The CSEA is more of an attempt to increase Bush's ratings through redundant legislation than anything else. This complements his obscure actions and vague speeches well. However, the bill appears to be well-intentioned, and I would have no complains if it were passed. The point about how the bill "also expands police ability to conduct Internet or telephone eavesdropping without first obtaining a court order" is misleading. The article later almost revokes this claim by stating the "kind of surveillance would, however, be limited to obtaining a suspect's telephone number, IP address, URLs or e-mail header information--not the contents of online communications or telephone calls", clearly nothing that threatens one's civil liberties or privacy. I doubt the same government that funds a sleazy trojan project (ahem... Magic Lantern) would even stick to such stringent liberty-friendly guidelines (as described in the bill). The Texan representative's attempted usage of synechdoche ('mouse' referring to a 'computer') is humorous indeed, but it simply cannot compete with Al Gore's 'invention' of the internet.
Most importantly, I would like to address the horrible choice of the title (CNet is purely to blame for this one). "House OKs life sentences for hackers"... at first sight it suggests that Mussolini has taken over and Mitnick's going back to the slammer (maybe they'll give him an quick trial this time). The fact is far from that, this bill simply reiterates that if anyone tries to commit murder, they shall face dire consequences, regardless of what tools were used.. a knife, an airplane, or a computer. (However, the 'life sentence' penalty isnt going to threaten a group of people that dont seem to value life very much.) The problem with this legislation is not that it violates civil liberties, but its apparent lack of practicality, redundancy, and the kind of ridiculous legislation that it may open doors to ("virtual trespassing" treated the same as its physical counterpart? "internet traffic violations" if you request a flashy web page too many times?). This leads us back to the title of my critique, a cloud with silver lining or silver in a cloud? Maybe its just another puff of smoke from Washington...
Slashdot Mirror
The CSEA is more of an attempt to increase Bush's ratings through redundant legislation than anything else. This complements his obscure actions and vague speeches well. However, the bill appears to be well-intentioned, and I would have no complains if it were passed.
The point about how the bill "also expands police ability to conduct Internet or telephone eavesdropping without first obtaining a court order" is misleading. The article later almost revokes this claim by stating the "kind of surveillance would, however, be limited to obtaining a suspect's telephone number, IP address, URLs or e-mail header information--not the contents of online communications or telephone calls", clearly nothing that threatens one's civil liberties or privacy. I doubt the same government that funds a sleazy trojan project (ahem... Magic Lantern) would even stick to such stringent liberty-friendly guidelines (as described in the bill).
The Texan representative's attempted usage of synechdoche ('mouse' referring to a 'computer') is humorous indeed, but it simply cannot compete with Al Gore's 'invention' of the internet. Most importantly, I would like to address the horrible choice of the title (CNet is purely to blame for this one). "House OKs life sentences for hackers"... at first sight it suggests that Mussolini has taken over and Mitnick's going back to the slammer (maybe they'll give him an quick trial this time). The fact is far from that, this bill simply reiterates that if anyone tries to commit murder, they shall face dire consequences, regardless of what tools were used.. a knife, an airplane, or a computer. (However, the 'life sentence' penalty isnt going to threaten a group of people that dont seem to value life very much.)
The problem with this legislation is not that it violates civil liberties, but its apparent lack of practicality, redundancy, and the kind of ridiculous legislation that it may open doors to ("virtual trespassing" treated the same as its physical counterpart? "internet traffic violations" if you request a flashy web page too many times?).
This leads us back to the title of my critique, a cloud with silver lining or silver in a cloud? Maybe its just another puff of smoke from Washington...