Poll: Sentate Committee passed "Internet Kill switch" Bill

[spartan231490]

I already said that just because one bill was unconstitutional, doesnt mean we should allow the upgrade to continue to be so. And the vigilance that is meant by that quote is, try to keep up with me, AGAINST the government to ensure that they don't chip away at our rights, like they are now. Hence the, we aren't paying part. I'm not posative they are three seperate amendments, the first(free speach) and the forth(illegal search and seizure(intellectual property)) I'm sure of. I'm not sure which ammendment protects our rights to privacy. Does it really matter that our rights have been infringed sinse 1934, if we actually raise enough of a fuss over it, the supreme court would do what it's job, and declare it unconstitutional, and repeal it, if it isn't already too late. But we wont, because the majority of americans, are either too scared, or too lazy to stand up for themselves.

The Vigilance you speak of, has amounted to jack and shit, for the past 10 or so years.

This bill in no way infringes upon free speech. Creating a Cybersecurity agency, and removing unquestionable power from someone who knows little to nothing about the bigger picture, also, doesn't infringe upon free speech. According to the bill, this also has nothing to do with illegal search and seizure, as the Cybery Security agency would work WITH the private sector, on data THEY collect on security holes in our infrastructure. IE, the Private Sector does most of the footwork research, and the Government creates framework around their existing infrastructure for security. Privacy is a non-issue, they're not creating security for person computers (that's up to you), they're creating it for huge entities in the US that are irreplaceable, vital, necessary for day to day functionality.

firstly, i believe i said we haven't been paying, but not just for the last ten years, try almost a century. the bill in 1934 and in ww1 at some point an ammendment was passed which increased the governments taxing abilities to basically say, they can tax us however, and whenever they want, and can do anything with the money. before that, they couldn't tax us indirectly (income tax) and any money left over from the tax had to go to the states by pop. The last bit is important because the fed govt controls many things that it is constitutionally forbidden from controlling by only giving a state money if they do what they're told. Like drinking age, education, speed limit, ect.

It's an internet kill switch, it shuts down one of the largest methods of communication on earth. In what immaginary world is that not a prevention of free speach. And if you think for one second that this cybersecurity agency won't get data on internet usage (privacy) I wonder how you delude yourself so well. and one seized email is the next step (intellectualy property). The bill doesn't directly give this agency the last two powers, but it will have them soon enough. not to mention that shutting off the internet prevents you from accessing any information you have stored there and of using services that you have payed for, which is just another form of illegal property siezure. True, when the switch is turned on again, you can access your stuff again, but there is the matter of internet access time you payed for but didn't get, thats siezed property. And just because you can access your intellectual prop again, doesn't mean it wasn't seized. If the cia took your car fro a day, you'd call it illegal siezure, why is your intellectual property not subject to the same protection?

 

[Velvo]

I think that this bill is PERFECTLY REASONABLE. I can't believe you guys are opposed to the idea of cyber-criminals being pursued by FBI style agents who are trained in all things internet. It seems like... an awesome movie.

I don't think that things like pirating movies, music and games and such is going to be the major focus, however. They've got real criminals to pursue first. I'm all for the free trade of information, but even if they do finally shut down excellent places like the pirate bay or something, who gives a crap? So you'll actually have to pay for the things you want. OOOOH. It's like the last cry of the cowboy out here or something.

 

[Plurralbles]

well, meh, good thing Steam has an Offline mode.

I could live without the internet, but I'm pretty sure it'd destroy the economy. No president would do this unless he really, really, really REALLY wanted to fuck the entire country over. Hell, some people couldn't even do their fucking banking! This killswitch might exist and be allowed, but it will NEVER be used.

Small price to pay to quell news of a small rebellion from traveling and causing it to be a full scale revolution. That is just one of the many evil uses that the government will eventually put this to, if we don't stop them while we still can. but hey, im on the record, after the next american revolution, maybe people will look back and say, "why did no one listen to this guy?". then again, prolly not, sinse all record of my "subversive writtings" will have been deleted, destroyed, ect. by the empire.

... I had the same worries but knew that most likely if the government knows about the revolution far enough ahead to turn off their communications via the internet, then it would have failed anyway.

