Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Congress Considering CISPA Amendments

samzenpus posted more than 2 years ago | from the ACTA-by-any-other-name dept.

Privacy 85

First time accepted submitter casac8 writes "As Friday's House vote on CISPA nears, it appears Congress members are getting nervous. Literally millions of people around the world have signed petitions voicing their opposition, and it appears Congress has heard their concerns, as House members are considering a number of amendments aimed at limiting the negative impacts the legislation would have on Internet privacy. For instance, one amendment likely to pass would tighten the bill's language to ensure its provisions are only applied in the pursuit of legit crimes and other rare instances, rather than whenever the NSA wants to target Joe Web-user. And another would increase possible liability on the parts of companies who hand personal information over to the government."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Tor (1)

noh8rz3 (2593935) | more than 2 years ago | (#39800209)

If only there were an option for those who don't want to be tracked by repressive governments...

Re:Tor (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39800281)

spoiler: Tor's security isn't worth shit to NSA hackers, those guys have the best mathematicians in the world and also the best computer gear, they could find all the e-mails you've ever sent since you first went on the internet.

Re:Tor (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39800349)

The NSA, let alone any single institution, does not have the "best" mathematicians in the world.

Re:Tor (1)

elgeeko.com (2472782) | more than 2 years ago | (#39800383)

spoiler: Tor's security isn't worth shit to NSA wanna-be hackers, those guys think have the best mathematicians in the world and also the best computer gear, they act like they could find all the e-mails you've ever sent since you first went on the internet.

FTFY

Re:Tor (2)

pwizard2 (920421) | more than 2 years ago | (#39800429)

What if you ascii-armor GPG messages and paste those into emails? Only the recipient would be able to decrypt so it wouldn't matter if the message is intercepted. 4096 bit is still secure, but it's possible to generate 8192 bit or even insanely huge 11296-bit keys.

Re:Tor (1)

Nerdfest (867930) | more than 2 years ago | (#39801239)

The really sad part is that it's fairly trivial to use GPG, etc to encrypt email these days. The problem is that most people seem to use web clients now, meaning that you need to trust your keys to a web based provider.

Re:Tor (4, Informative)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 2 years ago | (#39801673)

Bzzt. Encrypt separately then paste into the webmail body.

Re:Tor (2)

Nerdfest (867930) | more than 2 years ago | (#39802207)

Your average web user won't do that though. A pre-configured client that has your private key will allow it to be done automatically, which is what is will take. Well, that a a much larger number of people with keys.

Re:Tor (1)

Gilmoure (18428) | more than 2 years ago | (#39800889)

I could use that. I've lost a term paper on Laurie Anderson that I wrote and posted online, back in '93 or '94.

Re:Tor (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39804627)

Hint: Computers aren't magic.

"Free Country" (5, Insightful)

Galestar (1473827) | more than 2 years ago | (#39800357)

If only there were an option for those who don't want to be tracked by repressive governments...

The citizenry of a "Free Country" as America claims to be should not have to resort to such measures in order to hide their day-to-day activities from their government.

Re:Tor (5, Informative)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#39800467)

Thought that Tor was outlawed by repressive governments like US (backspace, backspace) China, Iran, etc.

Ron Paul says corporations will âact as government spiesâ(TM) under CISPA. "It represents an alarming form of corporatism, as it further intertwines government with companies like Google and Facebook." LINK - http://runronpaul.com/web-media/ron-paul-corporations-will-%E2%80%98act-as-government-spies%E2%80%99-under-cispa/ [runronpaul.com]

Re:Tor (1)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#39801331)

Modded both "troll" and "informative" on the same post. LOL. That's new.

Re:Tor (1)

formfeed (703859) | more than 2 years ago | (#39802441)

Modded both "troll" and "informative" on the same post. LOL. That's new.

I just wish for a Flamebait +1

Re:Tor (1)

CodeHxr (2471822) | more than 2 years ago | (#39805803)

Meh... misclicked and you got your wish :\

Re:Tor (1)

CodeHxr (2471822) | more than 2 years ago | (#39805813)

Oh... posting undoes that? Interesting. Nothing to see here...

