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

[PELHAM 10]

It's mentioned several times in the bill that entities can participate for protecting their rights and properties. PELHAM again tries cheap talk using words like "cospiracy sites" hoping we will buy his lies.

It's better that SOPA in "dumb people will not mess with Internet (routers & DNS)".

"Intellectual property" has been defined specifically as "research and development". What is wrong with a bill designed to stop people hacking into systems and stealing R&D information? That is what it's for. It's specifically aimed at hacking government and private networks. It's focused on industrial espionage.

Anyone can read it, it's not SOPA:

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

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.R.3523:

Edited April 19, 2012 by PELHAM

[mrcash2009 0]

Don't worry I won't ask you to explain why this time lol. Keep on posting videos by all means - it keeps me entertained lol.

Always glad to be of service, lol all the way to the future . LOL :)

Things like this should always be highlighted, re assesed, and never taken as gospel no matter what lesser wording is used, you know as well as I these fine tooth combed versions are written and re written by the highest paid lawyers and so on money can buy. I remember patriot act and other terrror laws coming in to play to "stop terrorist" .. but so far its shafted many who are not, and that being a great example, I dont care if they get on one knee and shout the fact they have changed it, it should always be caution.

You know the tricks, put out the 100 percent version knowing you will only get half (which is what you wanted) and then be seen to barter down to the 50 percent you wanted, making it look like a back down, same old tricks. Also that Wiki link also shows concerns, so, it wont go away.

So much megaLOlz.

Edited April 19, 2012 by mrcash2009

[mrcash2009 0]

Just an aditional article elsewhere in reference to CISPA:

http://www.naturalnews.com/035638_CISPA_SOPA_free_speech.html

In truth, there is no legitimate need to pass any "cybersecurity" bills because legal mechanisms to address internet crimes are already in place.

Certainly a point I was always thinking as regards justifications, posting for thread reference mainly.

[PELHAM 10]

Just an aditional article elsewhere in reference to CISPA:

http://www.naturalnews.com/035638_CISPA_SOPA_free_speech.html

Certainly a point I was always thinking as regards justifications, posting for thread reference mainly.

The bill is not addressing internet crimes but relates to the sharing of information between government agencies and others to prevent them. It is targetting hacking and industrial espionage.

naturalnews.com? Are they in any way able to make an authoritative interpretation on this? It's inaccurate as anyone who reads the bill itself can see:

In truth, there is no legitimate need to pass any "cybersecurity" bills because legal mechanisms to address internet crimes are already in place.

Not true at all, there is nothing existing on this issue.

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

CISPA is an amendment to the National Security Act of 1947, which does not currently contain provisions pertaining to cybercrime. It adds provisions to the Act describing cyber threat as a "vulnerability of, or threat to, a system or network of a government or private entity.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/hr3523

Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act of 2011 - Amends the National Security Act of 1947 to add provisions concerning cyber threat intelligence and information sharing. Defines "cyber threat intelligence" as information in the possession of an element of the intelligence community directly pertaining to a vulnerability of, or threat to, a system or network of a government or private entity, including information pertaining to the protection of a system or network from: (1) efforts to degrade, disrupt, or destroy such system or network; or (2) theft or misappropriation of private or government information, intellectual property, or personally identifiable information.

Full text of Bill:

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/hr3523/text

Edited April 23, 2012 by PELHAM

[walker 0]

Hi all

This is the problem with CISPA and ACTA you are really dealing with what should be Civil actions, the civil remedies are being clandestinely changed to criminal law with all its powers when in fact this is often a civil dispute between a company and a human being, or between an entrenched business and its more effective market entrant and as such not a crime. In the case of CISPA it is being organised with last minute amendments that give businesses, as often as not foreign businesses, the powers normally reserved for government.

The problem with ACTA is that it is a treaty and thus not debated in the executive, they are just enacted world wide by dict-at from the 1%ers and their apparatchiks

These are treatys that means you can be extradited to face crimes, that may not even exist in your country or are given higher punishment regimes than exist in your own country.

