Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
gammadust

SOPA - Internet as we know it about to be gone?

855 posts in this topic

Doesn't matter much as after the election something similar will get put through.

Telling sign here, red flag for all readers.

I love it, even administration that is pretty dodgy anyway goes all "Veto" now, which is simply reverse psychology as far as I can see it, and yet Pelham you see this and call it "Perfectly good legislation".

Its not perfect, and questionable for the future on whether its good, good for us? Or good for corporations (person) .. I certainly dont bat for a corporation using legislation with broad terms.

Edited by mrcash2009

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all

The major problem with CISPA is the information sharing provisions that allow both Government and Corporate bodies to share your private information against your wishes. The ambiguous wording even alows companies to share your private data willy nilly and even makes it legal to share information that other laws specifically forbid being shared and alows both companies and government bodies to go on fishing expeditions through your private data on the most flimsy of evidense. Yet no such reciprocations exists for you to trawl through corporate records, which are considered a legal fictions private records.

Clearly CISPA needs to be ammended to allow the same privacy provisions to apply to corporate body as apply to a human being. After all should a corporation be considered as having superior rights to those of a human being?

Yet many of the late ammendments put forward by CISPA's supporters do precisely that increasing the protections of legal fictions over that of human beings. This law makes a corporate body a higher legal class of being than a human being.

Kind Regards walker

Edited by walker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

regarding Pelham's words in regard of Walker's words

it was not rubbish, law making process looks like Walker said, I know it cause I work in it since some years, it looks like Walker said:

1. some lobby makes "legal act draft" (if not lobby than several lawyers in ministry of X or ministry of Y)

2. draft goes to parliament, when party leaders take it, read it and tell to party members "vote for it , vote against it"

3. draft is voted and becomes law after it signed by president ,

it was like that before EU, in case of EU members it is more complicated, cause draft goes to European Comission, it is notified by other member states etc.

if other states will agree, than it can be put into life ,

but if law is made in European Comission member state must accept and put such law into use,

so if some guys making lobby in European Comission will figure something out, we must obey it as country which is member of EU,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yet many of the late amendments put forward by CISPA's supporters do precisely that increasing the protections of legal fictions over that of human beings.

That's getting to the rub for definite, the whole legal use of words and terms for these things needs to be highlighted to get a better understanding of what things really actual refer too. Then again the whole system of maritime law over common law and the entire legal fiction area has to be taken into account with all of this too.

Although technically our data and what we have attached ourselves from birth with consent is technically Legal fiction anyway to be thrown around the system, so no surprise with data use. Its a very interesting area to look at combined with all of this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all

The biggest and most dangerous provision in CISPA is the inclusion of the "Not-Withstanding" Weasel word.

...The main provisions are introduced with the phrase "Not-withstanding any other provision of law." This phrase, essentially, renders all existing privacy protections irrelevant as long as it can be claimed that the information being collected and shared is relevant to a cybersecurity purpose...

http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/04/can-last-minute-amendments-redeem-the-troubling-cybersecurity-bill/256372/

As always follow the link to read an excelent article on the threat to place a legal fiction's judicial rights as higher than human legal rights.

That phrase has long been part of 1%er Corporatist jargon for a "Fuck You" to citizen / Tax payers rights and making legal fictions into superior entities to human beings.

Kind Regards walker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Notwithstanding is a standard legal term and is used in many types of legal documents. It's use is not unusual here.

e.g. The term notwithstanding is used as a preposition in drafting contracts to indicate that the wording that follows is to apply in spite of, without regard to, limited by, or prevented from operation by some other provision.

That is perfectly normal legal language and the meaning is clear. Without such terms the practical benefits and application of this document would be difficult as anyone trying to prevent a cybersecurity threat would need lengthy legal advice before obtaining the information. By the time a judgement was made the hacking may have already taken place so this law would be redered impractical. It's common sense, time is a factor in preventing these crimes occurring.

