This does sound like the kind of bill that could be implemented rather horribly and just end up ruining internet privacy in the US. I wish I could say at least we haven't got the same problem over here in England, but if some of the legislation they're trying to pass over here goes into affect, ISPs themselves will be able to snoop around inside our computers and send us adverts directly through our web connections. It would be nice if we could all have some privacy while innocently just trying to sit in our living room and surf the net.
" Sounds kind of like crazy conspiracy theorist right wing bullcrap to me. 'Shut down the internet'? Yea fuckin right...just reading through the actual document, right wing fear mongering confirmed... She's talking complete crap.double confirmed : she has done videos on that tea party BS a few months ago as well. She's a GOP tool. "
Does the government have the power to shutdown the internet or no?
Does the government have the power to shutdown the internet or no?Stop with the stupid rants.
Nope, and this bill grants them nothing of the sort. Even if it did they wouldn't be able to pull it off unless they physically took over 1000's of companies and servers across the US. I can rant on when people try to manipulate the truth and replace it with FUD.
Why would they want to shut it down anyways?
You posted the link to the bill, why not take the time to read it yourself?
" internet = non-tangibleinternet = not real and no real area of rulesinternet cant have rules becaues its in cyber space and not on any physical landFUCK THE MPAA AND RIAA! "
I love you're Futuristic Sex Robotz reference, too bad more people won't catch on to that. You're logic is pretty bad, though. The internet is a very real place, although the government shouldn't be allowed to deny us access. This isn't Canada, I want my MTV.
@Gamer_152: Well a similar thing was nearly put through here in the UK, where they could monitor downloads and if they were caught 3 times then their internet removed. However it was seen as a breach of privacy and it was said the only person who should have the power to take the net away is a judge as it's a human right to have access to it. I felt that was actually a really good thing, it restored some faith that they're not trying to monitor everything we do.
Does the government have the power to shutdown the internet or no?Stop with the stupid rants.
Nope, and this bill grants them nothing of the sort. Even if it did they wouldn't be able to pull it off unless they physically took over 1000's of companies and servers across the US. I can rant on when people try to manipulate the truth and replace it with FUD.Why would they want to shut it down anyways?You posted the link to the bill, why not take the time to read it yourself? "
Yup, it does, because unlike you, I did read it.
"
SEC. 18. CYBERSECURITY RESPONSIBILITIES AND AUTHORITY.
The President--
(1) within 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, shall develop and implement a comprehensive national cybersecurity strategy, which shall include--
(A) a long-term vision of the Nation’s cybersecurity future; and
(B) a plan that encompasses all aspects of national security, including the participation of the private sector, including critical infrastructure operators and managers;
(2) may declare a cybersecurity emergency and order the limitation or shutdown of Internet traffic to and from any compromised Federal Government or United States critical infrastructure information system or network;"
"
SEC. 14. PUBLIC-PRIVATE CLEARINGHOUSE.
(a) DESIGNATION- The Department of Commerce shall serve as the clearinghouse of cybersecurity threat and vulnerability information to Federal Government and private sector owned critical infrastructure information systems and networks.
(b) FUNCTIONS- The Secretary of Commerce--
(1) shall have access to all relevant data concerning such networks without regard to any provision of law, regulation, rule, or policy restricting such access;"
Any government that would go against the public interest and overrule rights such as private ownership as defined by our constitution won't worry about the rule of law in the first place, as we saw in the Bush administration.
As for Section 14, it's only relevant towards 'cybersecurity threat and vulnerability information'. If a critical backbone server has a security flaw, the government will be made aware of it.
I admit the blurb in section 18 could cause future problems, but what possible situation could you imagine it being used against the American public today? You're not one of those NWO conspiracy theorists are you?
Does the government have the power to shutdown the internet or no?Stop with the stupid rants.
