- Site menu:
- Latest Discussions
- Latest Newswire
- Archives
- Submit Story
- Story HOWTO
- Syndicate
- E-mail Alerts
Obama threatens to veto invasive cybersecurity bill CISPA
|
|
|
Comments (21)
I don't care how this goes down...
I don't care how this goes down so long as CISPA doesn't become law. The House has now passed the bill. (I'm submitting that story to the newswire.) There is now a push asking people to call their Senators and to ask them to vote no.
I always appreciate it when Caitlyn and I agree.
Don't you guys know that despite what it says on your calendars, it's not 2013, it's really 1984?!?!
> There is now a push asking people to call their Senators and to ask them to vote no.
My senators don't listen to me, as they already know I won't vote for them. :(
My senators don't listen to me, as they already know I won't vote for them. :(
All politicians only listen to those that pay for their campaigns. It doesn't matter what party, what country, what whatever you are talking about... The entire developed world is held hostage by big media. They control the flow of information, and decide what's "in" & "cool."
@JaseP --
Not as true as cynics believe.
People in positions of power tend to like being in positions of power. Let something stir the pot enough to rile the electorate, people listen.
Sometimes they get stupid and pay the price -- witness the electoral bloodbath of 2010, followed by the slap in the face administered to Republicans in 2012 after they got royally stupid and blew the opportunity that 2010 handed to them.
Did you notice how the recent spate of gun control measures went down? Somebody has been studying the 1934 midterm elections. That's when FDR went to the public with a list of items he'd try pushing through Congress only to be filibustered by Republicans. That's when he took complete control of Congress.
Those pithy little gun-control measures are the kind of thing you can throw at somebody and say "He voted against this".
If Democrats really are wising up -- a seeming impossibility given their nature -- 2014 could be a very interesting year.
Not as true as cynics believe.
People in positions of power tend to like being in positions of power. Let something stir the pot enough to rile the electorate, people listen.
Sometimes they get stupid and pay the price -- witness the electoral bloodbath of 2010, followed by the slap in the face administered to Republicans in 2012 after they got royally stupid and blew the opportunity that 2010 handed to them.
Did you notice how the recent spate of gun control measures went down? Somebody has been studying the 1934 midterm elections. That's when FDR went to the public with a list of items he'd try pushing through Congress only to be filibustered by Republicans. That's when he took complete control of Congress.
Those pithy little gun-control measures are the kind of thing you can throw at somebody and say "He voted against this".
If Democrats really are wising up -- a seeming impossibility given their nature -- 2014 could be a very interesting year.
> Those pithy little gun-control measures are the kind of thing you can throw at somebody and say "He voted against this".
The circles in which I tend to run would say, rather, "He voted for this."
The circles in which I tend to run would say, rather, "He voted for this."
Methinks we're getting too close to TOS issues... we should limit discussions more toward CISPA...
Hard to talk a political issue without talking a little politics.
My comment, for example, was basically that one should not simply presume that CISPA can't be beaten because politicians care only about who's greasing their palms. The truth is that they also care about those who could force their palms away from all the grease.
My comment, for example, was basically that one should not simply presume that CISPA can't be beaten because politicians care only about who's greasing their palms. The truth is that they also care about those who could force their palms away from all the grease.
> The truth is that they also care about those who could force their palms away from all the grease.
Yes. But that takes a fairly significant turnout of phone calls/letters from their voters to make them realize this issue is actually one which could have that result. And, as already noted, my letter/phone call would get rejected before it ever reached the pile.
Yes. But that takes a fairly significant turnout of phone calls/letters from their voters to make them realize this issue is actually one which could have that result. And, as already noted, my letter/phone call would get rejected before it ever reached the pile.
Without an Aaron Schwartz to get the "big names" to tell people about this, we're not going to be able to kill it.
The Powers That Be want it, and they want it bad.
The Powers That Be want it, and they want it bad.
You guys are obviously "14 year old basement dwellers":
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/04/obama-threatens-c...
/snark
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/04/obama-threatens-c...
/snark
I agree with dinotrac on this one. His posts hit the mark very well. Voting against something, anything that 90% of the people support is stupidity of the highest order. There is another issue that could cost the party who mainly voted against far more than the background check vote.
Regarding CISPA, we've beaten previous ill advised efforts to pass onerous bills that impact every Internet user. I don't think this one is any different if we get enough people angry. The key here is not to let up one little bit until this is dead.
JaseP: How's hat for staying on topic?
Regarding CISPA, we've beaten previous ill advised efforts to pass onerous bills that impact every Internet user. I don't think this one is any different if we get enough people angry. The key here is not to let up one little bit until this is dead.
JaseP: How's hat for staying on topic?
The Senate killed CISPA. It's dead.
Be wary, it will rise again!
> Be wary, it will rise again!
As long as people with money to spend want something, it'll keep showing up.
As long as people with money to spend want something, it'll keep showing up.
...and we'll keep shooting it down. What it takes is vigilance and a little anger.
It's only mostly dead.
Is it pining for the fjords?
privacy ?
Quoting:The National Security Agency and the FBI are tapping directly into the central servers of nine leading U.S. Internet companies, extracting audio and video chats, photographs, e-mails, documents, and connection logs that enable analysts to track foreign targets, according to a top-secret document obtained by The Washington Post.http://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/us-intelligence...
The program, code-named PRISM, has not been made public until now. It may be the first of its kind. The NSA prides itself on stealing secrets and breaking codes, and it is accustomed to corporate partnerships that help it divert data traffic or sidestep barriers. But there has never been a Google or Facebook before, and it is unlikely that there are richer troves of valuable intelligence than the ones in Silicon Valley. Equally unusual is the way the NSA extracts what it wants, according to the document: “Collection directly from the servers of these U.S. Service Providers: Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, Facebook, PalTalk, AOL, Skype, YouTube, Apple.”
London’s Guardian newspaper reported Friday that GCHQ, Britain’s equivalent of the NSA, also has been secretly gathering intelligence from the same internet companies through an operation set up by the NSA.
According to documents obtained by The Guardian, PRISM would appear to allow GCHQ to circumvent the formal legal process required in Britain to seek personal material such as emails, photos and videos from an internet company based outside of the country.
Quoting:Who are these companies and what do they want from me? A voyage into the invisible business that funds the web.http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/02/im-bei...
whistleblower : 'a matter of principle' : http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/09/edward-snowden-n...
This isn't really a government thing; the corporate sector has been going into this in a big way. The corporate sector just doesn't have the clout to get away with quite such high-handed approaches.
What They Know About You Wall Street Journal, July 30, 2010 http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405274870399930457539...
This ended up being the first article in an ongoing series -- and then a separate rubric under the WSJ technology section.
What They Know
http://online.wsj.com/public/page/what-they-know-digital-pri...
What They Know About You Wall Street Journal, July 30, 2010 http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405274870399930457539...
This ended up being the first article in an ongoing series -- and then a separate rubric under the WSJ technology section.
What They Know
http://online.wsj.com/public/page/what-they-know-digital-pri...
Post a comment
A free account is needed to post. Write your comment here first: your text is kept in this browser while you sign up or log in, and is waiting for you when you come back.
Your message:Markdown: **bold**, *italic*, [text](https://link), - lists, > quotes, $x^2$ for math. Formatting help
Sign up and post (it is free) or Log in and post