So in the case of the young student from the UK where it is not even illegal to give a link to a site where one may be able to find a link to a download of a file that is considered copyright in another jurisdiction but also that the material may not even be considered copyright in the UK. And the court is not even allowed to consider whether the case is one that could be answered in the local jurisdiction. All those prosecuting have to prove is that you "appear", note that word, to have case to answer in a foreign jurisdiction.

Further the company, and it will be a company that winds up the local police to go after foreign evil doers, can shop around for the most advantageous jurisdiction from which to launch the case ie one where the defendants rights and legal defenses are lowest where their costs are highest and where the tendency to prosecute and convict foreign defendants is highest, and the punishments are the most severe.

And in the case of Kim Dotcom he has to stay in jail the whole time he is fighting the case. Even if in the end he proves himself innocent and in the mean time the companys that brought the action, because he was out competing them at providing publishing services to artists, Hence why so many artists supported him, have destroyed their successful competitor and he has lost his business because the case will last years. Where those less competitive companies will be stealing his business.

Remember this company was 4% of Internet traffic. With millions of legal paying customers using it to store and distribute their files. Of course the thing the entrenched businesses wanted to stop was the MegaBox which was due out in the first quarter of the year and all their entrenched competitors are busy manufacturing the competing products without let or hinderance.

As I pointed out earlier the most effective way of dealing with the people who promote these bills is to go after their money, careers and positions of power. They are clearly doing a Murdoch and using government as a business tool for their own entrenched positions. The only things such people seem to understand is loss of their money and power, so that is how to deal with them.

The fact this keeps occurring, points to people who want it. Time to find out who they are and make them pay.

So we should personalize this, find out who the sponsors and lobbyists are; then destroy their careers and businesses through targeted actions that make life as miserable for them as they intend to make it for us. Concentrate first of all on the ones who's names appear as contributors in multiple versions of these laws.

Create or use an existing public website with each of the perpetrators and supporters of these types of laws listed, and then let crowdsourcing do its work in identifying them and what they do and how we can put such pressure on them that every other person who ever thinks they can get away with this, will think twice.

Start Here:

http://intelligence.house.gov/bill/cyber-intelligence-sharing-and-protection-act-2011

Compare with this:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xjisu18X6s7lPtAsIQg5Ol3KJjymPT2az1kasQVwGiw/edit?pli=1#

Find the names that reoccur.

Then create an Android app same as was done for SOPA PIPA.

http://gamepolitics.com/2012/01/10/android-app-helps-you-boycott-products-made-sopa-supporters

Boycott them right to hell...

Meanwhile it looks like the legal case against Megaupload has started to fall apart with no evidence so far found in the petabytes of information sequestered by the court. The court has now freed the board of Megaupload and allowed them to meet and have access to the net.

Kind regards walker

Edited April 25, 2012 by walker
Missed three words in the opening statement (in bold)

[PELHAM 10]

This is the problem with CISPA and ACTA you are really dealing with what should be Civil actions, the civil remedies are being clandestinely changed to criminal law with all its powers when in fact this is often a civil dispute between a company and a human being, or between an entrenched business and its more and as such not a crime. In the case of CISPA it is being organised with last minute amendments that give businesses, as often as not foreign businesses, the powers normally reserved for government.

Errr CISPA has nothing to do with ACTA as you can read in the links above. Since when is hacking networks and industrial espionage not criminal? What you have to say about CISPA is entirely untrue, it's ACTA that does much of what you describe. Can I ask precisely what powers CISPA gives businesses that are usually reserved for governments? The major change I can see is the 2 way info sharing. This will not turn businesses into spies lol, what is most likely is that they will simply hand over records when requested. As said before, many times, the monitoring of internet usage and history will be targetted at a few individuals that pose a National Security risk as they simply don't have the resources to monitor more. If you disagree I would like to see the reasoning behind your opinions?

The largest opposition to this bill comes from Russia Today, the Russian state funded television news network. Strange that they should lead the fight against a US law that will make hacking US government and private US networks and industrial espionage much harder to get away with. Why do you suppose that is?