Nope, and this bill grants them nothing of the sort. Even if it did they wouldn't be able to pull it off unless they physically took over 1000's of companies and servers across the US. I can rant on when people try to manipulate the truth and replace it with FUD.Why would they want to shut it down anyways?You posted the link to the bill, why not take the time to read it yourself? "
may declare a cybersecurity emergency and order the limitation or shutdown of Internet traffic to and from any compromised Federal Government or United States critical infrastructure information system or network
may order the disconnection of any Federal Government or United States critical infrastructure information systems or networks in the interest of national security
Of course the bill is nice and vague. What is a "critical infrastructure information system"? Anything the president wants it to be? Even if this bill is not a threat like this lady wants us to believe, what the fuck is the point? We don't need a Cybersecurity Advisory Panel. Waste of time and money.
We don't need a Cybersecurity Advisory Panel. Waste of time and money. "
I absolutely disagree on that point. If the government is leaking secret information through its own servers, or other nations are pummeling our servers with hacks or denial of service, it'd be good if there was some entity in position to detect and deal with the threat. What action can Google do against North Korea?
Well the threat is unknown (Or rather the threat levels), so this seems like more of a precautionary move. The times, they are a changing, it might take more than a read through of the bill to get what's going on.
Oh you're a real intelligent one aren't you.Any government that would go against the public interest and overrule rights such as private ownership as defined by our constitution won't worry about the rule of law in the first place, as we saw in the Bush administration.As for Section 14, it's only relevant towards 'cybersecurity threat and vulnerability information'. If a critical backbone server has a security flaw, the government will be made aware of it.I admit the blurb in section 18 could cause future problems, but what possible situation could you imagine it being used against the American public today? You're not one of those NWO conspiracy theorists are you? "
Okay. So my point is correct. The government has the power to shutdown the internet. A simple "You're right" would have been sufficient.
Read my previous posts. Did I claim that this is a conspiracy? Did I claim the government is now going to shutdown the internet? Did I claim the NWO has manifested itself in this new legislation?
No. All I did, was say that the government now has the power to shutdown the internet. Guess what, I'm right. The reason I chose that specific video, is because she's hot. The video is secondary to the actual bill itself which I posted.
Seriously, you can stop the rants now, it's getting annoying.
Okay. So my point is correct. The government has the power to shutdown the internet. A simple "You're right" would have been sufficient. Read my previous posts. Did I claim that this is a conspiracy? Did I claim the government is now going to shutdown the internet? Did I claim the NWO has manifested itself in this new legislation? No. All I did, was say that the government now has the power to shutdown the internet. Guess what, I'm right. The reason I chose that specific video, is because she's hot. The video is secondary to the actual bill itself which I posted. Seriously, you can stop the rants now, it's getting annoying. "
You're not a mod here and you don't get to dictate how people wish to discuss your points. If I want to rant and disagree with you in your thread I can and will. You also don't have the right to personally attack me.
The government doesn't have the power to shutdown the internet today, the bill does not even authorize 'shutting down the internet'. It can order the shut down of compromised critical or government systems. If the entire internet has been compromised, we have more serious problems than the government turning the systems off. Furthermore the US government couldn't 'shut down the internet' without an extreme act of international military force...
Why should people be alarmed by this if you don't believe the government will act against the public with this law. The bill COULD potentially protect national assets, so if you're not worried about the government, then what's the problem?
Okay. So my point is correct. The government has the power to shutdown the internet. A simple "You're right" would have been sufficient. Read my previous posts. Did I claim that this is a conspiracy? Did I claim the government is now going to shutdown the internet? Did I claim the NWO has manifested itself in this new legislation? No. All I did, was say that the government now has the power to shutdown the internet. Guess what, I'm right. The reason I chose that specific video, is because she's hot. The video is secondary to the actual bill itself which I posted. Seriously, you can stop the rants now, it's getting annoying. "
You're not a mod here and you don't get to dictate how people wish to discuss your points. If I want to rant and disagree with you in your thread I can and will. You also don't have the right to personally attack me.
