Internet Censorship Proposed in US Congress

David Segal: Stop the Internet Blacklist

oh lawdy

If it makes it to obama's desk, i would hope that he vetos it.. but i don't think it'll make it that far.

brb, circumventing this with VPN and tor.

Find more posts tagged with

Free for TechExams community: Cybersecurity salary guide

Compare cert salaries and plan your next career move

Button

Comments

veritas_libertas

Darthn3ss wrote: »

David Segal: Stop the Internet Blacklist

oh lawdy

If it makes it to obama's desk, i would hope that he vetos it.. but i don't think it'll make it that far.

brb, circumventing this with VPN and tor.

Didn't see that, but I did see this and it concerns me even more than that does:

Wiretapped phones, now Internet? | StarTribune.com

Devilsbane

I admire what they are trying to do, but I think if we allow censoring of this then we are just opening the floodgates to having everything censored.

Plus of course, the real criminals will always have ways around this.

Edit:
In regards to the whole youtube thing, what if that did happen? Do you think youtube is just going to be shut down? Nope, they will move offshores with their billions of dollars and continue to do what they do best.

earweed

This isn't something which should be taken lightly. In a way it is needed as there are a lot of sites out there which do violate copyrights and they should be shut down. I'm speaking more about some file sharing sites than about things like you tube.
Recently on the WGU forum someone advertised a site where students could get a free eversion of textbooks! The same textbooks which I paid quite a bit of money for and the sites even had the CD contents which came with the book (which you don't get if you buy a kindle version).
Some sites basically need to come down because they are knowingly violating laws but sites such as youtube are not the real violators.

Devilsbane

earweed wrote: »

Some sites basically need to come down because they are knowingly violating laws but sites such as youtube are not the real violators.

With the currrent laws, sites that are intended to violate laws are taken down inside of the US. What we can't regulate is websites hosted in Romania or something like that. So maybe, rather than allowing a mass black list that could potentially infringe on our rights, maybe only allow websites hosted outside the US to be on the list because there are already laws in place to shut down local sites.

That way our rights should still be protected while keeping content that we have no control over out.

Even with that amendment, I am still not at ease with what potentially could happen, and of couse the real criminals are going to be able to get around it.

NetworkingStudent

Darthn3ss wrote: »

David Segal: Stop the Internet Blacklist

oh lawdy

If it makes it to obama's desk, i would hope that he vetos it.. but i don't think it'll make it that far.

brb, circumventing this with VPN and tor.

If this goes into law we might as well move to China.uggghhhh Also, woudn't alot of people lose jobs because more companies would move their servers off american shores?

I found this interesting section in one of the wire tapping articles.
Several privacy and technology advocates argued that requiring interception capabilities would create holes that would inevitably be exploited by hackers.

Steven M. Bellovin, a Columbia University computer science professor, pointed to an episode in Greece: In 2005, it was discovered that hackers had taken advantage of a legally mandated wiretap function to spy on top officials’ phones, including the prime minister’s.

“I think it’s a disaster waiting to happen,” he said. “If they start building in all these back doors, they will be exploited.” http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/27/us/27wiretap.html?pagewanted=2

apena7

Darthn3ss wrote: »

David Segal: Stop the Internet Blacklist

oh lawdy

If it makes it to obama's desk, i would hope that he vetos it.. but i don't think it'll make it that far.

brb, circumventing this with VPN and tor.

I don't think we'll see this pass anytime soon. The Obama administration is pushing free Internets for all and until that system is in place (hopefully never), we won't see these "regulations" enacted. As history shows, you must first control the medium before you can control the content.

Thomas Jefferson wrote:

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

L0gicB0mb508

Do they really think this is going to stop anything?

hypnotoad

L0gicB0mb508 wrote: »

Do they really think this is going to stop anything?

"Dear god somebody think of the children!!!!"

"My opponent, candidate X, voted against the Internet Re-sanitation and Renewal Act of 2010, he doesnt care about american values and he eats babies!!"

L0gicB0mb508

hypnotoad wrote: »

"Dear god somebody think of the children!!!!"

"My opponent, candidate X, voted against the Internet Re-sanitation and Renewal Act of 2010, he doesnt care about american values and he eats babies!!"

