-censorship warnings that ask users to contact politicians about a vote in the U.S. Congress the next day on SOPA."

    Are they going to geo-locate IP addresses so those of us that don't have a congress-critter to talk to don't see what, to us, is a pointless message?

    1. Re:What about the rest of the world? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I hope they don't. The rest of the world needs to be confronted with the fact that the internet has way too many Big Red Buttons.

  14. Re:They can find better protets methods... by mrclisdue · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A simple splash screen is fine.

    Except that, once SOPA is enacted, you will be greeted with a 404 when you try to login to your favourite site...forever.

    The point being that once SOPA is enacted, everybody becomes hostage.

    cheers,

  15. All well and good, but... by IANAAC · · Score: 4, Interesting
    That's all well and good, but a total blackout of pages is never going to happen. These companies have too much money to lose.

    What will most likely happen is you'll get a black box on the page with the message, then a button to click to continue on with your search/purchase/whatever.

    I would fully support complete uavailability from these websites for a day/set time period - it would really be effective. But it'll never happen as long as there's money to be made/lost.

    1. Re:All well and good, but... by wvmarle · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The loss of one day's worth is far less than the potential losses caused by SOPA. Which include downright closure of your business.

  16. No, the nuclear option is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    replacing DNS. With browser manufacturers onboard, it wouldn't be nearly as disruptive as one might think - particularly as nothing more than a new, preferred method that lived alongside the old method. Or another nuclear options is some combination of this and encrypting/onion-routing the entire Web, so that no one can tell where content is actually coming from.

    What TFA mentions is an attempt to barter by threatening suicide - not war.

    1. Re:No, the nuclear option is... by WillDraven · · Score: 2

      How exactly would one write such a law so that it wouldn't effectively ban the entire internet?

      --
      This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
  17. Re:Pot calling the kettle black by Sloppy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What a bizarre thing to say. A blackout of a handful of websites, especially when self-imposed, is hardly "blocking the internet." It's not in the same league as the government fucking up DNS for everyone whether they consent or not.

    --
    As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
  18. Re:They can find better protets methods... by nurb432 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And that attitude is why we are in this mess in the first place. You are all for it, as long as you are not inconvenienced.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  19. Re:Democracy in Action by tjhart85 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yes, exactly! Getting the people involved is NOT the solution! The real solution is that they just have to offer a bigger bribe than the media companies!

  20. Re:Pot calling the kettle black by JoeMerchant · · Score: 4, Informative

    Isn't a collusive action like this no better than the legislation these corporations are trying to stop? Blocking the internet is blocking the internet, regardless of who does it and why.

    There's a difference between a protest a few hours long and a law that will change the landscape for decades to come.

  21. SOAP is what you get by RichMan · · Score: 5, Interesting

    When the politicians admit
    a) they don't understand the tech
    b) are willing to take the positions of the media companies that donate to them

    So the US is led by ludites who have sold their favor to the corporations. And this (the US) is the self descibed "leader of the free world".

    Where is the power of the people in this process? Where is the representation of the taxed?
    Where is the educated and informed action that is supposed to happen in a democracy?

    Do we need more proof we are living in a corporatocracy ?

    1. Re:SOAP is what you get by Artemis3 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Americans do not believe in Democracy. Power to the masses to them equals ignorants ruling. They crafted a system where the rich (educated) elite is able to influence politics to the extreme, the "Lobby system" which is basically illegal in the rest of the world; rich people and corporations openly funding politicians (elsewhere a scandal).

      Technically they don't define themselves as a democracy either, its a republic at best. A federal states union or something along those lines; each ruled by the wealthy (now corporations) in practice. A form of plutocracy, and it was intended that way. The rest is (corporate) propaganda to keep the masses controlled, and brag the world of how perfect they are and how undeveloped everyone else is.