Re:Tor (5, Interesting)

shmlco (594907) | more than 2 years ago | (#39802945)

Paul is -- I can't believe I'm saying this -- right.

CISPA provides one monster carrot to those who "voluntarily" participate in CISPA, and that's immunity from ever being sued for failing to safeguard the privacy of their users.

Have a hacker steal millions of financial records, health records, or credit card numbers, and as long as they were participating in CISPA, and sharing "threat" data, they were acting in "good faith" to secure their networks, and as such can not be sued for failing to protect their customer's personal data.

CISPA could literally save a company millions of dollars, and that's why Google, Facebook, Microsoft, and many, many more are supporters .

More at http://www.isights.org/2012/04/cispas-good-faith-carrot-needs-no-stick.html [isights.org]

Re:Tor (1)

the_pace (1319317) | more than 2 years ago | (#39806969)

There was an interview with Jacob Appelbaum in Democracy Now [democracynow.org] . He was asked about anonymity in Tor. It seems when the whole of the network is being continuously surveilled on, even Tor can not provide anonymity. So, be careful what you do even if you use Tor.

Personal Responsibility (5, Insightful)

DanTheStone (1212500) | more than 2 years ago | (#39800241)

I contacted my congressman to express my opposition. Anyone else?

Re:Personal Responsibility (3, Informative)

SomeWhiteGuy (920943) | more than 2 years ago | (#39800295)

Done the first day I heard this was a consideration and that all of my senators and representatives are backing the bill... Let your people know that you're watching and they'll need to answer for this. Call, email, write a letter. You can't bug these people enough.

Re:Personal Responsibility (1)

Mitreya (579078) | more than 2 years ago | (#39801055)

Let your people know that you're watching and they'll need to answer for this.

But what are you going to do? At best, you can throw your support behind an opponent (assuming you don't despise him or her more than the incumbent). And that threat can only be executed when the next election rolls around - could be many months away
There should be a way to recall a politician right now.

Re:Personal Responsibility (1)

steveg (55825) | more than 2 years ago | (#39801147)

And my congresscritter has run unopposed in this district for several years.

Not that he'd lose -- it's a pretty hard-core right wing district, which probably why no one is likely to run against him.

Re:Personal Responsibility (1)

shentino (1139071) | more than 2 years ago | (#39803469)

Right on.

Waiting until the next election lets them screw us over then get the private sector to line them up a nice cushily rewarding job.

Re:Personal Responsibility (1)

AnalogDiehard (199128) | more than 2 years ago | (#39800391)

I contacted my congressman to express my opposition. Anyone else?

How do I find the re-election campaign paypal account for my representatives?

Re:Personal Responsibility (2)

DanTheStone (1212500) | more than 2 years ago | (#39800475)

Constituents have different weapons than lobbyists. If enough voters in your district contact you saying they're strongly opposed to a bill, the campaign money may not be worth the sacrifice.

Re:Personal Responsibility (3, Informative)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 2 years ago | (#39800443)

Yep.

I'd like to take this opportunity to point these guys out [demandprogress.org] , while we are on it. Also these [movetoamend.org] .

Re:Personal Responsibility (5, Interesting)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#39800825)

Just done.

"Dear congressional employee:

"I am dissatisfied with your work. You've already proved you're delinquency by passing the Patriot Act, TARP bailouts, mandatory purchase of insurance (which I don't want), support for destruction of perfectly usable cars via Cash for Clunkers, and the NDAA "Shut up, you don't get a lawyer" provision.

"So I won't be the least surprised if you pass CISPA, giving corporations authority to spy on my internet usage for the benefit of the Homeland Security, and thereby confirming my initial conjecture. I'll be campaigning against you in the fall. Please pack-up your desk and remove your belongs by the end of the year."

Signed,
Your boss,
We the people.

Re:Personal Responsibility (4, Informative)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | more than 2 years ago | (#39801043)

yeah, that letter will get results.