[walker 0]

Hi all

As I pointed out CISPA has been used as a trojan horse by 1%er apparatchiks and companies, often as not foreign entities, wanting to sneak in amendments that extend its effect to areas of civil litigation and Business. That is why so many amendments to it are in dispute.

This then is the whole point of raising the CISPA act in order to remove from it those 1%er and corporate amendments to it that turn it from a law to protect the state into one that is the tool of often foreign 1%er and corporate entities.

It is important to follow the Anarchist presumption that political power does not end with an X in a box, and that true political power is created not in the ballot box but in action.

How laws are created.

a) The process of the law being created is that those who want the law lobby for it and write and frame it then get US Congress and Senate members to sponsor it. PELHAM seems to want to foster the impression that politicians write legislation. They do not. Not even in England. Politicians frame aspects of law, they may even add the odd line, but the majority of any act of law is framed and written by interested parties; this includes, civil servants, lawyers, businesses and those people who PELHAM thinks sole political input should be to put an X on piece of paper when they are allowed to; Citizen / Tax Payers.

b) It is process that many including YOU may contribute to and is much more important and powerful than putting an X on the piece of paper. That is why Businesses and elites of all shades spend so much time and money on it. That is the source of much of their power. It is time for the people Citizen / Tax Payers to take that power back!

c) Unlike the view PELHAM professes, and I point out tries to hoodwink us with, here in reality your contribution to politics does not have to end with putting an X on the piece of paper, I am an Anarchist I have never and will never believe that lie.

d) As Democracy evolves to a more anarchic form of government it is this form of political power that will increasingly come to dominate how Citizen / Tax Payers contribute to the political process. Don't let the elitists continue to fool you. Even in the Mafia Oligarchies of Russia Citizens have begun to realise this and are joining the nuts and bolts process that actually creates the law.

e) How the process works

Power Elites, Businesses and 1% er representatives, frame and write legislation in two ways:

I) Laws that constrain and control Power Elites, Businesses and 1% ers are narrowly defined and with multiple clauses and complex ideally unfathomable legal wording such as to make the laws infective.

II) Laws that constrain and control Citizens / Tax Payers are deliberately vague; as is the case with this CISPA law and also was the case with the SOPA and PIPA acts that preceded it. This is in order that with the aid of a smart expensive lawyer for Power Elites, Businesses and 1% ers these laws can be legally manipulated so that they can be applied to the benefit of the Power Elites, Businesses and 1% ers, and the Detriment of Citizens / Tax Payers.

III) Power Elites, Businesses and 1% er representatives sneak laws in with last minute amendments to acts that have little or nothing to do with the core legislation, so as to prevent their being spotted and discussed.

These processes even apply to the Tax code. Which is why 1%ers pay little tax where as the poor and Middle class Citizens / Tax Payers pay a much higher percentage of their earnings as Tax.

Logically then it is important that the maximum number of ammedments constraining CISPA are inserted into it; in order to prevent it being used as a trojan horse by 1%er and corporate entities. Perhaps the most logical addition is the removal of any economic justification or economic use of CISPA, being added as a primary ammendment. As an aside, there is some argument that such an ammendment could be inserted into all criminal law. And clearly all ammedments that benefit 1%ers and corporate entities need to be struck out or severly constrained as a matter of course.

f) An Ammedment Watch organisation is needed to ensure last minute 1%er and corporate entity ammedments can no longer be sneaked into legislation as has been attempted here and those involved in the activity need to be investigated.

g) As the other method being used by 1%er apparachnics and corporate entities to sneak changes to the law in under the citizens radar is by treaty then it also follows that a Treaty Watch organisation is needed.

h) Finaly I assert that: The acts of naming and shaming and boycott are and remain, legitimate political methods of pressure where Democracy is found wanting.

Kind Regards walker

Edited April 25, 2012 by walker
layout half brackets!

[PELHAM 10]

Lol what rubbish.

Firstly, please don't say I said things or gave an impression when I didn't. Not sure why you would want to lie in such a way unless you are trying to hoodwink someone yourself.