For clarity the clauses in CISPA where this is used are:

(1) IN GENERAL-

`(A) CYBERSECURITY PROVIDERS- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a cybersecurity provider, with the express consent of a protected entity for which such cybersecurity provider is providing goods or services for cybersecurity purposes, may, for cybersecurity purposes--

`(i) use cybersecurity systems to identify and obtain cyber threat information to protect the rights and property of such protected entity; and

`(ii) share such cyber threat information with any other entity designated by such protected entity, including, if specifically designated, the Federal Government.

`(B) SELF-PROTECTED ENTITIES- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a self-protected entity may, for cybersecurity purposes--

`(i) use cybersecurity systems to identify and obtain cyber threat information to protect the rights and property of such self-protected entity; and

`(ii) share such cyber threat information with any other entity, including the Federal Government.

Again, as is clear from the language, it's designed to prevent hacking and industrial espionage.

Edited by PELHAM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all

In reply to PELHAM you seem to fail to comprehend that the use of that Weasel Word "Not-Withstanding" places this law above all other laws meant to protect human beings from the overarching power of the state and with its inclusion in CISPA comes the somewhat disturbing prospect of ascribing of those same powers to corporate legal fictions, as exampled in your quoted text, at the mere stroke of a pen.

I am swiftly comming to the conclusion that:

1) Either you do not comprehend how legally loose the wording of this legislation is, and it is that lack of constraint, something I mentioned earlier as typical of these types of changes to law, that charachterises them as being to the detriment of human beings, in their relationship with corporate legal fictions;

2) Or you are in favour of corporate legal fictions being given more rights than human beings.

As far as I can tell; unless you work as a shill for one of the aforementioned corporate legal fictions or as an apparatchik of the 1%ers or are indeed the same; or for a government security agency, in which case your knickers are showing; your sole purpose in supporting laws such as CISPA is to prevent the privacy of aforementioned corporate legal fictions being invaded, to the same degree as this very law allows human beings privacy to be invaded. Your motivation seems based on some unclear fear, of mysterious hackers bent on James Bond Villain like acts of taking over the world.

This to me at least all seems a little odd, and not a little paranoid.

PELHAM I refer you to the words of Benjamin Franklin:

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."

http://www.ushistory.org/franklin/quotable/quote04.htm

because your posts on this subject seem to lack some basic human ethics or indeed morality.

By the way Presiden Obama has already said he will veto CISPA as it stands.

CISPA hit with veto threat before Friday vote in the House

By Morgan Little

April 26, 2012, 10:53 a.m.

WASHINGTON -- The White House’s threat to veto the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act is prompting more amendments from its supporters as the bill heads toward a planned House vote on Friday.

President Obama’s senior advisors will recommend he veto the bill if it passes Congress in its current form, the administration said on Wednesday, pointing out that the bill goes too far in releasing companies from liability if their computer networks are not secure and does not include enough oversight to limit how information gathered by the government can be shared. The administration also wants the Department of Homeland Security to be more involved in the procedures outlined in CISPA...

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-cispa-hit-with-veto-threat-prior-to-friday-vote-in-the-house-20120426,0,2584558.story

As always follow the link to get the full text of the story

Kind Regards walker

Edited by walker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a long legal background and therefore am aware that all Acts of Parliament and ammendments thereof are drafted in the loosest terms possible to avoid future problems and the possibility of having to go back, repeal and start again. They do the same thing in the US and there is nothing remotely suspicious about it. It's standard practice and I can only think you find it surprising because you have never seen one before.

For example if I take the 1st Statute book off my shelf it is the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974

S2(1)It shall be the duty of every employer to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare at work of all his employees.

That is remarkably loose wording wouldn't you say? That is how acts are designed, they are supposed to be a catch all. The detail of the implementation is covered in subsequent Regulations and Official Guidance.

Yeah we know about Obama doing anything for a few votes, see the previous page.