I can't tell if you are trolling or not but if you were serious, you should have an adult proofread your text before you get yourself into trouble (so many gov trouble-maker lists, I can't keep track anymore).

seriously, there is a way to deal with critters in office; and then there is your style...

I agree with your feelings, but your methods won't accomplish what you hope.

Re:Personal Responsibility (1)

shiftless (410350) | more than 2 years ago | (#39806491)

Go kiss ass all you want. At some point, when Congress has a 9% approval rating after people have tried and failed for years to convince and sweet talk and charm them into doing the right thing, finally you just have to talk to the pieces of shit like the pieces of shit they are. If enough angry people flood into their inboxes explaining what pieces of shit they are, eventually, something will change. It might take putting the mother fucker up against a wall and blowing his brains out, but one way or another, the government will listen and freedom will reign in this country again.

Re:Personal Responsibility (1)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#39808551)

>>>seriously, there is a way to deal with critters in office; and then there is your style...

So how many times have you changed your Congressperson to change his mind? What's that:? ZERO? Well then I guess your way is no more effective..... just as polls showed 75% of Americans opposed the TARP but the congress passed it anyway. They don't care what we say.

So why bother being polite to them? They deserve no more politeness than a delinquent employee that you fire and toss out on the curb. "Good morning. We've decided to terminate you for not doing what we asked you to do. You have 30 minutes to pack... give me your badge. Goodbye."

Re:Personal Responsibility (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39807665)

Dear Congressman,
    The penalty for Treason during a time of war is death. We are at war, and violating your oath of office is treason. Therefore I suggest that you submit yourself for termination forthwith and ask all of your cronies to do the same.

Re:Personal Responsibility (1)

Mitreya (579078) | more than 2 years ago | (#39800963)

I contacted my congressman to express my opposition. Anyone else?

Ha!
I'd be more impressed if anyone actually heard back something other than a canned letter "thank you for your support of CISPA" (regardless of the fact that your opinion was against it)
What I am to do next? What we sorely, sorely need is a standardized mechanism to recall and/or black-list (can't run for X months) a politician. As long as Y people from the constituency express their support for the penalty. The guarantee of politician's remaining term makes them complacent. In a year or two current issues will be long forgotten.

Re:Personal Responsibility (1)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | more than 2 years ago | (#39801071)

money talks.

you want results? organize and collect money to bribe the officials.

note, though: you are in heavy competition and I seriously doubt a grassroots fundraiser will even be a fraction of a fraction of what it takes to sway the officials.

besides, its also the gov that wants this. good luck convincing them that they are wrong.

Donated to my Congressman (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39801035)

I Donated to my Congressman's campaign to block you losers

Suck it hippy!

Re:Personal Responsibility (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39801489)

Weeks ago as soon as I saw my rep suddenly joined the co-sponsor list.

Re:Personal Responsibility (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39802833)

Just did. Thanks for reminding me.

Compromise? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39800267)

Instead of a bad idea being completely codified, the completely bad concept will be codified with a few provisions that can be removed later.

That is, if this isn't the typical "leaders express concern" story before they vote for something heinous.

Your Cheese? (5, Insightful)

SuperCharlie (1068072) | more than 2 years ago | (#39800275)

What? I can not take all your cheese?..well then.. let me have this slice..for now. I'll be back soon for more. You are truly a shrewd bargainer of cheese.

Re:Your Cheese? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39800311)

This is why we must poison the cheese.

Re:Your Cheese? (1)

lightknight (213164) | more than 2 years ago | (#39800445)

Indeed. They've tried this before with SOPA / PIPA, floating the idea of a few amendments here and a few amendments there. It's just an attempt to gauge how large the opposition truly is, and whether or not they can safely pass the bill without getting themselves voted out of office. For SOPA / PIPA, it appeared the opposition was large enough and strong enough that passing the bill would doom them (when large companies like Google have you in their sights, and there is a large following among the populace...when their powers combine, they form 'The De-Elector').

Re:Your Cheese? (1)

luther349 (645380) | more than 2 years ago | (#39800651)

this is just sopa attempt 2 just make shure to keep making noise untill its dead.

