Bitcoin Forum
December 05, 2016, 08:45:46 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: This just in: House Passes Cybersecurity Measure CISPA [US]  (Read 3062 times)
hazek
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


View Profile
April 26, 2012, 11:15:31 PM
 #1

Those mother fuckers.  Angry I can't express how angry it makes me that some people out there think they own me.


Quote
The House on Thursday approved cybersecurity legislation that privacy groups cautioned was a threat to civil liberties.

The Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act, or CISPA, sponsored by Reps. Mike Rogers (R-Michigan) and Dutch Ruppersberger (D-Maryland), passed on a vote of 248 to 168.

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/04/house-passes-cispa/

My personality type: INTJ - please forgive my weaknesses (Not naturally in tune with others feelings; may be insensitive at times, tend to respond to conflict with logic and reason, tend to believe I'm always right)

If however you enjoyed my post: 15j781DjuJeVsZgYbDVt2NZsGrWKRWFHpp
1480970746
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480970746

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480970746
Reply with quote  #2

1480970746
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1480970746
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480970746

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480970746
Reply with quote  #2

1480970746
Report to moderator
evoorhees
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 994


Democracy is the original 51% attack


View Profile
April 26, 2012, 11:29:34 PM
 #2

Onward we march into tyranny... thank god for Bitcoin
Littleshop
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1316



View Profile WWW
April 26, 2012, 11:47:23 PM
 #3

Obama has said he will veto it. Hopefully he keeps that promise.

FreeMoney
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246


Strength in numbers


View Profile WWW
April 26, 2012, 11:49:07 PM
 #4

Obama has said he will veto it. Hopefully he keeps that promise.

Guys, guys, don't worry about it, no need for a big campaign about this one, I've got it under control.

<<TROLLFACE.JPG>>

Play Bitcoin Poker at sealswithclubs.eu. We're active and open to everyone.
hazek
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


View Profile
April 27, 2012, 12:15:06 AM
 #5

Obama has said he will veto it. Hopefully he keeps that promise.

Yes he said that, because he said it wasn't far reaching enough. But I think they "fixed" what more he thought it should do.

My personality type: INTJ - please forgive my weaknesses (Not naturally in tune with others feelings; may be insensitive at times, tend to respond to conflict with logic and reason, tend to believe I'm always right)

If however you enjoyed my post: 15j781DjuJeVsZgYbDVt2NZsGrWKRWFHpp
SgtSpike
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1344



View Profile
April 27, 2012, 12:21:23 AM
 #6

You know, I'm all for the government catching criminals, but things like this are taking it too far.
Littleshop
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1316



View Profile WWW
April 27, 2012, 12:21:59 AM
 #7

Obama has said he will veto it. Hopefully he keeps that promise.

Yes he said that, because he said it wasn't far reaching enough. But I think they "fixed" what more he thought it should do.
You may not like Obama but that is the opposite of what he said.  

"
OMB said that the administration was "committed to increasing public-private sharing of information about cybersecurity threats" but said the process "must be conducted in a manner that preserves Americans' privacy, data confidentiality, and civil liberties and recognizes the civilian nature of cyberspace."
"

hazek
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


View Profile
April 27, 2012, 12:26:11 AM
 #8

Obama has said he will veto it. Hopefully he keeps that promise.

Yes he said that, because he said it wasn't far reaching enough. But I think they "fixed" what more he thought it should do.
You may not like Obama but that is the opposite of what he said.  

"
OMB said that the administration was "committed to increasing public-private sharing of information about cybersecurity threats" but said the process "must be conducted in a manner that preserves Americans' privacy, data confidentiality, and civil liberties and recognizes the civilian nature of cyberspace."
"

You should spend less time listening to the PR and more time reading the actual language of the amendments. I'm not going to waste even a second more on this topic, so if you want to know the reality of this matter feel free to do your own research.

My personality type: INTJ - please forgive my weaknesses (Not naturally in tune with others feelings; may be insensitive at times, tend to respond to conflict with logic and reason, tend to believe I'm always right)

If however you enjoyed my post: 15j781DjuJeVsZgYbDVt2NZsGrWKRWFHpp
Littleshop
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1316



View Profile WWW
April 27, 2012, 12:32:00 AM
 #9

Obama has said he will veto it. Hopefully he keeps that promise.