Regarding CISPA and the prevention of Cyber crime I thought the levels of hacking, industrial espionage etc were well known? Obviously I'm mistaken, here you are:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyberwarfare#Incidents

Incidents

In 2012, in a startling volley of allegations, India has been accused of hacking a U.S commission's e-mail communications, which primarily dealt with the economic and security relations between U.S and China. Reports confirm that hackers from an Indian government spy unit managed to post on the Internet, what is being understood be an Indian military intelligence document on cyber-spying. The document, reportedly discussed at length on ways to target the U.S - China commission aided with the expertise lent by western mobile phone manufacturers. The document, reportedly, also included transcripts of the emails exchanged between members of the commission.[50]

On November 21, 2011, it was widely reported in the U.S. media that a hacker had destroyed a water pump at the Curran-Gardner Township Public Water District in Illinois.[51] However, it later turned out that this information was not only false, but had been inappropriately leaked from the Illinois Statewide Terrorism and Intelligence Center.[52]

On October 6, 2011, it was announced that Creech AFB's drone and Predator fleet's command and control data stream has been keylogged, resisting all attempts to reverse the exploit, for the past two weeks.[53] The Air Force issued a statement that the virus had "posed no threat to our operational mission".[54]

In July 2011, the South Korean company SK Communications was hacked, resulting in the theft of the personal details (including names, phone numbers, home and email addresses and resident registration numbers) of up to 35 million people. A trojaned software update was used to gain access to the SK Communications network. Links exist between this hack and other malicious activity and it is believed to be part of a broader, concerted hacking effort.[55]

Operation Shady RAT is an ongoing series of cyber attacks starting mid-2006, reported by Internet security company McAfee in August 2011. The attacks have hit at least 72 organizations including governments and defense contractors.[56]

On December 4 2010, a group calling itself the Pakistan Cyber Army hacked the website of India's top investigating agency, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). The National Informatics Center (NIC) has begun an inquiry.[57]

On November 26 2010, a group calling itself the Indian Cyber Army hacked the websites belonging to the Pakistan Army and the others belong to different ministries, including the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ministry of Education, Ministry of Finance, Pakistan Computer Bureau, Council of Islamic Ideology, etc. The attack was done as a revenge for the Mumbai terrorist attacks, which had confirmed the involvement of Pakistani terrorists.[58]

In October 2010, Iain Lobban, the director of the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), said Britain faces a "real and credible" threat from cyber attacks by hostile states and criminals and government systems are targeted 1,000 times each month, such attacks threatened Britain’s economic future, and some countries were already using cyber assaults to put pressure on other nations.[59]

In September 2010, Iran was attacked by the Stuxnet worm, thought to specifically target its Natanz nuclear enrichment facility. The worm is said to be the most advanced piece of malware ever discovered and significantly increases the profile of cyberwarfare.[60][61]

In May 2010, In response to Indian Cyber Army defacing Pakistani websites, 1000+ Indian websites were defaced by PakHaxors, TeaMp0isoN, UrduHack & ZCompany Hacking Crew, among those were the Indian CID website, local government of Kerala, Box Office of Indian, Brahmos missile website, Indian HP helpdesk, Indian Institute of Science, and The Indian Directorate General of Shipping.[citation needed]

In July 2009, there were a series of coordinated denial of service attacks against major government, news media, and financial websites in South Korea and the United States.[62] While many thought the attack was directed by North Korea, one researcher traced the attacks to the United Kingdom.[63]

Russian, South Ossetian, Georgian and Azerbaijani sites were attacked by hackers during the 2008 South Ossetia War.[64]

In 2007 the website of the Kyrgyz Central Election Commission was defaced during its election. The message left on the website read "This site has been hacked by Dream of Estonian organization". During the election campaigns and riots preceding the election, there were cases of Denial-of-service attacks against the Kyrgyz ISPs.[65]