Re:Your Cheese? (3, Insightful)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#39800601)

Last I heard Google, Microsoft, and other internet companies are supporting CISPA. Which is sad. They were the ones who helped defeat SOPA, but now they are siding with CISPA. It will likely pass.

Re:Your Cheese? (1)

luther349 (645380) | more than 2 years ago | (#39800713)

support will die when the public makes enough noise.

Re:Your Cheese? (4, Informative)

Scareduck (177470) | more than 2 years ago | (#39801117)

Just so. Google "is working behind the scenes" [thehill.com] to get CISPA enacted. I wonder if that isn't because they maybe think they can exempt themselves from something by getting involved, or perhaps they were threatened elsewhere for their embarrassing (to its proponents) public opposition to SOPA. Another reason -- as explained in this Lifehacker [lifehacker.com] story -- is that CISPA pushes the role of censor onto the state expressly, where SOPA would have required Google et al. to take on that task themselves, and at the behest of any copyright holder. CISPA is much broader and gives the government all sorts of powers it really shouldn't have under any rational reading of the Bill of Rights (the first and fourth amendments, particularly).

Re:Your Cheese? (4, Informative)

shmlco (594907) | more than 2 years ago | (#39801787)

There's a good reason why Facebook and Microsoft and other tech companies are supporting CISPA.

You see, CISPA provides one monster carrot to those who "voluntarily" participate, and that's complete and total immunity from EVER being sued for failing to safeguard the privacy of your users.

http://www.isights.org/2012/04/cispas-good-faith-carrot-needs-no-stick.html [isights.org]

Re:Your Cheese? (1)

shentino (1139071) | more than 2 years ago | (#39803479)

It could well be their getting put on a spit and roasted over an anti-trust spit.

Hopefully a moot point (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39800287)

Looks a veto is looming..... http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-57421267-281/white-house-takes-aim-at-cispa-with-formal-veto-threat/ [cnet]

Re:Hopefully a moot point (1)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 2 years ago | (#39800457)

Yea, and hopefully someone slaps Lamar Smith with a clue-bat a few times.

Re:Hopefully a moot point (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39801209)

Election years are good for something.

Re:Hopefully a moot point (3, Insightful)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#39801385)

White House also said they'd veto NDAA, but they were secretly working behind the scenes to add the 2 sentences that allow Americans to be jailed w/o trial. And then they signed the bill on New Year's Eve, rather than veto it.

As the saying goes, fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. I doubt the president's word when he says he would veto something..... especially after he went and signed the ACTA (and now refuses to let the Senate see it).

Re:Hopefully a moot point (4, Insightful)

shmlco (594907) | more than 2 years ago | (#39801617)

Yes, the President has threatened to veto CISPA -- in its current form. However, CISPA's primary sponsors still plan on slapping on some patches (excuse me, amendments) and to proceed towards Friday's vote.

Unfortunately, many of those amendments have their own issues. One even offers -- I kid you not -- a promise to "develop" policies and procedures that will protect individual privacy and civil liberties... after the bill is passed.

It's okay. Trust us.

More at http://www.isights.org/2012/04/president-obama-threatens-to-veto-cispa-authors-brush-off-threat.html [isights.org]

They can do what they want (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39800317)

They can do what they want, doesn't matter any to me. I'm more than happy to throw them out. Are you?

Re:They can do what they want (1)

shentino (1139071) | more than 2 years ago | (#39805147)

We *can't* throw them out until next election, which is exactly why they rightly have nothing to fear from us.

Once they're in office all they have to do is screw us hard enough to get a cushy private sector job lined up for them for when we eventually get a chance to boot them, assuming that by then we still remember and whoever their opponent is isn't worse.

No federal recall means that politicians in congress do not answer to the voters at all.

Without federal recall voters are just cattle to be milked.

Amendments? How about just not passing it. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39800335)

It's sewage. Don't make it law. Flush it.

Re:Amendments? How about just not passing it. (1)

luther349 (645380) | more than 2 years ago | (#39800625)

this is how it starts. just like with sopa they essentially nuterd it then being its no longer a rights killing draconian we can do whatever we please bill big media loses interest and the bill dies. then in 2 months they will repeat the cycle. why because they hope the public will grow tired of protesting the unconstitutional bills and get one passed.