Democracy obviously doesn't end with an X in a box? That is why people are able to lobby, seek judicial review, partake in consultation etc. That is why they draft law and make ammendments, everyone can have their say before it is passed, it's democratic. Part of my job involves applying delegated legislation so I am well aware how law is made and would never say what is attributed to me above.

I have never said or given the impression that democracy ends with an X in a box. I once said that Walker is part of an extremist minority and that if most people didn't agree with him (as can be seen from voting statistics) who was Walker to try to change the world to suit himself? I suggested that perhaps he should ask first and why don't the Anarchists conduct a poll to see if they have any popular support? This seems to have resulted in the above smear campaign as he knows exactly what the results of such a poll would be and can't accept reality.

Getting back to CISPA what Walker says is utter guff, anyone who reads the draft bill will clearly see it's a government sponsored US law and 95% of it relates to government employees and what information they can share. Where the rantings about "foreign entities" and "trojan horses" come from I have no idea. Many US organisations support it as they are tired of having their networks hacked and information stolen. That is a criminal act by individuals and foreign governements who wish to make money the easy way - from theft.

CISPA allows a share of information on Cyber threats that will allow the US government to warn US organisations about them. The other part of CISPA allows US organisations to pass back information about any threat they may discover. It protects them from litigation if they do so.

I imagine the Russian government and Anarchists, like Walker, are opposed to this because it will curtail their activities. Hence the wild stories and the smear campaigns. If there was any truth in what they say they would be able to provide facts. They can't provide any facts to support their ideas as demonstrated in the post above.

Edited April 25, 2012 by PELHAM

[Tonci87 163]

Hi all

This is the problem with CISPA and ACTA you are really dealing with what should be Civil actions, the civil remedies are being clandestinely changed to criminal law with all its powers when in fact this is often a civil dispute between a company and a human being, or between an entrenched business and its more effective market entrant and as such not a crime. In the case of CISPA it is being organised with last minute amendments that give businesses, as often as not foreign businesses, the powers normally reserved for government.

The problem with ACTA is that it is a treaty and thus not debated in the executive, they are just enacted world wide by dict-at from the 1%ers and their apparatchiks

These are treatys that means you can be extradited to face crimes, that may not even exist in your country or are given higher punishment regimes than exist in your own country.

So in the case of the young student from the UK where it is not even illegal to give a link to a site where one may be able to find a link to a download of a file that is considered copyright in another jurisdiction but also that the material may not even be considered copyright in the UK. And the court is not even allowed to consider whether the case is one that could be answered in the local jurisdiction. All those prosecuting have to prove is that you "appear", note that word, to have case to answer in a foreign jurisdiction.

Further the company, and it will be a company that winds up the local police to go after foreign evil doers, can shop around for the most advantageous jurisdiction from which to launch the case ie one where the defendants rights and legal defenses are lowest where their costs are highest and where the tendency to prosecute and convict foreign defendants is highest, and the punishments are the most severe.

And in the case of Kim Dotcom he has to stay in jail the whole time he is fighting the case. Even if in the end he proves himself innocent and in the mean time the companys that brought the action, because he was out competing them at providing publishing services to artists, Hence why so many artists supported him, have destroyed their successful competitor and he has lost his business because the case will last years. Where those less competitive companies will be stealing his business.

Remember this company was 4% of Internet traffic. With millions of legal paying customers using it to store and distribute their files. Of course the thing the entrenched businesses wanted to stop was the MegaBox which was due out in the first quarter of the year and all their entrenched competitors are busy manufacturing the competing products without let or hinderance.

As I pointed out earlier the most effective way of dealing with the people who promote these bills is to go after their money, careers and positions of power. They are clearly doing a Murdoch and using government as a business tool for their own entrenched positions. The only things such people seem to understand is loss of their money and power, so that is how to deal with them.

The fact this keeps occurring, points to people who want it. Time to find out who they are and make them pay.

So we should personalize this, find out who the sponsors and lobbyists are; then destroy their careers and businesses through targeted actions that make life as miserable for them as they intend to make it for us. Concentrate first of all on the ones who's names appear as contributors in multiple versions of these laws.