      --
      Artix
      Your Linux, your init.
    2. Re:SOAP is what you get by Hatta · · Score: 2

      A republic, if we could keep it. As it turns out, we could not.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  22. Good idea, time to call for attention. by Artemis3 · · Score: 4, Informative

    It is a good idea, if the block shows a notice about the issue at hand. Wikipedia Italy did the same to protest something similar.

    SOPA/PIPA in the end forces self-censorship, Americans might as well try an early taste of it. Also, nobody in their right mind should keep their e-business there, and its about time the world breaks with ICANN and switch to alternatives like OpenNIC.

    I don't agree with that "nuclear" wording made by CNET. For a moment i though either the nuclear power industry was involved and would agree to a literal "blackout" or something unlikely involving weapons of mass destruction...

    Also i hope they make clear this is something concerning USA legislative branch, aka Congress, and its their citizens the ones getting the worst. Might be painful at first, but The World will learn to route around America. So the "blackouts" should be limited to American IPs.

    The notice might also show a list of who are supporting this bill, and call for boycotts, go daddy style; an action which seems to have gotten some people nervous.

    --
    Artix
    Your Linux, your init.
  23. Re:Pot calling the kettle black by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 4, Informative

    No. In this case you havecompanies who ownthe resources in question deciding to make them unavailable. In the other case you have the government deciding to make the resources it does not own or control unavailable based onthe say-so of any given third party and a judge's approval.

  24. Re:Pot calling the kettle black by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    What's the difference between Facebook, Google, et. al. taking themselves offline compared to the government doing it for them? From an end user's perspective, there is no difference.

    This is the most idiotic thing I've heard anyone say in a while.

  25. Re:They can find better protets methods... by Hatta · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Your minor inconvenience is a small price to pay if we can avoid the major catastrophe of SOPA.

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  26. Re:Doesn't have to be a total blackout by dgatwood · · Score: 2

    The first button should say, "Write Your Congressperson". The *second* button should say "Continue to site". Here's what the ad campaign should look like:

    Facebook: grey background with all media (video clips, photos, etc.) and most of the posts replaced with the words "This content is not available due to copyright claim."

    Google: all image search results, Google Video/YouTube results, and a random scattering of normal search results should be replaced with the words "This content is not available due to copyright claim."

    And on all pages, a pop-over dialog box in the middle of the screen says, "If SOPA passes, this is what this website will look like. [Write my congresspeople] [Okay, I get it; just show me the content]".

    And it should use cookies so that each person sees it only once per day.

    --

    Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

  27. Re:Pot calling the kettle black by Chrisje · · Score: 5, Funny

    I have to second what the AC said below. That is the most idiotic thing I've heard in a long time.

    You're really asking us what the difference is between choosing not to say something or having your government making sure you don't say a given thing? If you are a US citizen AND you would say such a thing, I suggest you print out your Constitution and Declaration of Independence and henceforth use it to wipe your ass with.

    Wow.

  28. Oh shit... this is getting serious by erroneus · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm not "oh shit"-ing because there might be a global demonstration against what the US government is attempting to do. I'm "oh shit"-ing because many businesses are willing to interrupt their business to get notice and make a stand. Of course, this is so they can preserve what they have now, but this is also "oh shit" because they are seeing the future beyond tomorrow or the next quarter.

    It's getting serious.

  29. just block .us .gov domains by deadl0ck · · Score: 3, Interesting

    instead of blocking everyone, why not send requests from .us or gov domains to a custom page or block entirely.

    --
    --
  30. Re:Good Idea by ais523 · · Score: 3, Informative

    It's worth noting that the Italian Wikipedia actually did shut down for a few days, in response to a proposed law in Italy that they thought would have made it basically illegal for them to operate (apparently, it would have allowed anyone to force a website to publish a retraction of anything said about them with minimal judicial oversight). Here's the Slashdot story on the issue. They hid all content on the site while they were opposing the proposal. So not only has this happened, on Wikipedia, but at least one major website's actually gone through with a threat like that in the past. I guess it makes it more likely that they'll go through with it again, if necessary.