In September 2007, Israel carried out an airstrike on Syria dubbed Operation Orchard. U.S. industry and military sources speculated that the Israelis may have used cyberwarfare to allow their planes to pass undetected by radar into Syria.[66][67]

In April 2007, Estonia came under cyber attack in the wake of relocation of the Bronze Soldier of Tallinn.[68] The largest part of the attacks were coming from Russia and from official servers of the authorities of Russia.[69] In the attack, ministries, banks, and media were targeted.[70][71]

In the 2006 war against Hezbollah, Israel alleges that cyber-warfare was part of the conflict, where the Israel Defense Force (IDF) intelligence estimates several countries in the Middle East used Russian hackers and scientists to operate on their behalf. As a result, Israel attached growing importance to cyber-tactics, and became, along with the U.S., France and a couple of other nations, involved in cyber-war planning. Many international high-tech companies are now locating research and development operations in Israel, where local hires are often veterans of the IDF's elite computer units.[72] Richard A. Clarke adds that "our Israeli friends have learned a thing or two from the programs we have been working on for more than two decades."[2]:8

Edited by PELHAM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PELHAM, You've absolutely no idea what are you talking about.

In September 2010, Iran was attacked by the Stuxnet worm, thought to specifically target its Natanz nuclear enrichment facility. The worm is said to be the most advanced piece of malware ever discovered and significantly increases the profile of cyberwarfare.[60][61]

You realize that this was set up by US/Israel?

In September 2007, Israel carried out an airstrike on Syria dubbed Operation Orchard. U.S. industry and military sources speculated that the Israelis may have used cyberwarfare to allow their planes to pass undetected by radar into Syria.[66][67]

Are you serious? Did you read any of these incidents before copy-pasting?

Who is the victim of these Internet attacks? Nation!? Society?!?!11!

How exactly will CISPA help if these attacks originate from Russia or other country?. Finding terrorists doing this inside US can be done without it (ISPs are required to store traffic for some time).

Yeah we know about Obama doing anything for a few votes, see the previous page.

So those supporting CISPA are all true, and those opposing are doing it just for votes? You're such a hypocrite. You don't know, you just speculate in favor of your arguments and "we" is You.

I think CISPA is just attempt to catch up with China.

And BTW PELHAM, your arguments never won against mine, even if you have last words. ;-)

Edited by batto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are examples of the extent of Cybercrime, industrial espionage and state sponsored espionage. I quoted that section in full to give a comprehensive picture of the problem. The information that will be shared through CISPA is not just about US citizens as most hacking affecting the US is done from outside it's borders. CISPA is designed to prevent all kinds of attack not just domestic. The international oposition to CISPA, mostly by Russian State Media, proves it. Yet again someone fails to comprehend what the law is for and who it will be mainly targeting. I will resist reaching for the bold text and face palms as that would be childish and would also indicate that the person has no logical or coherent argument to offer in response.

If you would like anything else explained please don't hesitate to ask.

Edited by PELHAM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They are examples of the extent of Cybercrime, industrial espionage and state sponsored espionage. I quoted that section in full to give a comprehensive picture of the problem.

Nope, you just tried to amaze us by irrelevant wikipedia copypasta and buzzwords of 21st century like "cyberspace", "cybercrime", ... and failed as usual. All your examples are either irrelevant to CISPA because it doesn't happen on Internet (even though it has word "cyber" in it) and not a sigle remaining example is relevant because DDOS or compromise of website is totally irrelevant to 99.999999% of people.

Some website with holes got owned? Well, who cares? How would CISPA help?

Website of president of Georgia is down during Russian attack? Oh, what a lost. Nope, srsly, who cares? How would CISPA help?

Someone from China is copying sensitive data from US government? How would CISPA help? Can you answer PELHAM? I'd like expert analysis on this. Answer this please!

One example is serious though and it's Stuxnew which was carried out by US and allies in cooperation with Siemens it seems. How would CISPA help?