Create or use an existing public website with each of the perpetrators and supporters of these types of laws listed, and then let crowdsourcing do its work in identifying them and what they do and how we can put such pressure on them that every other person who ever thinks they can get away with this, will think twice.

Start Here:

http://intelligence.house.gov/bill/cyber-intelligence-sharing-and-protection-act-2011

Compare with this:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xjisu18X6s7lPtAsIQg5Ol3KJjymPT2az1kasQVwGiw/edit?pli=1#

Find the names that reoccur.

Then create an Android app same as was done for SOPA PIPA.

http://gamepolitics.com/2012/01/10/android-app-helps-you-boycott-products-made-sopa-supporters

Boycott them right to hell...

Meanwhile it looks like the legal case against Megaupload has started to fall apart with no evidence so far found in the petabytes of information sequestered by the court. The court has now freed the board of Megaupload and allowed them to meet and have access to the net.

Kind regards walker

^this!^

The megaupload case is ridiculous. I really ask myself if KIM will be able to sue anyone if he is proven to be innocent. They ruined his buisness after all.

[mrcash2009 0]

I imagine the Russian government and Anarchists, like Walker, are opposed to this because it will curtail their activities.

Now I find that an interesting statement. Do you suggest by walker stating what he posts he is an Anarchist and in some way these bills/laws would effect him? Because you are actually admitting what most people here are pointing at. Blanket groups such as "anarchist" can be broken down to "whistle-blowing" .. "Activism" .. "Speaking out" .. then onto investigative journalism and so on. Never mind Terror laws and such that cross paths with such blanket names.

You say its all about the corporations and employees as it reads for the official standpoint, yet at the same time insinuate it will curtail "activities" of "Anarchists" which again can be interpreted later on once in place. Hacking first of all and then tighter measures later.

You are also suggesting that Walker indulges in "activities" you dont know that just from forum posts, and then sideline that with Russian government .. bit strong isn't it? Cold war tinterwebz and Walkers group hiding in binary land.

If there was any truth in what they say they would be able to provide facts. They can't provide any facts to support their ideas as demonstrated in the post above.

Maybe not to support an argument, but then people didn't have that for Patriot acts and SOCA/2005 changes in UK, but once its in place and a few years pass you can check the abuse of it, should be enough to be cautious. I dont agree on all of Walkers points, but I find the categorising interesting though, democracy cant be defined by and x in a box but you can certainly paint a black & white picture of other things in the same way.

That is why people are able to lobby, seek judicial review, partake in consultation etc. That is why they draft law and make amendments, everyone can have their say before it is passed, it's democratic.

EU Referendum? Taking more & more orders from Brussels? Stick "Terror" or "Anarchist" or "Extremism" (watch them merge later) into a paper and its fast track city. Not directly related, but I haven't seen much that has gone through in this realm where its been "fine" ... in fact theres plenty to show groups and bodies are not fine with it, even in your wiki links and so on, it all doesn't have to be masked with "minority activism" & the Russians are coming to cast a demon shadow on opposition, or people complaining becuase they are somehow dodgy by default.

Edited April 25, 2012 by mrcash2009

[PELHAM 10]

Now I find that an interesting statement. Do you suggest by walker stating what he posts he is an Anarchist and in some way these bills/laws would effect him?

You say its all about the corporations and employees as it reads for the official standpoint, yet at the same time insinuate it will curtail "activities" of "Anarchists" which again can be interpreted later on once in place.

You are also suggesting that Walker indulges in "activities" you dont know that just from forum posts, and then sideline that with Russian government .. bit strong isn't it? Cold war tinterwebz and Walkers group hiding in binary land.

It is important to follow the Anarchist presumption that political power does not end with an X in a box, and that true political power is created not in the ballot box but in action.

He said it - Anarchists engage in "action", we all know what that is, these days it includes hacking. He has also stated he is an Anarchist many times on these forums? You have been here long enough to know this, surely?