The government doesn't have the power to shutdown the internet today, the bill does not even authorize 'shutting down the internet'. It can order the shut down of compromised critical or government systems. If the entire internet has been compromised, we have more serious problems than the government turning the systems off. Furthermore the US government couldn't 'shut down the internet' without an extreme act of international military force...Why should people be alarmed by this if you don't believe the government will act against the public with this law. The bill COULD potentially protect national assets, so if you're not worried about the government, then what's the problem? "
No, the government doesn't have the right to today, the bill hasn't passed yet. But as the bill says (apparently you still haven't read it), the government can stop internet traffic. Just like how Iran just blocked the people of Tehran's ability to send text messages and send emails, the government will have that power in an emergency, just like Iran.
The government cannot shutdown the internet without extreme international force? Yea, you're right, to shutdown internet service you have to invade everyone's homes and put 3 bullets in their computer. That's how it happens.
And I'm not responding to the last part. It's more ranting. I never even said there is a problem with the bill.
Did I say I'm a mod? Nope, I didn't. Disagreeing with me is fine, rants are annoying. And I am aware that you can, and you will. Thanks for the information. But yea, I do have the right to personally attack you. Quit being such a bitch. No, the government doesn't have the right to today, the bill hasn't passed yet. But as the bill says (apparently you still haven't read it), the government can stop internet traffic. Just like how Iran just blocked the people of Tehran's ability to send text messages and send emails, the government will have that power in an emergency, just like Iran. The government cannot shutdown the internet without extreme international force? Yea, you're right, to shutdown internet service you have to invade everyone's homes and put 3 bullets in their computer. That's how it happens. And I'm not responding to the last part. It's more ranting. I never even said there is a problem with the bill. "
No, you don't have the right to personally attack me, it's against the forum rules.
Stop choosing to selectively ignore vital context of the bill. COMPROMISED SERVERS, it's not an open door for the government to shut down ANY servers ANY time it wants.
To bring up Iran or any other system is just idiotic, that's not how our system works, and it's not how this bill works.
Finally I think you need to look up the term 'rant' in a dictionary.
To speak or write in an angry or violent manner; rave.
v.tr.
To utter or express with violence or extravagance: a dictator who ranted his vitriol onto a captive audience.
n.
Violent or extravagant speech or writing.
A speech or piece of writing that incites anger or violence: “The vast majority [of teenagers logged onto the Internet] did not encounter recipes for pipe bombs or deranged rants about white supremacy” (Daniel Okrent).
" Sounds kind of like crazy conspiracy theorist right wing bullcrap to me. 'Shut down the internet'? Yea fuckin right...just reading through the actual document, right wing fear mongering confirmed... She's talking complete crap.double confirmed : she has done videos on that tea party BS a few months ago as well. She's a GOP tool. "
The right wing likes to spread fear regarding government control because it serves their core purposes. The girl in the Youtube video has openly expressed a right wing standing.
When I say right wing I'm referring to the US Republican Party, btw.
The right wing likes to spread fear regarding government control because it serves their core purposes. The girl in the Youtube video has openly expressed a right wing standing.When I say right wing I'm referring to the US Republican Party, btw. "
Once you kids get degrees in political science come back and talk to me about your conspiracy theories.
Once you kids get degrees in political science come back and talk to me about your conspiracy theories. "
You don't need a degree in political science to discuss obvious facts.
For the record I recognize not all Republicans partake in such activities, but some obviously do. I'm sorry for generalizing by saying 'the right wing'.
Once you kids get degrees in political science come back and talk to me about your conspiracy theories. "
You don't need a degree in political science to discuss obvious facts. "
I don't care if you're liberal, conservative, moderate, whatever ... does anyone, you know, take offense to someone labeling the party that freed the slaves and ended the Cold War as having its core purpose "spreading fear regarding government control"?