You've no idea.

The information that will be shared through CISPA is not just about US citizens as most hacking affecting the US is done from outside it's borders. CISPA is designed to prevent all kinds of attack not just domestic.

You've no idea what are you talking about. Stop watching Fox News.

Your motivation seems based on some unclear fear, of mysterious hackers bent on James Bond Villain like acts of taking over the world.
The international oposition to CISPA, mostly by Russian State Media, proves it.

ROFL and facepalm at the same time. Pathetic...

If you would like anything else explained please don't hesitate to ask.

Thank you, but no. You're the last person I'd ask anything about this subject because:

1) You don't have slightest idea what are you talking about. You simply don't have knowledge to answer my questions.

2) You don't answer questions. I can't be sure if you'd reply. You've already a lot of questions in queue, look at my previous post.

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120426/14505718671/insanity-cispa-just-got-way-worse-then-passed-rushed-vote.shtml

Edited by batto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys its simply not fun to discuss with Pelham, he doesn´t seem to, or doesn´t wan´t to understand some things. He replys to arguments with absolutely not related stories. For me he´s just a troll. Don´t feed it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-17853518

Digital Economy Act's anti-piracy measures are delayed

The controversial piracy law, the Digital Economy Act, has again been delayed, the Department for Culture, Media and Sport has confirmed.

Posting for reference as on topic in some ways.

Not all legislation is good, even in some more obvious areas as piracy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all

The Republican party have forced CISPA through the House of Representatives. So the fight now moves to the Senate.

This Charter to Spy on you, the clue is in the name; CISPA stands for:

Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act

In other words the purpose of the act is to protect corporate legal fictions and big government agencies, from you suing them, for illegaly sharing your information. This law makes it illegal for you to sue them for stealing your information.

With the as expected corporate sponsored Ben Quayle ammendment you can now be spied on by corporate legal fictions and big government for a whole bunch of reasons. Esentialy all a corporation or government agency has to say they thought they were protecting some one or something else, from anything. No Warrant, no judge; just their decision and they can sell and trade your information, they call it an administration fee. And that "Not-withstanding" weasel word means there is not a thing you can do about it.

Do not vote for or donate to those Politicians who voted for it. Put them out of office. This is the list of politicians you should not vote for or give any money too:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/04/26/1086805/-BREAKING-CISPA-PASSED-IN-RUSH-VOTE

Be aware that other politicians like Ron Paul were too Chicken to vote against it.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/112-2012/h192

Donate instead to the politicians and organisations that are fighting for your rights as human beings.

And Vote for those politicians who stood up for your rights!

Write and email to the companies and individuals who are sponsoring your rights being stolen! Warn them you intend to Boycott their products and services as a result.

http://www.cleveland.com/newsflash/index.ssf/story/technology-telecom-and-defense-companies-support-cispa/ad5aba8ae3a524dc64aa316d8497d02e

Time to make life hell for these individuals and corporations. Pester and nag the crap out of them. Make sure they hear you. Join the mass actions planned to disrupt and punish them.

CNET has produced an FAQ on how CISPA will affect you time to get involved before your private information is shared and bought and sold by every corporate legal fiction in the US.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-57422693-281/how-cispa-would-affect-you-faq/

Kind Regards walker

Edited by walker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CISPA through the House of Representatives, fantastic news, isn't democracy wonderful. Bad day for hackers and criminals everywhere.

Nothing forced about it, they had a vote.....?

I guess those that understand how to read statutes and are open to sensible arguments won the day. Time to open a beer!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still don't think for a moment that this is something to celebrate. Walker's link to CNET was indeed quite informative and the results are is sad. Not even (more than) 750.000 voters have had any weight on the decision whether CISPA passes or not.

I don't think CISPA would be so negatively viewed (in the end , there is apparently need for tougher meassures on cyber security protection) if, as said, the "Not-Withstanding" gave this legislation so much legal power, superior to other laws, basicaly replacing those when fit.