    --
    (1)DOCOMEFROM!2~.2'~#1WHILE:1<-"'?.1$.2'~'"':1/.1$.2'~#0"$#65535'"$"'"'&.1$.2'~'#0$#65535'"$#0'~#32767$#1"
  31. Do it! by assertation · · Score: 4, Funny

    Alec Liu of Fox News reports that Amazon, Facebook and Google are considering a coordinated blackout of the internet to protest SOPA

    Even if Congress relents, they should do it. It would be just too cool of a spectacle not to!

    It would also be fun to read the next day in the news how American office worker productivity had a temporary spike upwards.

  32. Re:They can find better protets methods... by bmo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    >Ah, more fearmongering. No, my personal site will never be affected by SOPA because I generate all its content myself. My own photography, videos, thoughts and data feeds.

    Someone, maybe me, maybe someone else accuses you of infringing, whether true or not. Your upstream gets 100 percent protection from liability if they cut you off and none if they don't, because that's how "good faith" is defined in the bill.

    And I, as the accuser, do not suffer any consequences for false accusation.

    Guess what happens to your site.

    Go ahead, guess.

    --
    BMO

  33. Block access to SOPA supporters by schwit1 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Google, Facebook and Amazon should block access from their public IPs, Facebook should shutdown accounts of SOPA supporters and Google should remove search results for them. This includes government IPs and accounts.

    Stop playing nice. Make life troublesome for them.

  34. Re:They can find better protets methods... by mrclisdue · · Score: 5, Informative

    Fearmongering?

    Let's suppose someone from Time-Warner decides that "your own photography" resembles theirs? "your own videos" resemble theirs (how could *anyone* possibly have the same or similar ideas as anyone else?)

    Once *someone-with-more-pull ($$)* than you decides that you're infringing on their widespread copyright/trademarks/patents, you're doomed.

    You may feel that you're immune, but you won't be; there simply aren't enough checks and balances to ensure you're immune. The dollars win every time.

    cheers,

  35. Re:They can find better protets methods... by HeckRuler · · Score: 5, Insightful

    because I generate all its content myself. My own photography, videos, thoughts and data feeds.

    Prove it. Prove that it isn't owned by someone else. Then take that evidence proving a negative to a court, fight the district attorney, convince a judge that your personal site was wrongfully blocked. And then your site will be unblocked.

    Until they do it again.

    (Also, the parent said "favorite sites", not "personal site". With SOPA, the DA, at the behest of content owners, could block any site that they deem is infringing their copyrights or is aiding infringement. Like if Slashdot linked to a site that explained how to bypass SOPA blocks.)

  36. Just a heads up by future+assassin · · Score: 2

    but for people like me losing those services will not be noticed. I think SOPA is insane but except for google I don't use any of the other services and google is not the only search shop in town. I can see mostly parents who rely on youtube and facebook as baby sitters being affected.

    Why not just de-list all the SOPA supporters from Google and see what happens.

    --
    by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
  37. Re:Has Google, Amazon et al proposed an alternativ by dgatwood · · Score: 5, Interesting

    You can't combat piracy. Externalities are a cost of doing business. Anyone who thinks otherwise is kidding him/herself.

    There's exactly one way to maximize profit, and that is to deliver a product that people are willing to pay for at a price that they are willing to pay. The pirates were never your customers and never will be, and the sooner the companies accept that and focus on the real problems (massively overpricing everything when first released, delivering products that can't easily be moved between devices because of the restrictive/broken DRM, and the declining quality of entertainment products in general), they'll have better profits. That's not what SOPA/PIPA and similar legislation are about, however. They're about eliminating legitimate lower-cost competition.

    What scares the industry most is that these days, any jackass in his home could make a movie of comparable quality to most of the non-SFX Hollywood films. Moderately high-end HD cams cost a couple of grand or three—well within the price range of most people if they are willing to save up for a bit. You can buy halogen lights at Home Depot for fifty bucks, then rebuild the reflectors yourself and build your own barn doors for just about nothing. And there are millions of people out there who can act, not just a few dozen in Hollyweird, so there's no shortage of available talent.