Look at yourself. You're on an internet forum - a gaming forum - spreading your extremist political beliefs. Unbelievable. I can't take it. What is it with gaming forums and extremist liberal beliefs?
Once you kids get degrees in political science come back and talk to me about your conspiracy theories. "
You don't need a degree in political science to discuss obvious facts.For the record I recognize not all Republicans partake in such activities, but some obviously do. I'm sorry for generalizing by saying 'the right wing'. "
Thank you, THANK YOU, for editing your post. I can rest now.
I don't care if you're liberal, conservative, moderate, whatever ... does anyone, you know, take offense to someone labeling the party that freed the slaves and ended the Cold War as having its core purpose "spreading fear regarding government control".
Look at yourself. You're on an internet forum - a gaming forum - spreading your extremist political beliefs. Unbelievable. I can't take it. What is it with gaming forums and extremist liberal beliefs?
It's not the same party as it once was. Especially after Reagan. They don't have the same core principals and they aren't the same people, but neither is any party. The world changes all the time.
If you don't like me or anyone expressing my rational centrist beliefs, you're free to leave the forum, noone's making you stay.
If you believe you can judge a person from a single comment over the internet (you've obviously not read all my post history), and then label them as 'extreme', as if you'd understand what that meant, which you obviously do not, you've got another thing coming.
Once you kids get degrees in political science come back and talk to me about your conspiracy theories. "
You don't need a degree in political science to discuss obvious facts.For the record I recognize not all Republicans partake in such activities, but some obviously do. I'm sorry for generalizing by saying 'the right wing'. "
Thank you, THANK YOU, for editing your post. I can rest now. "
I try not to be unreasonable and I will correct myself if I make mistakes like that. For the record I'm liberal leaning, but on a few issues I'm very right-leaning. I don't like the current Republican party's economic policies, and the way they present themselves above all else.
You shouldn't assume where a person lies politically based on a handful of comments because anyone who has a well informed opinion might not follow modern party lines on all issues.
Quick reminder that directly insulting someone to belittle them or otherwise offend and abuse them is not something we tolerate here. I suggest some people take note of this.
" Quick reminder that directly insulting someone to belittle them or otherwise offend and abuse them is not something we tolerate here. I suggest some people take note of this. "
she isnt a giant bomb user, and i was only kidding, of course i noticed her boobies. :P
"@Gamer_152: Well a similar thing was nearly put through here in the UK, where they could monitor downloads and if they were caught 3 times then their internet removed. However it was seen as a breach of privacy and it was said the only person who should have the power to take the net away is a judge as it's a human right to have access to it. I felt that was actually a really good thing, it restored some faith that they're not trying to monitor everything we do."
Actually I remember that. I suppose that particular occasion did display that there are thankfully at least some politicians out there who do care about our online privacy.
We don't need a Cybersecurity Advisory Panel. Waste of time and money. "
I absolutely disagree on that point. If the government is leaking secret information through its own servers, or other nations are pummeling our servers with hacks or denial of service, it'd be good if there was some entity in position to detect and deal with the threat. What action can Google do against North Korea? "
And this is the point where I pull my hair out (not at you, but our incompetent government). We spend more than the entire world combine on nation defense. Obama himself signed the largest defense bill in history earlier this year, yet it doesn't cover setting up secure servers? What!? $500+ billion is not enough? When I read this bill (or parts of it) it just seemed like more bureaucratic bullshit. I don't know about you, but my patience has run out with Uncle Sam.
Just another thing from the bill: -The Secretary of Commerce shall provide assistance for the creation and support of Regional Cybersecurity Centers for the promotion and implementation of cybersecurity standards. -The purpose of the Centers is to enhance the cybersecurity of small and medium sized businesses in United States
Korea is attacking small businesses in the US now? When a country has a $11.3 Trillion debt you might want to cut back on waste. Guess not.
Log in to comment