Larry Posted July 29, 2011 Share Posted July 29, 2011 skids writes "Under the guise of fighting child pornography, the House Judiciary Committee approved legislation on Thursday that would require internet service providers to collect and retain records about Internet users' activity. The 19 to 10 vote represents a victory for conservative Republicans, who made data retention their first major technology initiative after last fall's elections. A last-minute rewrite of the bill expands the information that commercial Internet providers are required to store to include customers' names, addresses, phone numbers, credit card numbers, bank account numbers, and temporarily-assigned IP addresses. Per dissenting Rep. John Conyers (D-MI): 'The bill is mislabeled... This is not protecting children from Internet pornography. It's creating a database for everybody in this country for a lot of other purposes.'" Link. (Although the above paragraph is the entire Slashdot message. All that's at the link is the above paragraph, and a gazillion comments. The actual stories are contained in the links above, which I've reproduced from the original post.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACW Posted July 29, 2011 Share Posted July 29, 2011 .:tantrum: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted July 29, 2011 Share Posted July 29, 2011 So basically when they say "smaller government" they mean "a government that gives you almost nothing but watches your every move". Prediction: The sold out supreme court will rule that these lists must be sold to companies as internet viewing history is not a protected right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renegade7 Posted July 29, 2011 Share Posted July 29, 2011 As an American, I feel like I'm being poked with a stick while somebody's laughing about it. You'd be surprised how many people have no idea what's going on with the debt ceiling,so it's no longer surprising to me when bills like this get snuck through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted July 29, 2011 Share Posted July 29, 2011 I suspect (hope) that the Senate will have something to say about this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted July 29, 2011 Author Share Posted July 29, 2011 I suspect (hope) that the Senate will have something to say about this. 1) Pointing out that the bill hasn't passed the House, yet. Just the committee. 2) But we all know what the Senate will say about it. They'll say "Where's my lobbyist?" Maybe it's just me, but does anybody really think that the #1 money behind this isn't people going after copyright violators? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teller Posted July 30, 2011 Share Posted July 30, 2011 Hopefully the pen of "change" will prevent this from ever becoming law. Given its track record so far, I'm not optimistic. Obama has lost me. My party is pushing me away with their idiocy. Is there ANY-****ING-BODY out there that I can even HALFWAY believe in or trust? ANYONE?!?!?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CurseReversed Posted July 30, 2011 Share Posted July 30, 2011 Hopefully the pen of "change" will prevent this from ever becoming law. Given its track record so far, I'm not optimistic.Obama has lost me. My party is pushing me away with their idiocy. Is there ANY-****ING-BODY out there that I can even HALFWAY believe in or trust? ANYONE?!?!?! I would like to tell you, but most likely you would disagree. Too see the truth and to know who to believe now, we have to admit that many of those we have trusted before were not trustworthy, and that many things we believed before were not accurate. We would have to admit that the whole system we have helped build and support is not trustworthy. We would have to admit we were wrong so many times it would make us feel foolish. It was easier for me because I had not invested so much that I could not break free from the dialectic. Still I feel foolish. I would like to think that I would have been able to do it no matter how invested I was, but truthfully I dont know. The sports team mentality grows very strong. I would run through a wall for the redskins. Our situation is dire, a population comitted to blaming the other half, all the while both halves keep adding the the whole. Now were in a whole world of crap and nobody knows how to fix it without blaming the other side, or more importantly admitting that their side was wrong! Any other option is like a boston fan admitting that Jeter is an awesome shortstop. Not gonna be easy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted July 30, 2011 Author Share Posted July 30, 2011 Any other option is like a boston fan admitting that Jeter is an awesome shortstop. Not gonna be easy. I might be willing to tolerate a Dallas fan, if the fate of the Earth depended on it. I draw the line at Philly, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teller Posted July 30, 2011 Share Posted July 30, 2011 Painful post to read, Curse. Mostly because of its accuracy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CurseReversed Posted July 30, 2011 Share Posted July 30, 2011 I might be willing to tolerate a Dallas fan, if the fate of the Earth depended on it. I draw the line at Philly, though. I firmly believe it does. But I am an optimist, we will win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted July 30, 2011 Share Posted July 30, 2011 Ah yes,, another taste of right wing "freedom". ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted July 30, 2011 Share Posted July 30, 2011 Nope, you wouldn't want to vote third party: Thats a wasted vote. When we can have horrible **** like this as a mislabeled bill. committee 1 on the debt reduction list: Fire them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mardi gras skin Posted July 30, 2011 Share Posted July 30, 2011 Rep. John Conyers (D-MI): 'The bill is mislabeled... This is not protecting children from Internet pornography. It's creating a database for everybody in this country for a lot of other purposes.' What are the other purposes of this bill? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted July 30, 2011 Share Posted July 30, 2011 Well, obviously it's just to protect us. Nanny state Republicans are all about monitoring us for our own protection. ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mardi gras skin Posted July 30, 2011 Share Posted July 30, 2011 Well, obviously it's just to protect us.Nanny state Republicans are all about monitoring us for our own protection. Right. But what are the other purposes of this bill? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted July 30, 2011 Author Share Posted July 30, 2011 Right. But what are the other purposes of this bill? Well, groups like the RIAA have been in court for years, demanding that ISPs tell them the name and address of whoever owned IP address w.x.y.x on such and such a date, so they can sue that person for downloading and/or sharing copyrighted material. But I'm sure this law wasn't pushed by a bunch of lawyers working for big corporations, or anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ixcuincle Posted July 30, 2011 Share Posted July 30, 2011 Log me all you want, you'll just see me posting on ES and HFBoards I'm harmless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Harris Posted July 30, 2011 Share Posted July 30, 2011 for the record, 4 dems voted in favor of this bill, as did the guy from puerto rico. i guess we should point 3 fingers at repubs and 1 at the dems to make it proportionate? :whoknows: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted July 30, 2011 Share Posted July 30, 2011 I prefer my plan above, sends a message to pay more attention. My bank account number + other information is immediate loss of money if the GS11 that could care less doesn't protect such data after collectiong it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mardi gras skin Posted July 30, 2011 Share Posted July 30, 2011 so they can sue that person for downloading and/or sharing copyrighted material. Why is this bad? Copyrighted material should be protected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teller Posted July 30, 2011 Share Posted July 30, 2011 Why is this bad? Copyrighted material should be protected. Because you're logging the surfing habits of EVERYONE in hopes of catching a few people doing something illegal. Can we search your house? Some houses have drugs in them afterall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ixcuincle Posted July 30, 2011 Share Posted July 30, 2011 Hey, that dude's acquiring illegal music. Go after him. Oh wait, he's just doing what everyone else is doing If the government takes action upon music "piracy" it'll be ridiculous, it's almost a part of culture now to torrent Deal with it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mardi gras skin Posted July 30, 2011 Share Posted July 30, 2011 Because you're logging the surfing habits of EVERYONE in hopes of catching a few people doing something illegal.Can we search your house? Some houses have drugs in them afterall. Ok, that makes sense. The concern is that this basically becomes a nationwide wiretap. Is that right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted July 30, 2011 Share Posted July 30, 2011 I've been harping on this lately.... The GOP is for smaller government, WHERE THEY WANT SMALLER GOVERNMENT. The same can be said for the dems. Itsnlike that bill of rights thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.