Yes he said that, because he said it wasn't far reaching enough. But I think they "fixed" what more he thought it should do.
You may not like Obama but that is the opposite of what he said.  

"
OMB said that the administration was "committed to increasing public-private sharing of information about cybersecurity threats" but said the process "must be conducted in a manner that preserves Americans' privacy, data confidentiality, and civil liberties and recognizes the civilian nature of cyberspace."
"

You should spend less time listening to the PR and more time reading the actual language of the amendments. I'm not going to waste even a second more on this topic, so if you want to know the reality of this matter feel free to do your own research.

You may know more about this then me.  I didn't think the president proposed amendments to bills but I guess I am wrong. 

Herodes
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 868


View Profile
April 27, 2012, 12:38:29 AM
 #10

Quote
The bill immunizes ISPs from privacy lawsuits for voluntarily disclosing customer information thought to be a security threat.

Wow. So if someone somehow thinks you or some of the systems or persons using the computer systems registered on your name is thought to be a security threat, then they could share any information about you with the govt. or any other entity?

We have several cases from real life showing that not even judges and lawyers always manages to use common sense when handling persons percieved to be a 'security threat', and now we're going to have people who have no business taking legal decisions deciding when it's right to share information and not ?

A free man should be able to exercise his freedom be it offline or online, that's my stand. So basically now, if anyone wants your information, they could just call an ISP and say in a very serious voice to a stressed out sysadmin; Hi I'm Bob Hansen, calling from the local FBI office, we believe to have very serious security threats coming from user with ip 345.233.323.233 from you system. We need the Name, Street Address and Billing contact information NOW!

When there's no court order needs, the social engineering attempts to get out personal information and the misuse from government and private companies are only going to increase.

Also Imagine you or some of your friends or a remote hacker does some nefarious stuff with your current ISP account, and then later on you've straightened up your ways or gotten rid of the the malware, and get's rejected by the current ISP, and you try another ISP and you again get rejected for 'security reasons'. (ISPs sharing information about your activities and blacklisting you).

Personally I don't think a customers private information should be shared with anyone unless there's a court order allowing it.
FreeMoney
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246


Strength in numbers


View Profile WWW
April 27, 2012, 12:51:23 AM
 #11

You know, I'm all for the government catching criminals, but things like this are taking it too far.

So you want them catching criminals but not defining 'criminal'? Who ought be doing that?

Play Bitcoin Poker at sealswithclubs.eu. We're active and open to everyone.
Littleshop
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1316



View Profile WWW
April 27, 2012, 01:33:51 AM
 #12

From wiki:
On April 26, 2012, the House of Representatives passed CISPA.
House Voting Counts

Full list can be seen at the House.gov site. [21]
Ayes Votes

Republican: 206 Democrat: 42
Noes Votes

Republican: 28 Democrat: 140
NV Votes

Republican: 7 Democrat: 8
Supporters

CISPA is supported by several trade groups containing more than eight hundred private companies, including the Business Software Alliance, CTIA – The Wireless Association, Information Technology Industry Council, Internet Security Alliance, National Cable & Telecommunications Association, National Defense Industrial Association, TechAmerica and United States Chamber of Commerce, in addition to individual major telecommunications and information technology companies like AT&T, Facebook, IBM, Intel, Microsoft, Oracle Corporation, Symantec, and Verizon.

evoorhees
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 994


Democracy is the original 51% attack


View Profile
April 27, 2012, 01:59:13 AM
 #13

When there's no court order needs, the social engineering attempts to get out personal information and the misuse from government and private companies are only going to increase.

Excellent point  Cry
coinuser4000
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 89



View Profile
April 27, 2012, 02:25:25 AM
 #14

Quote
The bill immunizes ISPs from privacy lawsuits for voluntarily disclosing customer information thought to be a security threat.

When there's no court order needs, the social engineering attempts to get out personal information and the misuse from government and private companies are only going to increase.


I hardly thought it could get much worse but as usual, I stand unfortunately corrected. This is yet one step closer to a Police State from NSL's

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Letter

Where I live, regular use of Tor and strong encryption would be more than enough to qualify as "suspicious activity" (if you're not doing anything wrong you shouldn't have anything to hide.....). If you don't see me post for a while you'll know I've been tracked down and sent to jail for conspicuously awesome internet hygiene.

