• Hello!

    Either you have not registered on this site yet, or you are registered but have not logged in. In either case, you will not be able to use the full functionality of this site until you have registered, and then logged in after your registration has been approved.

    Registration is FREE, so please register so you can participate instead of remaining a lurker....

    Please be certain that the location field is correctly filled out when you register. All registrations that appear to be bogus will be rejected. Which means that if your location field does NOT match the actual location of your registration IP address, then your registration will be rejected.

    Sorry about the strictness of this requirement, but it is necessary to block spammers and scammers at the door as much as possible.

Bill would give president emergency control of Internet....

Hey, it's no "Patriot Act". As long as he reimbursts me I have no qualms. I would assume it's just in the event that some new cyber attack sweeps that requires immediate damage control. I don't expect much to come from it, and I can live without for a few days; it might even be fun. Just like camping!!!.
 
It's this whole "we decide" thing that has my skin crawling. Parameters need to be set BEFOREHAND and need to be very well-defined.
 
This (near the end of the article) is what underlines the nature of this article that makes me nervous :
"The language has changed but it doesn't contain any real additional limits," EFF's Tien says. "It simply switches the more direct and obvious language they had originally to the more ambiguous (version)...The designation of what is a critical infrastructure system or network as far as I can tell has no specific process. There's no provision for any administrative process or review. That's where the problems seem to start. And then you have the amorphous powers that go along with it."

Translation: If your company is deemed "critical," a new set of regulations kick in involving who you can hire, what information you must disclose, and when the government would exercise control over your computers or network.
Click to expand...
....this is where it all starts...quietly, subtly...wrapped in vague, fatherly words...said to be for our own protection...yeah, that's the ticket.
 
vetusvates said:
This (near the end of the article) is what underlines the nature of this article that makes me nervous :

....this is where it all starts...quietly, subtly...said to be for our own protection...yeah, that's the ticket.
Click to expand...

Just saw this post. I REALLY don't like the sound of that.


Anyone else notice that "Obama nation" sounds very similar to "abomination"?
 
RobbiesCornField said:
I would think changing the parameters would require more than JUST his input.
Click to expand...

Well we don't pay you to think, :nyah: just kidding Robbie.
But that does kinda illustrate the problem, many people naively "think" that he would "never" do that, and that that would not be allowed. Well, with his many Czars, who knows what will happen.
 
I definitely disagree that there are ANY parameters that warrant any kind of governmental control of the internet- WTF?
 
I am becoming very nervous about all the aspects of my private life that The Government feels like they should control. If saying it is just in case there is a problem or to say it’s for my protection is plain and simple bullsh!t (hello moderator). If The Government controls the Internet, they control the information you are allowed to see. Hello Radio Free Europe.
 
Ricky87 said:
Hey, it's no "Patriot Act". As long as he reimbursts me I have no qualms. I would assume it's just in the event that some new cyber attack sweeps that requires immediate damage control. I don't expect much to come from it, and I can live without for a few days; it might even be fun. Just like camping!!!.
Click to expand...

The internet is something like the world has never seen before. Never in history has there been a tool that is so hard to control. As a result, it can be both a tool for evil (Predators, organized crime, misinformation) and good.

So we have to make a decision: Does the freedom exemplified by the internet outweigh the costs of the freedom it allows the criminal element? You know, the Iranian government called the protesters criminals and the internet was an invaluable tool in the civil disobedience on display. The internet accomplished more simply by existing than any CIA action in terms of destabilizing an oppressive theocratic regime. And the Iranian government did everything they could to suppress the internet.

I don't believe for a second that the internet should be controlled. The bad side is bad, but the good side is it is the absolute answer for people who live under oppression. A dictator relies on control of information to keep his people in line. If we move to make the internet more controllable, less free, we move to secure those who survive with the tools of intimidation and fear.

Trusting any government who wants to control the internet is folly.
 
Nova_C said:
The internet is something like the world has never seen before. Never in history has there been a tool that is so hard to control. As a result, it can be both a tool for evil (Predators, organized crime, misinformation) and good.

So we have to make a decision: Does the freedom exemplified by the internet outweigh the costs of the freedom it allows the criminal element? You know, the Iranian government called the protesters criminals and the internet was an invaluable tool in the civil disobedience on display. The internet accomplished more simply by existing than any CIA action in terms of destabilizing an oppressive theocratic regime. And the Iranian government did everything they could to suppress the internet.

I don't believe for a second that the internet should be controlled. The bad side is bad, but the good side is it is the absolute answer for people who live under oppression. A dictator relies on control of information to keep his people in line. If we move to make the internet more controllable, less free, we move to secure those who survive with the tools of intimidation and fear.

Trusting any government who wants to control the internet is folly.
Click to expand...
If they want to control the content of the internet, than yes that is insane and unjust. My interpretation is that they just reserve the right to a kill switch in case a cyber attack is launched. Makes sense to me, and it would protect out internet and more importantly our security. Iranians are separate and they weren't allowed to create any content for the outside world due to political constraint. I just think this is another one of those bills that is so vague that it makes people fill in the blanks with their own wild conspiracies, and it becomes something so twisted from it's original intent; that's all!!.
 
I think it's a great idea! Look what he did for digital TV!! :eek: Virtually the first thing he did while in office was save the fate of digital TV. Good for him. I think the government is the perfect entity to control the interent. That and free hot coffee for everyone (don't forget not to spill it in your lap though, it's hot, as in not cool, hot).

D80
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top