EU Referendum? Taking more & more orders from Brussels? Stick "Terror" or "Anarchist" or "Extremism" (watch them merge later) into a paper and its fast track city. Not directly related, but I haven't seen much that has gone through in this realm where its been "fine" ... in fact theres plenty to show groups and bodies are not fine with it, even in your wiki links and so on, it all doesn't have to be masked with "minority activism" & the Russians are coming to cast a demon shadow on opposition, or people complaining becuase they are somehow dodgy by default.

Not sure what you mean - I didn't say that - I simply said that Anarchists should have some legitimacy by extablishing popular support through a poll (referendum if you will). Why should an extremist minority such as Anarchists change the world to suit themselves if the rest of us don't want to live that way?

Russia Today are the chief opponents of CISPA, it's the international news agency of the Russian Government, historically it's editorials support the Kremlin view 100%. So we can deduct that the Russian Government do not want CISPA, we all know why.

Both the Anarchists and the Russian Government will benefit if CISPA fails, direct action through hacking and industrial espionage will be much harder in the US if it gets through.

Edited April 25, 2012 by PELHAM

[mrcash2009 0]

He said it - Anarchists engage in "action", we all know what that is, these days it includes hacking. He has also stated he is an Anarchist many times on these forums? You have been here long enough to know this, surely?

Do you have a proof of this other than text on a database on BIS forum? You ask for proof, I just see words, thats his view, I did say I dont agree with everything he posts, I was speaking in terms of the whole area of group names/"deemed" and policy & introductory laws/clauses and such that get expanded over time, that's really where I was coming from.

Both the Anarchists and the Russian Government will benefit if CISPA fails

I dont see the world being hacked to submission via Russia and anarchists with it not being in place right now though, do you? Well, apart from Anonymous popping up with powers that could foil Norad in hacking terms, which cracks me up every time I see them. Just exchange "hack" with "Terror" and its the same scare game. I exaggerate a little hear, but anyway.

direct action through hacking and industrial espionage will be much harder in the US if it gets through.

Well lets just say that in its basic form, yes, but we shall see how it fleshes out if its allowed in from the current "framework". Most likely a big mass Anonymous hack and then it has to be instantly extended or some such scenario, tinternet Terror and all that. Allthough like most double standards I wonder how the works for the finger pointing teams, as if this only happens in the murky world of "the east" & activists?

Why should an extremist minority such as Anarchists change the world to suit themselves if the rest of us don't want to live that way?

Flip that directly to the power structure of the entire world and you come to the same question, just remove the naughty word activist. And why is it that an activist will change the world? Really? The "World" ... your sounding a bit extremist now :) Tip the balance in certain areas, make people think, well, maybe.

Edited April 25, 2012 by mrcash2009

[tacticalnuggets 24]

Agorists love the freedom of the internet. SOPA is obviously an attack on the internets anarchistic environment. So the question comes down to whether people have finally accepted that agorism/anarchy can exist efficiently and for the benefit of everyone.

[mrcash2009 0]

Agorists love the freedom of the internet.

We all do dont we?

SOPA is obviously an attack on the internets anarchistic environment.

So once we rid the tinterwebz of activists, I wonder what the net will be like with it all still inplace and extended? I think people use the media term version reflex action tag to justify it than actually seeing a bigger picture with it all.

One day it will be a single site login via biometrics, saturated with containment algorithm bots feeding you corporate controlled one side views and places to "consume" cashless & tracked absolutely ... great, but we need to bring in these types of laws to take it there becuase of all the bad apples online (same shit since it was invented).

Theres no more anarchy online now than before and there is far more of that going on daily in the real world with people using a different tag in a suit, like I said before no one can get on the moral high ground as they are all guilty in one form or another.

Anarchists and all those labels more often than not exist from a reaction to something (right or wrong with what they actually do), but the focus is on the reaction in the end, god forbid checking out the source as to why.

Edited April 25, 2012 by mrcash2009

[PELHAM 10]

So the question comes down to whether people have finally accepted that agorism/anarchy can exist efficiently and for the benefit of everyone.

Well let the Anarchists conduct a poll and see what people think, either they have popular support or they don't. Without this legitimacy they simply look like spoiled children throwing a tantrum because they can't get what they want.