The big brother was there, hidden and always present but now it is awakening and getting all legal, all powerful.

I do wonder what else is to come becouse I got that feeling this ain't over and congress got a lot more in their sleeves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I still don't think for a moment that this is something to celebrate. Walker's link to CNET was indeed quite informative and the results are is sad. Not even (more than) 750.000 voters have had any weight on the decision whether CISPA passes or not. I don't think CISPA would be so negatively viewed (in the end , there is apparently need for tougher meassures on cyber security protection) if, as said, the "Not-Withstanding" gave this legislation so much legal power, superior to other laws, basicaly replacing those when fit. The big brother was there, hidden and always present but now it is awakening and getting all legal, all powerful.

I do wonder what else is to come becouse I got that feeling this ain't over and congress got a lot more in their sleeves

PS can you justify the following:

Not even (more than) 750.000 voters have had any weight on the decision whether CISPA passes or not.

The CNET article states that 750,000 people have signed up to a website that oposes CISPA, which means what? The population of the USA is 311,591,917 - Jul 2011. That is a 0.24% opposition. To anyone with normal logical reasoning that might say something...... As I have said many times before, how is it right that a tiny minority should dictate the way the rest live? I'm happy with CISPA because it will be another tool to stop industrial espionage and hacking. That affects everyone as our taxes have to pay for the resulting losses, damage to economies and security fixes.

I am happy with the CNET article in general because it mostly supports my argument, part of it highlights the nonsense that certain people talk eg:

"Notwithstanding" would trump wiretap laws, Web companies' privacy policies, gun laws, educational record laws, census data, medical records, and other statutes that protect information, warns the ACLU's Richardson: "For cybersecurity purposes, all of those entities can turn over that information to the federal government."

Wiretap laws don't apply here? Gun laws don't apply to your internet records? Your ISP does not have your educational records, census data or medical records? It's nonsensical... lol. It's true that it would trump ISP privacy policies but why should hackers have any right to privacy? That is who will be targetted by this, no one else, as said in other threads the intelligence agencies do not have the resources to spy on everyone. You really need to work hard to get to be noticed. They have better things to do than poke through the average persons emails.

Please read the rest of the CNET article, it's really well balanced and shows that most of the spurious arguments put forward in this thread were not true. I'm happy Walker linked to it.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-57422693-281/how-cispa-would-affect-you-faq/

As for congress the next vote will be in the Senate: The Senate is currently composed of 51 Democrats, 47 Republicans, and 2 independents, both of whom caucus with the Democrats. Could be more interesting.

No need to be frightened of the unfamiliar Bee. as I said before:

Notwithstanding is a standard legal term and is used in many types of legal documents. It's use is not unusual here.

e.g. The term notwithstanding is used as a preposition in drafting contracts to indicate that the wording that follows is to apply in spite of, without regard to, limited by, or prevented from operation by some other provision.

That is perfectly normal legal language and the meaning is clear. Without such terms the practical benefits and application of this document would be difficult as anyone trying to prevent a cybersecurity threat would need lengthy legal advice before obtaining the information. By the time a judgement was made the hacking may have already taken place so this law would be redered impractical. It's common sense, time is a factor in preventing these crimes occurring.

For clarity the clauses in CISPA where this is used are:

(1) IN GENERAL-

`(A) CYBERSECURITY PROVIDERS- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a cybersecurity provider, with the express consent of a protected entity for which such cybersecurity provider is providing goods or services for cybersecurity purposes, may, for cybersecurity purposes--

`(i) use cybersecurity systems to identify and obtain cyber threat information to protect the rights and property of such protected entity; and

`(ii) share such cyber threat information with any other entity designated by such protected entity, including, if specifically designated, the Federal Government.

