Re: CISPA - SOPA 'security' edition
I see someone already posted that it passed. Teartear.
I see someone already posted that it passed. Teartear.
REGISTER TO REMOVE ADS |
SOPA was just about copyright infringement and shutting down infringing websites. This involves the acquisition and usage of your personal details for theoretically anything provided it is shared based upon suspicions of cybersecurity threats, but once it's been shared between companies they don't have to use it for cybersecurity. One thing it opens up is the possibility for cybersecurity and copyright-holding companies to work together to take down websites and people with the information initially provided for the supposed sake of security, even though there's nothing of the sort happening afterwards.So, I'm probably out of the loop, but how exactly is this bad BAD? I understand it's not really the best thing to happen to us, but it couldn't be worse than what would've happened with SOPA, right?
Probably not. He said he'd veto NDAA 2011/12, but went and signed it anyway, even admitted on camera that he didn't like the elements within it. He could rejected it and then waited till we got something that didn't screw over suspects and normal people, but instead he went ahead and signed it because it was a way to increase the government's national and international power. CISPA will do the exact same, and moreso than ever. This is probably just Obama - like before - saying he'll veto it to have people favour him a bit more, but 'grudgingly' sign it anyway when the time comes.BBC News - Cyber-security bill Cispa passes US House
it seems that Obama threatens to veto it if he even sees it.
at least he's looking out for us.
Probably not. He said he'd veto NDAA 2011/12, but went and signed it anyway, even admitted on camera that he didn't like the elements within it. He could rejected it and then waited till we got something that didn't screw over suspects and normal people, but instead he went ahead and signed it because it was a way to increase the government's national and international power. CISPA will do the exact same, and moreso than ever. This is probably just Obama - like before - saying he'll veto it to have people favour him a bit more, but 'grudgingly' sign it anyway when the time comes.
Okay, so the argument can be made that websites and VOIP services aren't being forced to wiretap their customers, but I see this as being disastrous. Look at in the real physical world - most phone wiretapping requires a physical presence and some kind of suspicion to justify the action, but we've seen time and again how flimsy a thing such suspicion can be. This being on the web just makes it even easier. When surveillance can be applied so cheaply, what's to stop suspicion-justifications from going down to practically nothing? People who visit 4chan get their activities auto-tapped because Anonymous can be destructive on the online world?The FBI is asking Internet companies not to oppose a controversial proposal that would require firms, including Microsoft, Facebook, Yahoo, and Google, to build in backdoors for government surveillance.