The amount of Anarchist type hacking is very small compared to the industrial espionage organised type hacks. That is what CISPA is mainly focused on.

[walker 0]

Hi all

Well let the Anarchists conduct a poll...

Is an Oxy Moronic Statement.

ROFL

The very concept is based a falacy; the one that states "The majority is always right!" a moments thought proves it wrong.

The majority thought the world was flat...

The majority did not know there was gravity until Newton...

The majority of German voters voted for Hitler...

As to tantrums PELHAM Hmm...

Clearly there are currently several problems with the admistration of the world at large and curtailing the powers of the 1%ers and corporates is needed in order to redress the balance and ensure the world is run for benefit of the many rather than the few.

I think there is a lot to be said for being able to see what those who make the world worse are up to, so I suggest the following amendments to CISPA.

Corporate bodies

Complete transparency of all corporate and 1%er business.

Meaning the full acounts of every penny they own and use including Taxes available on their website with right to audit at any time.

All of their meetings broadcast on the interenet and available by podcast.

No right of privacy for any corporate body.

No right to any business secrets. This would enable a proper and transparent market.

National Executive and Administration

24 hour recording of all actions of all politicians, make them wear a wire and camera. An exception for when at home and not engaged in political action. Make it a criminal offence for a politician to engage in political action, including visits from corporate representatives, without recording it. Dito all civil servants. Presumption that all records are made public with the only exception being a defense of the nation but with all corporate activities excluded. Then have an independent panel decide what needs to be secret because it has a defense implication. With 5 yearly reviews and a 50 to 70 year absolute limit on it remaining secret.

One has only consider the corruption the Murdoch's News Corp has been involved in to see that there is a serious level of damage being done by these unfetered elements.

Perhaps an increase in sentencing levels also needs to be brought against such corrupt practices. Considering the damage the 1%ers and bankers have done to world economy perhaps compulsory life sentences are in order.

Kind Regards walker

[PELHAM 10]

The majority of German voters voted for Hitler...

Well you never know, you may get a majority too someday?

As for Anarchists conducting a poll, I know it will never happen. They are convinced their views on how we all should live are correct, so why bother to ask? Hitler was also very sure of his ideas, so he didn't ask a second time, interesting you mentioned him, do you have something in common?

[Bee8190 10]

Just read the wiki CISPA description, in hope to catch up.

It adds provisions to the Act describing cyber threat as a "vulnerability of, or threat to, a system or network of a government or private entity, including information pertaining to the protection of a system or network from either 'efforts to degrade, disrupt, or destroy such system or network'; or 'theft or misappropriation of private or government information

I'm not a lower but IMO this could mean about anything and is unclear to say the least. In fact, the wiki and others, barely explains what CISPA is, which raise (at least my) concerns.

It sounds to me like extended SOPA, nothing more really.Yet another legislation to make the world perfect place.

Lets lock up all the worlds criminals and world will be happy again...Or will it? Well, I guess all the law enforcers (police?) will find another job now.

Rep. Mike Rogers characterized the growing protests against CISPA as 'turbulence' and vowed to push for a floor vote without radical changes

Basicaly - meh, people will get over it, fuck em..

I perhaps don't fully understand but except for some cosmetic sounding tweaks to this legislation, aren't there laws that already forbid basicaly any cyber attack(s), theft or damage to private / corporate property?

@walker - hehe, loving your sense for ''public'' justice against political figures ;)

Edited April 25, 2012 by Bee8190

[tacticalnuggets 24]

The internet is fairly similar to the printing press revolution of europe and the renaissance. If people really want governments to monopolize the internet for our "own safety" then the internet will go that direction. I have my doubts about that ever being possible though. From what we saw in egypt, this attempt greatly enhanced the fierce resistance to information control. In the US we have not entirely reached that stage. Our ISP's are mostly monitored, not controlled. The only way the government can get away with this is if they do it so slow no one will notice. Thats exactly what they are trying to do now.