 

[Aesir23]

This is Lieberman we're talking about. The guy's an bloody idiot, pure and simple. If we're lucky, someone higher up will veto it. I mean, come on, you can't just switch off portions of the internet for your country. If this does go through, I can imagine that it would spell disaster for Obama's presidency. And I like Obama. Or at least, I like him better than the alternative. *cough*McCain & Palin*cough*

 

[spartan231490]

I think that this bill is PERFECTLY REASONABLE. I can't believe you guys are opposed to the idea of cyber-criminals being pursued by FBI style agents who are trained in all things internet. It seems like... an awesome movie.

I don't think that things like pirating movies, music and games and such is going to be the major focus, however. They've got real criminals to pursue first. I'm all for the free trade of information, but even if they do finally shut down excellent places like the pirate bay or something, who gives a crap? So you'll actually have to pay for the things you want. OOOOH. It's like the last cry of the cowboy out here or something.

Piracy isn't the only form of free information trade(read free speach) that will get shut down if they use the kill switch. I dont give a magicarp one way or the other about piracy, it's my rights that i'm afraid of losing.

 

[spartan231490]

well, meh, good thing Steam has an Offline mode.

I could live without the internet, but I'm pretty sure it'd destroy the economy. No president would do this unless he really, really, really REALLY wanted to fuck the entire country over. Hell, some people couldn't even do their fucking banking! This killswitch might exist and be allowed, but it will NEVER be used.

Small price to pay to quell news of a small rebellion from traveling and causing it to be a full scale revolution. That is just one of the many evil uses that the government will eventually put this to, if we don't stop them while we still can. but hey, im on the record, after the next american revolution, maybe people will look back and say, "why did no one listen to this guy?". then again, prolly not, sinse all record of my "subversive writtings" will have been deleted, destroyed, ect. by the empire.

... I had the same worries but knew that most likely if the government knows about the revolution far enough ahead to turn off their communications via the internet, then it would have failed anyway.

The internet is one of teh widely used method of geting news rapidly, they could stop the news of a riot, or minor uprising at the sourse, they wouldn't need advanced warning. lolish

 

[Velvo]

I already said that just because one bill was unconstitutional, doesnt mean we should allow the upgrade to continue to be so. And the vigilance that is meant by that quote is, try to keep up with me, AGAINST the government to ensure that they don't chip away at our rights, like they are now. Hence the, we aren't paying part. I'm not posative they are three seperate amendments, the first(free speach) and the forth(illegal search and seizure(intellectual property)) I'm sure of. I'm not sure which ammendment protects our rights to privacy. Does it really matter that our rights have been infringed sinse 1934, if we actually raise enough of a fuss over it, the supreme court would do what it's job, and declare it unconstitutional, and repeal it, if it isn't already too late. But we wont, because the majority of americans, are either too scared, or too lazy to stand up for themselves.

The Vigilance you speak of, has amounted to jack and shit, for the past 10 or so years.

This bill in no way infringes upon free speech. Creating a Cybersecurity agency, and removing unquestionable power from someone who knows little to nothing about the bigger picture, also, doesn't infringe upon free speech. According to the bill, this also has nothing to do with illegal search and seizure, as the Cybery Security agency would work WITH the private sector, on data THEY collect on security holes in our infrastructure. IE, the Private Sector does most of the footwork research, and the Government creates framework around their existing infrastructure for security. Privacy is a non-issue, they're not creating security for person computers (that's up to you), they're creating it for huge entities in the US that are irreplaceable, vital, necessary for day to day functionality.

It's an internet kill switch, it shuts down one of the largest methods of communication on earth. In what immaginary world is that not a prevention of free speach. And if you think for one second that this cybersecurity agency won't get data on internet usage (privacy) I wonder how you delude yourself so well. and one seized email is the next step (intellectualy property). The bill doesn't directly give this agency the last two powers, but it will have them soon enough. not to mention that shutting off the internet prevents you from accessing any information you have stored there and of using services that you have payed for, which is just another form of illegal property siezure. True, when the switch is turned on again, you can access your stuff again, but there is the matter of internet access time you payed for but didn't get, thats siezed property. And just because you can access your intellectual prop again, doesn't mean it wasn't seized. If the cia took your car fro a day, you'd call it illegal siezure, why is your intellectual property not subject to the same protection?