They need to consider the amendment... (3, Insightful)

rastoboy29 (807168) | more than 2 years ago | (#39800355)

...of killing the damn bill.

Re:They need to consider the amendment... (1)

luther349 (645380) | more than 2 years ago | (#39800671)

just like sopa once the unconstitutional bits are removed the bill dies.

Re:They need to consider the amendment... (2)

DigiShaman (671371) | more than 2 years ago | (#39801511)

first and foremost, bureaucracy is in the business of supporting said bureaucracy. That why the Government is called "The Beast". It feeds and grows ever more in complexity and without regards to individual freedom and liberty. In theory, this can all be corrected via default sunset clauses for each bill. That alone will keep them busy without having to keep expanding the government and thus spending and what seemingly would be an exponential rate.

I said in "theory". Come election time, make your vote count. Turn that "theory" into fact.

Getting the foot in the door. (4, Interesting)

Whammy666 (589169) | more than 2 years ago | (#39800365)

The amendments are an attempt to get the foot in the door with CISPA. It's likely they hope to get the basic framework of CISPA in place and then do incremental revisions to the bill over time when the attention has died down.

The best part of the proposed amendments is the supposed liability for the companies violating privacy and handing over info to the government. How'd that work out with the massive illegal NSA wiretapping? Oh that's right, everyone was granted retroactive immunity and the whistle blower got criminal prosecution for his trouble. Somehow, I seriously doubt that the privacy provisions will carry much weight or have any teeth. This bill needs to die.

Re:Getting the foot in the door. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39800393)

The thing that puzzles me if why they even bother with this bill, they're already recording all the messages they can get. Is this just a way to make it legal? And does it matter since they'd do it with or without a law.

Re:Getting the foot in the door. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39817903)

It's a liability shield for your (un)favorite corporations. Lawsuits do affect the bottom line, after all.

Re:Getting the foot in the door. (1)

luther349 (645380) | more than 2 years ago | (#39800687)

looks like a veto is aruldy on the table.

Re:Getting the foot in the door. (1)

HiThere (15173) | more than 2 years ago | (#39814889)

Believe it if you will. Based on past history I'm not at all willing to accept that Obama's honest about *this* veto. And even if he, technically, is, the promise was wrapped in enough weasel words that he can sign it, and claim to be honest, because it's changed since he made the promise.

Re:Getting the foot in the door. (1)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | more than 2 years ago | (#39801103)

if you see a law that seems just; look behind it and you'll find a hidden one that undoes the first one.

what would be great (my dream): NO NEW LAWS. period.

that would stop all this bullshit creeping featurism.

do we need more laws? it seems that laws that we have passed over the last 20 years have all been paid for by PAC money and not one has been created due to actual need BY THE PEOPLE.

oh right: corps are now people.

ignore what I just wrote. I was still stuck in the past, where the constitution still meant something.

Re:Getting the foot in the door. (3, Informative)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | more than 2 years ago | (#39801179)

"It is at first denied that any radical new plan exists; it is then conceded that it exists but ministers swear blind that it is not even on the political agenda; it is then noted that it might well be on the agenda but is not a serious proposition; it is later conceded that it is a serious proposition but that it will never be implemented; after that it is acknowledged that it will be implemented but in such a diluted form that it will make no difference to the lives of ordinary people; at some point it is finally recognised that it has made such a difference, but it was always known that it would and voters were told so from the outset."
-- Times editorial, published on August 28, 2002

Re:Getting the foot in the door. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39801571)

What wiretapping? How does this bill have anything to do with wiretapping? Have you read the bill you're opening your huge mouth about?