    In effect, this means that commercial movies are too expensive by about a factor of a thousand. But instead of finding ways to take advantage of new technologies to cut their production and distribution costs, they are instead focusing on destroying new means of distribution to prevent competition. You see, YouTube is in a great position to deliver paid content from independent producers to consumers. The studios know this, and they know that if the Internet turns into anything approaching a free market, they're basically out of business. For this reason, they do everything within their power to kill such sites—not because they can be used to pirate Hollywood movies, but because they can be used to sell non-Hollywood movies without having to spend millions of dollars in infrastructure. That ability of the general public to do what the major studios do is the greatest threat to their power.

    Game studios are similar. There's no reason why people who want to write games should go work for one of those sweatshops, working unholy hours for terrible pay. You can go off on your own and work with a handful of people and write a great game, sell it, and make a fair amount of money. If everyone did this, the sweatshop game studios of the world would collapse, and the Internet makes that not only possible, but downright easy. They know this, and it terrifies them. So they do what they can to create liability for any ISP that might dare to distribute software, thus discouraging the practice.

    And so on. It's not about piracy. It's about control. They want to control the entire content production industry, and our Congresspeople are almost all too fucking stupid to realize that these laws only serve to turn the big studios into a state-protected oligopoly and thwart small businesses' attempts to compete. And this is why we don't have jobs in this country.

    --

    Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

  38. Re:First they get my hopes up, then ... by LVSlushdat · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Simple: Each one of the major players, put up a black splash page with info about SOPA and WHAT to do about it... That's all, No Google searches, no Facebook statuses, No buying on Amazon/eBay. If you go to one of these sites ALL you get is the black splash page... EasyPeasy...

    --
    THANK YOU, Edward Snowden!! Americans owe you a debt of gratitude (whether they know it or not..)
  39. They should rename that option by HangingChad · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If they're going to stop working and drag their feet on getting anything done, they should call it the "Republican option". Nuclear option implies a device that's working.

    --
    That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
  40. Re:They can find better protets methods... by Heddahenrik · · Score: 4, Insightful
    >"Ah, more fearmongering. No, my personal site will never be affected by SOPA because I generate all its content myself. My own photography, videos, thoughts and data feeds."

    Bullshit! Some robot will notice that your notice that your stuff looks "copied" and you'll be gone. And if they can shove SOPA down your throat, you can be sure that you'll soon have to have a permit to have a website. And your thoughts are build on other thoughts, by the way, so they are just blatant copy-monopoly infringement.

    This is NOT fear-mongering. It's already happening! Youtube is deleting stuff that "seems" bad (like critique of SOPA) because of misuse by the entertainment mafia. Google's AdSense is removing from sites that MIGHT have copied stuff on them. With SOPA the mafia can also shut people up or at least make Internet at lot less useful.

  41. The Day Before Does Nothing by stoicio · · Score: 2

    It seems a bit odd to try a blackout the day before a vote.
    It would be more to the point , and achieve more if everyone
    went off line for 2 or 3 days at least a week in advance of the vote.
    Then go back on line, and once again blackout the day before
    as a reminder.

    If you're going to protest, at least make sure the message sticks.

  42. Re:They can find better protets methods... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Why do you believe that generating all the content yourself is sufficient for you to "not be affected"? Just because your site happens to not actually be infringing is no reason for a competitor (or a thug from the MAFIAA) NOT to accuse you of infringing. Your site goes down for weeks or months, it turns out you're not infringing and it goes back up, and they do it again.

  43. Re:Good by ancientt · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It is very apt that they're referring to it as a nuclear option, because it harms much more than just the intended target. Every visitor to a site with blackout boxes or censorship warnings will consider for a moment what their other options are. This action would be to inform people of something they probably don't realize they care about. It will cost the participants real money as customers switch to alternatives and even those who don't switch will be a little more aware that they need alternatives.