I bet if a bomber blew up your bank, you'd be a little more understanding of why you couldn't use your bank. This is designed to protect assets in the event of catastrophic cyber attacks or other terrible internet related failures. This is no new advance. The Pentagon alone spends hundreds of millions annually repairing damage from cyber attacks and other network problems. This agency is supposed to be a protective agency not unlike the FBI and I'm all for it.

It's just that for so long the internet was totally free. I hate the wild west analogy, but hearing these rants is like hearing the last cry of the cowboy. Government comes in and brings civilization and everyone complains about how they have to be civil and responsible and how they can't just make their own way anymore.

 

[Oinodaemon]

Big Brother? Is that you?

Must be...

 

[Leviathan_]

I actually think it would be cooler if he had a literal "kill switch". Like a button in a special case that he would press to shut down the internet. Think about the movies that could inspire! In a post-apocalyptic world, porn is out of control and 4chan has distracted the world's economy to a standstill. Only one man can battle his way to the white house, shut down the internet, and save the world! Bruce Willis would be perfect.

Fucking awesome.

 

[spartan231490]

im done argueing with you, this bill gives them the authority to take our rights, and it's being passes is a seal of approval from the current people. What makes you think the government won't abuse this power, the founding fathers would weep at our ignorance and our foolishness. stuff like this makes the sacrifices of every american who has ever fought in a war for our freedom meanless. Ignore me at not only your own peril, but the peril of all of us, our system is broken, and every day brings us closer to the day where it will be beyond repair.

 

[Novania]

I love the smell of hypocrisy in the morning...

 

[Velvo]

I think that this bill is PERFECTLY REASONABLE. I can't believe you guys are opposed to the idea of cyber-criminals being pursued by FBI style agents who are trained in all things internet. It seems like... an awesome movie.

I don't think that things like pirating movies, music and games and such is going to be the major focus, however. They've got real criminals to pursue first. I'm all for the free trade of information, but even if they do finally shut down excellent places like the pirate bay or something, who gives a crap? So you'll actually have to pay for the things you want. OOOOH. It's like the last cry of the cowboy out here or something.

Piracy isn't the only form of free information trade(read free speach) that will get shut down if they use the kill switch. I dont give a magicarp one way or the other about piracy, it's my rights that i'm afraid of losing.

Pretty sure the kill switch was taken out of the actual bill. That part was written before the time when the country was always online, 24/7. Besides, even if they did include it, or something like it, I don't think they'd kill the internet just because of someone taking free speech "too far." In a terrible catastrophe, like the biggest banks in the world losing billions in a cyber attack, it might be beneficial to stop everything for a day and figure things out. But again, I don't think even that would be necessary. It would not be profitable to stop the internet for anything other than the most catastrophic cyber attack in the history of the internet. Such a thing isn't impossible, but you know, probably not gonna happen.

It's business interests that run things, not some Orwellian government that you seem to fear so much.

 

[Naheal]

I suppose that this should be pointed out...

"Free speech" doesn't mean "privacy".

 

[eastinfecter]

Who said we FEAR it?
The Ministry of Love???
*cracks whip*
BRING IT ON!

 

[Tharwen]

You cannot shut down the internet! It is simply too large and complex for any individual to be able to kill it!

 

[Eggsnham]

Now, Obama, I realize that you had the country in a frenzy and you were elected president, but please. For the sake of us all, work on doing things that matter.

Killing the internet at your whim is not going to help things.

Sincerely, the American population who use the internet excessively.

Also, do you really need to monitor how much porn we watch? Is it necessary to keep tabs on us at all times?

 

[Lexodus]

As for full body scans. My penis is magnificent, iy would be a crime against humanity not to let them see it.

Yours is too? *High fives*

Hooray for the Magnificent Three(nis)! *High fives as well*

 

[copperflyingace]

Big Brother? Is that you?

Look at the time, it's 1984 already.

SSSHHHHH! You'll raise the Thought Police!