Re:Getting the foot in the door. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39802143)

this bill needs to die! Is an UNDERSTATEMENT.

this FP fQor GNAA.. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39800367)

conversations where direct orders, or And Julixet 40,000

Legal framework around existing spyware (5, Interesting)

Scareduck (177470) | more than 2 years ago | (#39800621)

A couple of points about this. First, if the recent Wired article on the under-construction Utah data center [wired.com] is accurate, mass spying is already underway with increasing volumes being planned. So I think it is fair to say that this is a reflection of Total Information Awareness [wikipedia.org] and the post-Admiral Poindexter philosophy of spying: build it and let 'em try and take it away later. CISPA, then, is best thought of as a legal framework around existing and planned hardware buildouts. While I do not expect the Obama White House to be forthcoming with its real reasoning for threatening a veto [cnet.com] , I presume that the real reason is that CISPA does not go far enough so far as the executive branch is concerned.

Two cents (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39802819)

While I do not expect the Obama White House to be forthcoming with its real reasoning for threatening a veto [cnet.com]...

Elections.

First, if the recent Wired article on the under-construction Utah data center [wired.com] is accurate, mass spying is already underway with increasing volumes being planned. So I think it is fair to say that this is a reflection of Total Information Awareness [wikipedia.org] and the post-Admiral Poindexter philosophy of spying: build it and let 'em try and take it away later.

Look at it this way. We will take it away, and what's left over can be donated to wikipedia to mirror the internet until the end of our existence.

Amendment is not enough (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39800849)

Amending it is not enough - the bill needs to be thrown out completely, to deliver a strong enough message to the authors that they need to stop trying to get this sort of thing through. It's not a very big deterrent from trying it again, but it's about the best we could hope for.

Re:Amendment is not enough (1)

shentino (1139071) | more than 2 years ago | (#39805155)

Our congress critters have nothing to fear from us.

Because we can't boot them out of office until next election which means they have a shitload of time to farm out a nice cushy private sector job from the same congress trough fillers that are "lobbying" them to pass this shit in the first place.

Once someone's in office, they're scot free and the only ones who can get rid of them are their brothers who are feeding from the same corporate troughs they are.

Empty promises (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39800897)

considering a number of amendments aimed at limiting the negative impacts the legislation would have on Internet privacy

only applied in the pursuit of legit crimes and other rare instances

Does anybody believe this rhetoric that ultimately boils down to, "We'll only use it when it's appropriate, we promise?" Instead of ammendments made of empty promises, how about don't pass the bill?

The good news is the Government has heard your anger and protests! The bad news is they don't care. They still intend to pass the bill. Keep calling and writing your congressmen and senators!

Doesn't matter (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39801053)

if you shut down CISPA, Lammar still has DISPA, EISPA, FISPA,...

I see that none of you have read the bill (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39801561)

If you did you'd notice it's about information sharing and that information is limited in scope. Instead you go on about NSA spying on people and other bullshit they're already doing under the authority of completely different bills.

If they pass we will REBEL (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39802121)

ANY COMPANY THAT COOPERATES WITH THE FASCIST GOVERNMENT WILL HAVE ALL OF US QUIT AND SWITCH SERVICES. Then when their not around anymore the new companies run by young executives WILL NOT play nice and cooperate with the government. Put simply if they pass it and comcast/xfinity assists the government with our info we use someone else for internet.

Re:If they pass we will REBEL (1)

Coren22 (1625475) | more than 2 years ago | (#39810513)

If only that worked. Verizon is also in support of the bill, I would guess all the major ISPs are behind it. Who will you go to when they are all the same?

Beats By Dr.Dre (-1, Offtopic)

monster007 (2585623) | more than 2 years ago | (#39804021)

If you are the music the way you want to get Beats By Dr.Dre [cheapbeatbydre.us] the best sound quality can be. In addition, you should be able to move and listen to music, look good, when you do it correctly? If this sounds like you, then you will want to know more about Beats By Dr.Dre Pro Headphnoes [cheapbeatbydre.us] . In this article, we will focus on his talents, to let you know dance by Monster Beats Solo Headphones [cheapbeatbydre.us] .

Why is this bill needed? (1)

t4ng* (1092951) | more than 2 years ago | (#39804095)

From TFA...

U.S. Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Mich., a lead sponsor, has said, the bill would "help the private sector defend itself from advanced cyber threats."

