New CISPA bill will completely censor the web as we know it.

Run_to_da_hills

With the body of SOPA still warm in the grave CISPA the (Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act) would allow private companies internet service providers and others to turn over confidential information about users to the US authorities without a court order. this one is far more intrusive than ACTA and SOPA. and it is not about piracy.

Nothing would surprise me if when this will come to Europe. The EU & US are both in bed together with the full intent of destroying our civil liberties all in the name fighting the very crime that the CIA has invented themselves.

We are fast heading down the slippery slope towards the a totalitarian "mark of the beast" system with the hardware already in place and it will only be a matter of time before the dots are joined.

Well over two years the subject of ACTA was brought up in AH when it was little known about. look where it is now.

CISPA may become law within DAYS in the US and If it does it will only be a matter of time before we see it and when it dose we can then kiss our internet and smartphone privacy goodbye.

800+ major corporations and U.S. Chamber of Commerce support internet freedom crushing CISPA

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/apr/19/cispa-six-sponsors-critics-attack?newsfeed=true

Run_to_da_hills

It dose seem quite ironic to see a Russian TV station whistle blowing on a draconian threat to civil liberties that would have been synonymous with Russia itself only a generation ago. It looks as if the tables have turned 180 degree and the United States is now rapidly becoming the new USSR.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HpWSzWTtOEg

Dr Galen

Can you edit your post to add a description of that video please RTDH

As per the charter, video only posts aren't allowed without a description.

Cheers

DrG

Dr Galen

Can you edit your post to add a description of that video please RTDH

As per the charter, video only posts aren't allowed without a description.

Cheers

DrG

Jonny7

Conspiracy theory stuff aside, its not a nice bill. According to the White House the current administration does not support it.

Also both sides, Democrat and Republican have shown opposition to the bill.

It has been criticised by both activists and politicians of both Democrats and Republicans for vague wording and insufficient safeguards.

Hopefully common sense will prevail.

bwatson

Orwell's dystopian prophesy looks more and more likely to be realized within our generation with every month that passes!

Run_to_da_hills

bwatson wrote: »

Orwell's dystopian prophesy looks more and more likely to be realized within our generation with every month that passes!

I don't think George Orwell meant his book to be an instruction manual but it certainly seems to be going down that road.

Jonny7 wrote: »

Conspiracy theory stuff aside, its not a nice bill. According to the White House the current administration does not support it.

Also both sides, Democrat and Republican have shown opposition to the bill.

Hopefully common sense will prevail.

Hopefully but like all the other invasive bills that have crept in to America in the recent past such as the 9/11 imposed Patriot act and HR418 Real ID bill. The US authorities will more than likely create a situation in order to push this through (a hacking meltdown of the EFT ( Banking ) or military departments etc) so they will convince public that drafting such a bill is necessary for the security of the state. Its an old dogs trick and goes right back to Nazi Germany and the burning of the Reichstag

Overheal

Wheres the bit about Censorship?

Run_to_da_hills

Overheal wrote: »

Wheres the bit about Censorship?

"Critics say that CISPA would give any federal entity that claims it is threatened by online interactions the ability to take action against the "perpetrator". Unlike the SOPA and PIPA acts which were eventually discarded after a successful online campaign, widespread recognition of what the latest proposed law will do has yet to surface to the same degree".

So basically if someone set up a website that was deemed contrary to the interests of the state the authorities could silence it. You could kiss good bye to blogging and free speech if they had remote access to terminate your account through your ISP.

http://digitaljournal.com/article/322396#ixzz1sxQOSoXV

Overheal

is the type of action they can take described?

Run_to_da_hills

Overheal wrote: »

is the type of action they can take described?

The whole thing seems very vague and full of holes. An ISP could interpret this bill as allowing them to gather information from suspected individuals, pass it on to the authorities and block accounts believed to be infringing.

There are quite a lot of videos springing up over the last few days, I like this one.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GToqLgHfcbU

charlie_says

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

The whole thing seems very vague and full of holes. An ISP could interpret this bill as allowing them to gather information from suspected individuals, pass it on to the authorities and block accounts believed to be infringing.

There are quite a lot of videos springing up over the last few days, I like this one.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GToqLgHfcbU

Anonymous have been know to attack various government systems and servers in the past. That is exactly the type of provocation and behaviour needed to make people and politicians believe that something along the lines of CISPA is necessary.

Anyhow in my opinion, when non state sponsored hacker groups attack governmental systems they rarely achieve much more than downtime, please correct me if I am wrong.

