Slashdot Mirror
Facebook Says It Has 'No Intention' To Abuse CISPA
An anonymous reader writes "Facebook is supporting the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA), despite opposing the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the PROTECT IP Act (PIPA). SOPA and PIPA were about intellectual property, and allowed courts to remove DNS listings for any website hosting pirated content. CISPA is meanwhile about security, and makes it possible for companies to share user information with the U.S. government (and vice versa) if the parties believe it is needed for the greater cyber security good. That being said, CISPA has loopholes that allow it to be abused, especially when it comes to Intellectual Property and privacy. Facebook says it will not do that, and will instead work on closing these loopholes."
...you can trust Facebook when it comes to privacy!
The check's in the mail.
I won't cum in your mouth.
I'll respect you in the morning.
I won't abuse CISPA."
....
You don't give your support to something that is broken, you oppose it and negotiate the bad parts out. How exactly by supporting this thing do they think they're going to get it changed? This is Bullshit. If I was Mr Zuckerberg I'd be careful what I wish for...
"Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem." -- Jefferson
If I could mod TFS or TFA, they would definitely get a "+1 Funny"...
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
NDAA - Obama signed a statement saying he won't use the indefinite detention part of it.
What's up with all these laws, that are getting passed and the people who are directly or indirectly responsible for passing them are all promising not to use the new powers they acquire?
Why don't they just own up to the truth - there is no reason to pass these privacy and freedom destroying laws if you have no reason to use them, you pass them because you are intending to use them (or you are intending for them to be used, even if it is not you directly who is going to use them).
When is it going to stop exactly and why would it stop?
You can't handle the truth.
It is my firm belief that Google, Facebook and other "Big Players" who collect user-data for a living have been sharing all sorts of supposedly "private" user data with various governments for years, without ever talking publicly about this happening, or saying/doing anything that would confirm in any way that this - probably - illegal sharing of data is taking place. CISPA to the rescue: Now, when someone using these services complains or sues about their private data being handed to some government or govt agency, they can simply say: "We checked out your data briefly because of suspicion of a security threat. We found nothing, and deleted your data again. This is all perfectly legal under the rights-of-action granted by CISPA." To put it more simply, Google, FB & Others will continue what they have been doing all along - sharing your data with all sorts of other parties without informing you and without having your consent. But now, if a legal problem or challenge arises from doing this, they can simply invoke the relevant section of CISPA, and it all becomes perfectly legal. In no way can Google, FB & Friends be held liable or accountable for passing your private data on to others anymore. What a terrific law this is! Just what Google, FB & Friends have always wanted...
Why did the chicken cross the road? Because Elon Musk put an AI chip in its head.
The only time a corporation can be trusted is when you have a contract (and, sometimes, not even then). Otherwise, no.
A man or woman can give you their word, and may (or may not) be believed. A corporation cannot, as whatever is said can be changed totally, not least when the people at the top change.
That is the obvious question. If you support the creation of a system full of loopholes, then a claim of "we don't intend to abuse the system" has the unspoken addition "...but we think it's OK for people to abuse the system (and we reserve the right to abuse it if we change our minds)." If they don't agree with that little addition, then they should oppose it until the potential for abuse is fixed. Why start with a broken system and try to fix it later?
How about not passing laws with known loopholes in them in the first place??!
Reason? Because a lot of the support for the laws while they were under debate demanded those loopholes. But they weren't going to abuse them. Really. Honest! They'll be removed as soon as the law is passed. We promise!
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
We have no intention of abusing CISPA = We have every intention to claim any abuse has been unintentional?
Facebook is offended that you would even suggest that they would have any intention of abusing CISPA. They are really, really hurt that you would think such a thing about them.
Further, they have released a statement saying that they are trying really really hard, and do you have any idea how it makes them feel when you don't trust them? Perhaps you have some trust issues which are preventing you and them from becoming closer, and until you deal with those this relationship cannot get to the next level, which is making social networking more user-friendly! It's always all about you, isn't it? Your privacy. Your rights. You, you, you. How do you think Facebook feels? Do you ever care about them for one minute?
You are welcome on my lawn.
"We'll use it, EXACTLY as intended!"
"Abusing" CISPA would involve actions like demanding due process for actions by police and government agencies, or insisting on Warrants in the case of investigations and seizures. Facebook intends no such thing.
Welcome to the desert of the real.
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
Isn't the Slashdot comment system a huge potential data mine for spying and profiling people as well? I mean with Facebook, you get to see things such as a persons favorite artists, their friends, whether they like mountain dew or not, etc. With the people actively logging in, commenting, moderating and meta-moderating in slashdot, you get to see their whole idealogy and opinion of various government and political ideas. Which of these two things would governments be more interested in?