If that's really all the bill does, why is it needed? Why would intertube [wikipedia.org] experts in "cybersecurity" need help from the morons in Congress to do their job?

Give 'em something to chew on (1)

Ultracrepidarian (576183) | more than 2 years ago | (#39804219)

The following might, or might not, be random data sent just to drive the NSA monitors nuts: 36599 76464 99006 12528 862 30068 26982 34658 32764 88115 14845 91533 77711 76363 3793 97990 68307 40928 48327 84342 29895 7296 9251 33722 51706 84452 21850 57248 34469 43000 19863 87259 18800 59098 59663 14702 57754 69653 68442 83150 21658 28472 35201 78999 13632 87928 74015 25053 30221 56156 15297 93035 23082 95959 22686 99437 4921 38296 90694 38732 95685 80621 51412 38107 23483 28301 7317 88681 78777 15983 11643 19624 70112 14995 37773 33607 44963 92741 14782 14709 20259 40543 57504 53223 13697 27471 86409 5686 79191 69484 15079 23050 27628 25521 81240 35071 57542 45197 11048 74781 29421 96380 35750 63365 92067 95125 24833 52775 9739 45347 60439 41135 44794 71088 54094 34248 22112 90321 98668 25467 38780 36022 56039 5748 85384 77557 4046 95851 13668 33449 5112 13486 19437 95196 13292 49605 9263 1033 6529 30107 84906 8423 16551 81888 10306 14530 30102 5473 22580 65044 52099 80396 10681 73471 53820 94039 13196 45354 77399 89816 80220 64904 31620 76402 3326 55087 93461 26113 42350 66518 24814 17602 68066 85295 24454 45731 95748 75484 61633 29738 6223 87984 79527 99787 38232 74338 14314 31508 88707 41325 48790 28334 76086 70234 8211 22218 5828 3281 10418 74769 kryton

This will be testing the power of the people (1)

mdragan (1166333) | more than 2 years ago | (#39804509)

When SOPA/PIPA were rejected, this success was attributed to the outcry and protest of the people. In fact the people had the support of a number of BIG corporations (like Google) who also felt threatened by the bills. Now that the corporations have been made partners and exempted from the bad effects, it's just us. We will see how well we do on our own, but I'm not very optimistic.

Federal recall! (1)

shentino (1139071) | more than 2 years ago | (#39805413)

Is it any wonder that our congress critters are screwing us in the ass every chance we get?

They have nothing to fear from us.

First off, we can't even touch them until the next election.

Second, even if we do vote them out, they have plenty of time to build up a cushy private sector job as a *reward* for stepping on our rights.

Third, because of one and two, the next guy that runs against them has no incentive to be any better.

Federal recall elections will solve this issue of corruption...which is unfortunately why the notion will never see the light of day. One may as well ask a rapist to cut his own dick off.

We the people are powerless to do a god damned thing by ourselves, and it's high time everyone who preaches all high and mighty about getting involved in politics instead of bitching about stuff they can't change realizes just how invincible our politicians really are, at least against us piddly voters.

Run for office? Corporate media will skin you alive if you try to derail their precious gravy train.
Vote the fuckers out? Can't do that till election time, and by then it's too late. Plus the next guy won't be any better because he knows he can just do the same routine as the guy you're voting out.

We need to go after their corporate backers too. Boycott any company that does more harm than good, and be vocal about your reasons. Support the companies that are the least evil. Make companies compete for your business on the basis of good karma. Don't do business with a company that has a better one competing with it. If a company is evil and has no competition, try to avoid doing business with it.

@ Google/Facebook employees (1)

jmerlin (1010641) | more than 2 years ago | (#39808927)

Please go tell your bosses to stop supporting CISPA. The threat here is not from the government, clearly they are willing to hand you complete impunity over a massive inadequacy to maintain privacy (and in fact, to allow the govt. to spy on users of your services without warrants at any time). The real threat here is that if you get this bill passed, you will have zero customers. Protect your users and the citizens of this country or cover your own ass and go out of business. This doesn't seem like a hard decision to make.
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?