I hope they don't play into the hands of the people who want this legislation passed for either legitimate or shady reasons.

RichieC

The Obama admin issued a veto warning unless there's serious edits.

RichieC

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

It dose seem quite ironic to see a Russian TV station whistle blowing on a draconian threat to civil liberties that would have been synonymous with Russia itself only a generation ago. It looks as if the tables have turned 180 degree and the United States is now rapidly becoming the new USSR.

The internet is a threat to all entrenched elites, not just american. which is why they are going after it. No longer do they have full spectrum information dominance and they are finding it harder to control the narrative. They will eventually get their way, though. If it fails this time with CISPA as SOPA did they will simply regroup and begin again. Once they iron out any threats to the large internet corporations and get them on board we are screwed.
Piracy is simply their cover story in all of this.

Run_to_da_hills

charlie_says wrote: »

Anonymous have been know to attack various government systems and servers in the past. That is exactly the type of provocation and behaviour needed to make people and politicians believe that something along the lines of CISPA is necessary.

Anyhow in my opinion, when non state sponsored hacker groups attack governmental systems they rarely achieve much more than downtime, please correct me if I am wrong.

I hope they don't play into the hands of the people who want this legislation passed for either legitimate or shady reasons.

I don't want to drag this thread into CT, but I would often be under the illusion that some of these so called an anonymous "hack" groups, whistle blowers and illegal torrent bays were deliberately set up by the very same elitist powers that be are all out to stop them. I have my same thoughts for other infamous false flag terrorist attacks and fabricated financial meltdowns that were also intended with the exact same agendas.

A little over three years ago the Financial Times posted two articles within months of each other concerning Global Governance and the depletion of our privacy by 2013, I personally now believe they are right on target with their predictions.

RichieC wrote: »

The internet is a threat to all entrenched elites, not just american. which is why they are going after it. No longer do they have full spectrum information dominance and they are finding it harder to control the narrative. They will eventually get their way, though. If it fails this time with CISPA as SOPA did they will simply regroup and begin again. Once they iron out any threats to the large internet corporations and get them on board we are screwed.
Piracy is simply their cover story in all of this.

I believe so very much so and it is their ultimate aim to develop the technology to be able to track and pinpoint along with silence those that are considered to be a subversive threat to their system.

Jonny7

CISPA just passed in the House
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/la-pn-cispa-passes-in-the-house-after-surprise-vote-20120426,0,3445226.story

Run_to_da_hills

Jonny7 wrote: »

CISPA just passed in the House
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/la-pn-cispa-passes-in-the-house-after-surprise-vote-20120426,0,3445226.story

The ironic thing about it is that the amended version of CISPA that was quickly drafted in to help quell the tension is actually worse then the original version.

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

Run_to_da_hills

The Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection act (CISPA) will be reintroduced before the US House next week following a spate of cyber espionage and hacking attacks. Civil liberties advocates have criticized the bill for violating privacy laws.

The House Intelligence Committee’s Chairman Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) and ranking member Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger (D-Md.) will attempt to breathe new life into CISPA on Wednesday.

The bill will be identical to the version of CISPA that passed the House last spring, but was defeated on the Senate floor in August mainly because the upper house was hammering out its own cyber security bill.

http://rt.com/usa/news/cispa-congress-reintroduce-act-825/

RandolphEsq

No one should be anonymous on the internet. People have been enjoying the freedom of relative anonymity on the internet for too long.

Overheal

RandolphEsq wrote: »

No one should be anonymous on the internet. People have been enjoying the freedom of relative anonymity on the internet for too long.

ill let you be the first to change your username to your full legal name.

Playboy

Overheal wrote: »

ill let you be the first to change your username to your full legal name.

Access to his address, phone number and surfing habits would be nice too. Who needs privacy?

V_Moth

RandolphEsq wrote: »

No one should be anonymous on the internet. People have been enjoying the freedom of relative anonymity on the internet for too long.

Assad, Ahmadinejad and the Chinese Government like this.

SeanW

RandolphEsq wrote: »

No one should be anonymous on the internet. People have been enjoying the freedom of relative anonymity on the internet for too long.

I was going to try to respond to this with mere words, but ... none seemed to adequately express the FAIL like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U06jlgpMtQs

Run_to_da_hills

Overheal wrote: »

ill let you be the first to change your username to your full legal name.

And then link it to his Facebook - GMail - UTube - Flikr accounts and what ever else.