`(B) SELF-PROTECTED ENTITIES- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a self-protected entity may, for cybersecurity purposes--

`(i) use cybersecurity systems to identify and obtain cyber threat information to protect the rights and property of such self-protected entity; and

`(ii) share such cyber threat information with any other entity, including the Federal Government.

Again, as is clear from the language, it's designed to prevent hacking and industrial espionage.

Edited by PELHAM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read the article and decoded your deduction, and, I lost the energy to respond fully becuase, well ... its not worth the bother it so comical, although I will highlight a real gems:

It's true that it would trump ISP privacy policies but why should hackers have any right to privacy? That is who will be targetted by this, no one else

Isnt it in place for OUR right to privacy? Last time I checked Hackers were not the majority online ISP users, so how does it effect "no one else"?????

Its true because on the simplest of logic, agencies cant be arsed to look at tom dick or harry even though this will open it up so they just can, becuase, you know, you can trust such agencies with such gleaming track records over history using such tools, plus the fact that it only "keeps us safe" from hackers. I notice the patriot act did really well too with the same mantra, nothing was ever used for something other than the bad men. I mean we could all be a hacker couldnt we? And we need ISP privacy trumped to save us from ourselves it seems.

The CNET article states that 750,000 people have signed up to a website that oposes CISPA, which means what? The population of the USA is 311,591,917 - Jul 2011. That is a 0.24% opposition. To anyone with normal logical reasoning that might say something......

Really, REALLY re-read this and see what's wrong with it.

it's designed to prevent hacking and industrial espionage.

We know ... thats not the point.

You post like a television spokes person, after reading the article which you like as it backs up your points (?), and the doublethink you unfold in the same instance, I have, absolutely 100% lost complete interest in your points, as none of them stack up with the information surrounding it other than your "how it is now" black & white nuclear family rose tinted glass 2.4 children and the dog view on it all, have fun arguing mate, its been a blast, print this thread out for the children and their children when they are on-line, this is just a playing field level ready for more later to be stacked on, but you dont see that, you are completely blind. Enjoy batting for the team thats also targeting you later on ... fun times ahead. smile.png

Stop posting about it everyone, everything is ok, nothing to see here ... move along now, the pesky hackers will get whats coming to them *shakes fist* .. once they are all gone we still have ISP privacy trumped, but still no worries as your tax will be better once we are saved from them.

Edited by mrcash2009

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Isnt it in place for OUR right to privacy? Last time I checked Hackers were not the majority online ISP users, so how does it effect "no one else"?????
I don't know where you think the handfull of people who will work on this will get the time to look through the webtraffic of 311.5 million people. They will have a small number of priority targets. International espionage, industrial espionage and hackers. That is fact, I have even contacted an associate who works in the field who confirmed this to me. They don't have the time or the resources to go any further.
Really, REALLY re-read this and see what's wrong with it.

In the USA there are:

311.5 million people

164 million PC's

293 million mobile phones

142 million social network users

This legislation was proposed many months ago and there was significant press coverage yet only 750,000 (that's 0.24% of the population) could be bothered to sign up to oppose it, despite widespread internet access. Am I going to have to explain how democracy works again or are you going to look it up yourself.

You post like a television spokes person,

Why thank you, I do my best to be professional at all times. You post like a conspiracy nut and most, if not all of your objections, to everything pertain to be about some unquantifiable, unidentified future disaster (UFD lol, are UFD's the new paranoia now UFO's are out of fashion) that any change in law or western international policy will produce. When ever I have asked for something concrete about exact worries I can't get a legible response.

Edited by PELHAM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This legislation was proposed many months ago and there was significant press coverage yet only 750,000 (that's 0.24% of the population) could be bothered to sign up to oppose it, despite widespread internet access. Am I going to have to explain how democracy works again or are you going to look it up yourself.

That could be more to do with apathy and compliance.Lack of resistance to certain legislation,isn't necessarily an indicator of informed choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That could be more to do with apathy and compliance.Lack of resistance to certain legislation,isn't necessarily an indicator of informed choice.