    There will be fallout.

    You fear corporate action to influence behavior? Many people seem to think that they have a right to the services provided, rather than realizing it can be revoked or changed at whim, and I welcome the education of the masses.

    --
    B) Eliminate all the stupid users. This is frowned upon by society.
  44. Re:They can find better protets methods... by FSWKU · · Score: 2

    there simply aren't enough checks and balances.

    Oh there's plenty of checks (made out to campaign funds), just no balances. And that's the problem.

    --
    "So after all this, you make my case for me. To end this stalemate, you must die..."
  45. Re:Pot calling the kettle black by Culture20 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What's the difference between Facebook, Google, et. al. taking themselves offline compared to the government doing it for them? From an end user's perspective, there is no difference.

    It's the difference between a dude in Tunisia setting himself on fire in political protest and the cops taking him away to be disposed of quietly. Choice. Freedom. Yes, if you get freedom to decide for yourself, that means the people running Google and Facebook get freedom too. It's part of the overall concept. And when people see that Google, Facebook, et al are willing to hurt themselves to stop this legislation, it might pique a little interest.

  46. Re:They can find better protets methods... by kheldan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Better watch out. Your camera manufacturer may change the EULA on the software your camera runs, claiming copyright on all photographs taken with the camera that you are granted license to use (you didn't really think that you OWN the camera, did you? No no silly boy, you merely bought a license to use it! All you base are belong to us!), therefore anything you post online is an infringement on THEIR copyright. Don't worry, I'm sure they'll let you off with a warning -- and a royalty fee for every photo you post on your website. Oh, and you website hosting company may change their EULA to claim copyright on all content they're hosting -- merely to protect YOU, of course -- so don't go thinking you own any of that, either. As if you ever did: The EULA on the software you used to create your site? Same deal: they change the EULA, and viola! Nothing you create with it is really yours, you just have a limited license to it, revokable more or less any time they decide you did, and unless you have a zillion dollars to pay a lawyer to fight it, you're screwed. And so on, and so on. Welcome to the world of SOPA: You own NOTHING.

    --
    Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
  47. Re:Pot calling the kettle black by Grishnakh · · Score: 4, Informative

    Are you dense?

    What's the difference between a bunch of key employees of a company quitting at the same time, or that company laying them off? From the perspective of the customers of that company (who now can't get their products), there's no difference, but that's irrelevant. Employment is voluntary: if employees want to quit, they're allowed to, regardless of who it hurts. If the employer wants to fire everyone, they're allowed to (subject to employment law), even if it's shooting themselves in the foot. Same here: just because so many people use FB and Google services doesn't mean they're obligated to continue providing them in perpetuity.

  48. or rather by pablo_max · · Score: 2

    "Almost every single congressman's mailbox/e-mail server will be flooded with messages, it would be like a legal DoS."

    Or rather would be, had google not shut down gmail.

  49. Re:Your God's name is SONY by biodata · · Score: 2
    This is what the media companies want you to think. The one thing the recent NewsCorp events have taught us is how the relationship between government and media really works (in the UK at least, I imagine it's the same in the US).

    NewsCorp is a protection racket. It invades the privacy of anyone in the public eye, builds up a dossier of evidence that would be uncomfortable for the person if made public, and uses that evidence to further its economic aims.

    They only publish the dirt if they don't get what they want. Generally they use the dirt as leverage over the politicians.

    This is why SOPA.

    --
    Korma: Good
  50. Re:Newscorp by biodata · · Score: 4, Informative
    Newscorp eh? A UK politician recently openly called Newscorp a 'protection racket'. They had invaded the privacy of everyone in the public eye to dig up dirt, and were using that dirt to further their own agenda, and as leverage against politicians.

    It's starting to become clear why your US senators support this thing now.

    --
    Korma: Good
  51. harmonizing douchebag cockhead end-run by epine · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yes, and the harmonization process involves negotiating treaty consent in a closed process, then bringing it back and claiming in the face of democratic opposition "we've already promised this" without any democratic consent in the first place.