Hotblack Desiato

RandolphEsq wrote: »

No one should be anonymous on the internet. People have been enjoying the freedom of relative anonymity on the internet for too long.

I demand your PPSN.

Amirani

RandolphEsq wrote: »

No one should be anonymous on the internet. People have been enjoying the freedom of relative anonymity on the internet for too long.

Why stop at the internet? People have enjoyed the freedom on relative anonymity in public for too long. Everyone should have to wear name tags.

RandolphEsq

It's an accountability issue really. The internet is so entrenched in our lives these days that lines get blurred between offline and online actions and interactions. The scales pits need to keep law and order against personal freedom and avoiding of a nanny state. Issues such as online bullying, copyright theft and pedophilia are crimes that can be extremely difficult to prosecute for due to the nature of the internet. If people realise that their internet persona is an extension of their physical, offline person then they may think twice about committing certain crimes. This justifies the legislation.

G Power

NiallSparky wrote: »

Why stop at the internet? People have enjoyed the freedom on relative anonymity in public for too long. Everyone should have to wear name tags.

feic that for a solution, rfid's in our cornflakes please

Hotblack Desiato

RandolphEsq wrote: »

It's an accountability issue really. The internet is so entrenched in our lives these days that lines get blurred between offline and online actions and interactions. The scales pits need to keep law and order against personal freedom and avoiding of a nanny state. Issues such as online bullying, copyright theft and pedophilia are crimes that can be extremely difficult to prosecute for due to the nature of the internet. If people realise that their internet persona is an extension of their physical, offline person then they may think twice about committing certain crimes. This justifies the legislation.

Really?
Everything you do on the internet leaves a trail of evidence. It's much easier to detect and prosecute the sharing of child abuse images on the internet than it would be, say, by post.
It's simply a question of priorities and resources. Copyright is in any case a civil matter. I note you don't post under your real name BTW :rolleyes: but even if you did, if your real name is one among millions on the internet you can use it and still be effectively anonymous. If your name is near-unique on Google a real-name policy has far greater implications for you.
Whistleblowing is impossible without anonymity - Watergate would have remained a secret. You are proposing the introduction of something close to a police state for very dubious actual benefit.

RandolphEsq

ninja900 wrote: »

Really?
Everything you do on the internet leaves a trail of evidence. It's much easier to detect and prosecute the sharing of child abuse images on the internet than it would be, say, by post.
It's simply a question of priorities and resources. Copyright is in any case a civil matter. I note you don't post under your real name BTW :rolleyes: but even if you did, if your real name is one among millions on the internet you can use it and still be effectively anonymous. If your name is near-unique on Google a real-name policy has far greater implications for you.
Whistleblowing is impossible without anonymity - Watergate would have remained a secret. You are proposing the introduction of something close to a police state for very dubious actual benefit.

Well to be honest I do not trust our legislators so would violently oppose any bill by them to regulate the internet, that is not a joke. If Ireland imposed a regulation bill upon us I would destroy the lives of the instigators. But that does not mean such an Act is not required. I, moreso than most, relish the anonymity to do and threat as I please on the internet.

Hotblack Desiato

RandolphEsq wrote: »

Well to be honest I do not trust our legislators so would violently oppose any bill by them to regulate the internet, that is not a joke. If Ireland imposed a regulation bill upon us I would destroy the lives of the instigators. But that does not mean such an Act is not required. I, moreso than most, relish the anonymity to do and threat as I please on the internet.

Make your mind up...

Overheal

For real,

Issues such as online bullying, copyright theft and pedophilia are crimes that can be extremely difficult to prosecute for due to the nature of the internet. If people realise that their internet persona is an extension of their physical, offline person then they may think twice about committing certain crimes. This justifies the legislation.

Well to be honest I do not trust our legislators so would violently oppose any bill by them to regulate the internet, that is not a joke. If Ireland imposed a regulation bill upon us I would destroy the lives of the instigators. But that does not mean such an Act is not required. I, moreso than most, relish the anonymity to do and threat as I please on the internet.

You agree it is required, to stop things like sexual preying and cyber bullying, which destroys lives, but will 'destroy lives', if the bill is passed, and 'violently' oppose any such bill.

The mind boggles. If I were an authority figure right now I'd be filing for the ISP/Website warrants on you right now, so we could get you the help you need. Normally that would be a joke, but these days it's become obvious how often we ignore the warning signs before people go off and do really abhorrent things.