Tell them you're going to take away their guns and see how many signups you get lol. Internet access is available in nearly every home in the US, if there was strong opposition you would see it. Fact is most people know what a problem the lack of a coherent Cyber Security policy is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We'll have to disagree on one point at least.I don't think most people know a lot about online security policy.Their interest may be roused were it something more obvious.Such as the weapon scenario you mention.Or the shutting down of a site like Facebook.Actually,I think shutting down Facebook would probably be the internet equivalent of a cataclysm. :D

Barring that,I think most people simply aren't interested.And the ones who are,find the entire subject confusing.Not surprising,considering the conflicting information flying around.Of course that's just my take on it.I can't claim to have studied it to any great degree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't know where you think the handfull of people who will work on this will get the time to look through the webtraffic of 311.5 million people. They will have a small number of priority targets. International espionage, industrial espionage and hackers. That is fact, I have even contacted an associate who works in the field who confirmed this to me. They don't have the time or the resources to go any further.

Currently and officially at this particular time with this particular framework, at it stands right now.

In the USA there are:

311.5 million people

164 million PC's

293 million mobile phones

142 million social network users

This legislation was proposed many months ago and there was significant press coverage yet only 750,000 (that's 0.24% of the population) could be bothered to sign up to oppose it, despite widespread internet access. Am I going to have to explain how democracy works again or are you going to look it up yourself.

Complete codshit, you know as well as I do this type of legislation only interests people who are looking, then you have the population who are willing to accept anything an official will say, media doesn't fully report (both sides of the story), poor people, people without a PC the lst goes on in that "311.5 million people" .. so to be honest your "stats" aren't facts at all, you are pulling form a CNET article that said it, the unfortunate part of it Pelhmam is that lots of those larger figures of people will only notice it later on.

Rather than focusing on the bottom scale, why dont you show the stats & facts of the 311.5 million people - 75,000 that are jumping for joy and ran out voting yes and fully informed and understood it all? If people got fully educated on it correctly and there was a vote to put it through (than only by default putting it through and maybe there will be opposition) then your stats might be reality, but "democracy" doesn't work that way with this does it. We should know there are bad apples and thus need officials to tell us how bad they are and simply not worry because its too technical and "its for our safety", so wo betide having issue with it.

if there was strong opposition you would see it. Fact is most people know what a problem the lack of a coherent Cyber Security policy is.

Yes Pelham the average Joe beer drinker in the tinterwebz know this for sure, or at least they know what you know .. which is we need privacy to be inched away to "get the bad guys". After all the internet has deid on us and caused a market crash and overpayment of taxes becuase of the lack of security since its inception.

Why thank you, I do my best to be professional at all times.

Official spokesperson as in a contractually compromised team batting player.

You post like a conspiracy nut and most, if not all of your objections, to everything pertain to be about some unquantifiable, unidentified future disaster (UFD lol, are UFD's the new paranoia now UFO's are out of fashion) that any change in law or western international policy will produce.

So you now align me with a nut & UFO's (I mean come one how on earth is that to do with this subject mr professional?) and "unquantifiable & unidentified future disaster" maybe you should direct that point to those trying to enforce this, in some ways that would be admitting most patriot and terror laws are conspiracy nut work, how Ironic, as I am not the one picking out bad case scenarios and then trying to onset blanket legislation to openly effect everyone else who isn't partaking in such "threats" but get sucked into the cross-hairs to keep me safe, with some flimsy safety net that "they only look at the bad men".

You work under a very compartmentalised way of seeing it, which makes you blind to anything other than black & white and it seems to me your line of work has helped in that with training.

Edited by mrcash2009

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Actually,I think shutting down Facebook would probably be the internet equivalent of a cataclysm. :D

Lol save that one for next April 1st, don't let the joke run too long though, it could start WW3 or mass suicides lol!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0