    I wouldn't complain about my life suffering a DOS day for these companies to band together and make a point.

  52. Re:Pot calling the kettle black by error_logic · · Score: 2

    Yes. You are right. They could just stop services.

    This is them threatening to do exactly that for a short time, to protest SOPA--which would give that power to other parties not in ownership of said property.

    The Internet as we know it cannot coexist with SOPA, because it means any site with user-generated content would be subject to the whims of lawyers with agendas.

  53. Re:Good by Dwonis · · Score: 2

    Corporate interests controlling voter behavior (vote our way or we'll break the Internet) is terrifying

    You do realize that Congress is voting on whether to break the Internet, right?

  54. Re:Democracy in Action by JonWan · · Score: 2

    Getting people involved would be nice but, Google buying one of the big 5 media companies and dump all content more than 14 years old into a CC license would be priceless.

  55. Re:First they get my hopes up, then ... by ScentCone · · Score: 4, Interesting

    No Google searches, no Facebook statuses, No buying on Amazon/eBay

    It's not that simple. There are contractual issues in play, with third parties who pay places like Amazon and eBay to provide services that are part of their businesses. I doubt that those agreements have clauses in them that say things like "We retain the right to fail to provide you with these contracted-for services while we participate in a political protest." Lots of moving parts involved, here.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  56. Re:They can find better protets methods... by cffrost · · Score: 4, Funny

    "cheers" is used as a valediction.

    What!? "Cheers" is a toast! You mean to tell me I've been getting slobbering shitfaced reading your posts, and you haven't even been trying to keep up? =(

    --
    Thank you, Edward Snowden.

    "Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
  57. In our darkest hour -- a savior will return by Krishnoid · · Score: 5, Funny
    They came after his candidacy ... and he stood down.

    They came after his planet ... and he started working to find a solution.

    Then they came after his child.

    Nobody comes after his child.

    GORE

    Summer, 2012.

  58. Re:Pot calling the kettle black by Rakarra · · Score: 2

    If you are a US citizen AND you would say such a thing, I suggest you print out your Constitution and Declaration of Independence and henceforth use it to wipe your ass with.

    I'd rather he print it out and then read it.
    Something I recommend all US citizens do. Most people who aren't used to doing that might get a few surprises.

  59. Re:First they get my hopes up, then ... by mrchaotica · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Imagine if every Adsense ad changed to an anti-SOPA message for a day...

    --

    "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  60. Re:Has Google, Amazon et al proposed an alternativ by steelfood · · Score: 2

    Your post needs to be turned into a television commercial.

    --
    "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
  61. Re:First they get my hopes up, then ... by Thing+1 · · Score: 2

    I doubt that those agreements have clauses in them that say things like "We retain the right to fail to provide you with these contracted-for services while we participate in a political protest." Lots of moving parts involved, here.

    Which is why I find it all the more amazing that this idea is even being floated. Kudos to them, even if they don't actually make it happen; they've made some noise. Tell your friends, relatives, neighbors.

    --
    I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
  62. Not everyone has lost faith by rsilvergun · · Score: 2

    Accepting that politicians are inherently corrupt and there's nothing you can do about it isn't a natural state of humanity. We could use more people with faith in their politicians. That way when that faith is abused there'd be some shock, instead of acceptance mixed with defeat and irritation.

    Oh, and if you need some faith restored and live in American, check out Alan Grayson, and if you can spare it please donate. After he pointed out the hypocrisy of our health care system the powers that be came down on him like a ton of bricks and ran him out of office with money...

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  63. Re:HAlf nuclear by sjames · · Score: 2

    Deep in a cave at an undisclosed location lives an original Cyber 70 with only a Morse code key and a single blinkenlight to act as a human interface.

    The machine is maintained by an old card walloper whose name is lost to time. According to legend his beard is now 20 feet long.

    That machine is the one true router without which the entire Internet becomes just a series of LANs.