Oh ok. Well in that case you got my vote.

za3bour

I don't think it will stop anything, as for children I think censorship should be at home not through the gov.

There are millions of violating sites, it's endless trying to shut them down sadly.

earweed

hypnotoad wrote: »

"Dear god somebody think of the children!!!!"

"My opponent, candidate X, voted against the Internet Re-sanitation and Renewal Act of 2010, he doesnt care about american values and he eats babies!!"

As Fat B*stard from Austin Powers said "Babies, the other other white meat"

nel

im sorry but i had to laugh/cry at this. Not at the american government (or people for that matter) but the whole consensus of things for us in the west. One minute governments and corporations are ripping apart eastern countries for doing such things and then we jump on the bandwagon! ohh dear...God only knows what BS the EU will come up with then!

SephStorm

apena7 wrote: »

I don't think we'll see this pass anytime soon. The Obama administration is pushing free Internets for all and until that system is in place (hopefully never), we won't see these "regulations" enacted. As history shows, you must first control the medium before you can control the content.

We are talking about the same administration that has secretly worked to create the ACTA Treaty, and is in the process of submitting a bill that would require all communications to be accessible by the Government.

People, I don't get riled up often but with a scared govenment, and likely incoming republican congress (no offense.) that has stated it has plans on "social issues", I forsee that we'll see many types of legislation getting pushed through that take away our freedoms under the guise of protecting society, and protecting our children.

The censorship bill is overly broad in scope, it allows domains to be blacklisted, a better bill would require them taken down, and perhaps a penalty for the owners, but I bet that in the future such a law would be extended to cover "indecency". i'm sure goatsee.cx would be on there. Then "cult" domains, then "dangerous knowledge" (minor religions are on that list. Guarentee you that hacking will be on there.). The truth is yes, we can ban and block until we are blue in the face. The people you are trying to stop WILL continue, and we will be a worse off nation because of our attempt.

wastedtime

SephStorm wrote: »

People, I don't get riled up often but with a scared govenment, and likely incoming republican congress (no offense.) that has stated it has plans on "social issues", I forsee that we'll see many types of legislation getting pushed through that take away our freedoms under the guise of protecting society, and protecting our children.

Ya, I am worried about that myself. I'm not a tea party supporter but they may be along the right idea. I was/am worried about the PATRIOT Act for the same reason.

I don't see this being passed though.

za3bour

Well sadly whatever happen in the west in considered democracy and whatever happen in the east is considered dictatorship.Even in Syria we don't have a law like Patriot Act.

tpatt100

wastedtime wrote: »

Ya, I am worried about that myself. I'm not a tea party supporter but they may be along the right idea. I was/am worried about the PATRIOT Act for the same reason.

I don't see this being passed though.

Well like 9/11 people panic and willingly give up freedoms and liberties. I remember how many polls showed most Americans would willingly allow the Government to listen in on their phone calls "because they have nothing to hide".

Darthn3ss

earweed wrote: »

This isn't something which should be taken lightly. In a way it is needed as there are a lot of sites out there which do violate copyrights and they should be shut down. I'm speaking more about some file sharing sites than about things like you tube.
Recently on the WGU forum someone advertised a site where students could get a free eversion of textbooks! The same textbooks which I paid quite a bit of money for and the sites even had the CD contents which came with the book (which you don't get if you buy a kindle version).
Some sites basically need to come down because they are knowingly violating laws but sites such as youtube are not the real violators.

i agree that piracy is an issue but allowing the government to create blacklists at the will of big business is absurd. If a site is hosted outside of the US... theres nothing they can do. What makes it worse is the law is apparently written kind of open - it doesn't really say what can and can't be blocked. Piracy is like the drug trade in a way. Shut down one dealer... two more will replace him tomorrow. Worst come to work, people will resort to sneaker net and irc.

What we really need is a major leak from people involved with the FBI's DCSnet and anything CALEA related.

SephStorm

tpatt100 wrote: »

Well like 9/11 people panic and willingly give up freedoms and liberties. I remember how many polls showed most Americans would willingly allow the Government to listen in on their phone calls "because they have nothing to hide".

Well, its strange, because I am a fan of the nothing to hide bandwagon, however, I think the difference is I recognize this could go south, fast.