I understand that a lot of people have a distaste for free market anarchism, whether semantic in nature or not. However, the internet has been a great test of this philosophy and it sadens me how people want to eliminate it. Without the major market pressure from the internet on large corporations, many of us would still be watching shit tv programs on cable instead of whatever we want online.

[PELHAM 10]

I perhaps don't fully understand but except for some cosmetic sounding tweaks to this legislation, aren't there laws that already forbid basicaly any cyber attack(s), theft or damage to private / corporate property?

That isn't what CISPA is - it's about information sharing between the US security Services, US Government Networks and Private Networks to prevent Cyber security Weaknesses - as stated many times before there is nothing in the Act CISPA ammends that deals with this method of crime prevention. So the answer to that is No.

[NoRailgunner 0]

Just something to read about CISPA : https://www.cdt.org/cispa-resource-page

[PELHAM 10]

Just something to read about CISPA : https://www.cdt.org/cispa-resource-page

Taken from the above link:

CISPA Threatens Privacy

1. CISPA has a very broad, almost unlimited definition of the information that can be shared with government agencies and it supersedes all other privacy laws.

2. CISPA is likely to lead to expansion of the government’s role in the monitoring of private communications.

3. CISPA is likely to shift control of government cybersecurity efforts from civilian agencies to the military.

4. Once the information is shared with the government, it wouldn’t have to be used for cybersecurity, but could instead be used for other purposes.

1. Part 1 is true, if it was limited it would not be of any use. Part 2 isn't true, it doesn't supersede all other privacy laws.

2. Not likely, as 99.9% of people are not involved in hacking US Government Networks the ISP's will not need to report them.

3. Blatently untrue, there is a strict protocol governing foreign and domestic intelligence gathering, it will remain the same after CISPA. Foreign Cyber threats will be handled by the NSA (military) and CIA. Domestic Cyber threats will be handled by the The DHS National Cyber Security Division (NCSD) (civilian).

4. Misleading:

CISPA

`(1) LIMITATION- The Federal Government may use cyber threat information shared with the Federal Government in accordance with subsection (b) for any lawful purpose only if--

`(A) the use of such information is not for a regulatory purpose; and

`(B) at least one significant purpose of the use of such information is--

`(i) a cybersecurity purpose; or

`(ii) the protection of the national security of the United States.

So the info can be used for cybersecurity or national security purposes only.

[batto 17]

1. Part 1 is true, if it was limited it would not be of any use.

FPDR

2. Not likely, as 99.9% of people are not involved in hacking US Government Networks the ISP's will not need to report them.

LOL. Seriously, You've no idea what are you talking about.

Anyway, I'm not reading this meaningless threads anymore. Here are some news:

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entries/obama-will-veto-cispa-unless-changes-are-made

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120425/12445718657/obama-administration-threatens-to-veto-cispa.shtml

Edited April 26, 2012 by batto

[mrcash2009 0]

CISPA has a very broad, almost unlimited definition of the information that can be shared with government agencies

is true, if it was limited it would not be of any use

:j:

So ...... its true it has very broad terms and it wouldn't be much use otherwise, is, sort of saying without it having broad terms its useless, which is the issue. Its only use IS to broaden terms, and then its open season to interpret and extend on later with any "events" that may occur or changing of party later on, this you miss all the time.

Strict protocol based under something that would be useless unless its using broader terms means strict protocol broadened out.

Broader = "Interpret" ... and that's flakey ground for the future, the point of all of the non gatekeepers not happy with it in the long run.

This thread should be renamed "Doublethink". :)

Edited April 26, 2012 by mrcash2009

[PELHAM 10]

FPDR

LOL. Seriously, You've no idea what are you talking about.

Anyway, I'm not reading this meaningless threads anymore. Here are some news:

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entries/obama-will-veto-cispa-unless-changes-are-made

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120425/12445718657/obama-administration-threatens-to-veto-cispa.shtml

Thanks for the news, already knew about it. Do you know it's an election year? Around this time they do anything to get votes, including vetoing perfectly good legislation. Doesn't matter much as after the election something similar will get put through. Double face palm from me, the stupid and the criminal element win again.

Edited April 26, 2012 by PELHAM