◈▣ KOMODO ● ICO STARTS OCTOBER 15TH ▣◈
         PROTECTING YOUR PRIVACY WITH BITCOIN'S HASHRATE         
| Untraceable Zero Knowledge Transactions | Delayed Proof of Work / as safe as Bitcoin |
SgtSpike
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1344



View Profile
April 27, 2012, 02:27:05 AM
 #15

You know, I'm all for the government catching criminals, but things like this are taking it too far.

So you want them catching criminals but not defining 'criminal'? Who ought be doing that?
I don't understand what you mean... a criminal would be one who breaks a law that defines one as a criminal, right?

From wiki:
On April 26, 2012, the House of Representatives passed CISPA.
House Voting Counts

Full list can be seen at the House.gov site. [21]
Ayes Votes

Republican: 206 Democrat: 42
Noes Votes

Republican: 28 Democrat: 140
NV Votes

Republican: 7 Democrat: 8
Supporters

CISPA is supported by several trade groups containing more than eight hundred private companies, including the Business Software Alliance, CTIA – The Wireless Association, Information Technology Industry Council, Internet Security Alliance, National Cable & Telecommunications Association, National Defense Industrial Association, TechAmerica and United States Chamber of Commerce, in addition to individual major telecommunications and information technology companies like AT&T, Facebook, IBM, Intel, Microsoft, Oracle Corporation, Symantec, and Verizon.
Republicans, I am disappoint.
FreeMoney
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1246


Strength in numbers


View Profile WWW
April 27, 2012, 03:53:57 AM
 #16

You know, I'm all for the government catching criminals, but things like this are taking it too far.

So you want them catching criminals but not defining 'criminal'? Who ought be doing that?
I don't understand what you mean... a criminal would be one who breaks a law that defines one as a criminal, right?

Well all they are going to be doing is catching criminals, right? But since they get to pick how to do that and who is a criminal and they even get to change it as they go "catching criminals" pretty much means doing whatever the hell they want.

Play Bitcoin Poker at sealswithclubs.eu. We're active and open to everyone.
SgtSpike
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1344



View Profile
April 27, 2012, 05:55:42 AM
 #17

You know, I'm all for the government catching criminals, but things like this are taking it too far.

So you want them catching criminals but not defining 'criminal'? Who ought be doing that?
I don't understand what you mean... a criminal would be one who breaks a law that defines one as a criminal, right?

Well all they are going to be doing is catching criminals, right? But since they get to pick how to do that and who is a criminal and they even get to change it as they go "catching criminals" pretty much means doing whatever the hell they want.
Exactly.  That's why I said this is going too far...  Wink
check_status
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196


Web Dev, Db Admin, Computer Technician


View Profile
April 27, 2012, 07:22:15 AM
 #18

Those mother fuckers.  Angry
This +11

For Bitcoin to be a true global currency the value of BTC needs always to rise.
If BTC became the global currency & money supply = 100 Trillion then ⊅1.00 BTC = $4,761,904.76.
P2Pool Server List | How To's and Guides Mega List |  1EndfedSryGUZK9sPrdvxHntYzv2EBexGA
Dutch Merganser
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 84


View Profile
April 27, 2012, 07:52:44 AM
 #19

People seem to have quickly forgotten the bunch of worthless pissants with minds crippled by superstition, parochialism, and preposterous ideologies they put in the U.S. House of Representatives in 2010. The House has been nearly completely dysfunctional since.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tea_Party_Caucus

It was said in the 1970s that the attention span of the American electorate was approximately equal to the length of a beer commercial. These days that attention span is comparable to that of a parakeet, as seems to be the average IQ.

This is the payoff for forty years of wishful escapism and deliberate dumbing down. Enjoy it, it won't be fixed and by the time it could be it really won't matter any more, they made you world-class losers and you loved it the whole way.

"Science flies you to the Moon, religion flies you into buildings."
 - Victor Stenger

"Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and the rulers as useful."
 - Seneca the Elder (ca. 54 BCE - ca. 39 CE) Roman rhetorician
bb113
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 728


View Profile
April 27, 2012, 08:02:01 AM
 #20

THIS IS A HUGE DEAL. BE OUTRAGED, go research it for yourself.
Pages: [1] 2 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!