What is it about then? Spying on the average user and see intressting pictures of Joe eating food and if he posted something on facebook? Or: Look there is Jane she posted an hour long video of eating spagetti on youtube. Lets hire some people to look at this. There is quite big amounts of traffic going on online and its unlikley that any goverment has the money or personal required to go through each text, image, video etc manually. It would have to be done by software/code and it would most likley scan for "suspicious things" only and only suspicious things would be seen by a human (with a few false positives ofc), this in an attempt to not overflood the staff with junk. According to the paralegal dot com site you linked to they want to be able to intercept or modify communication, its hard to confirm what the intent is here. But this suggests that in the future there might be a plan on intercepting and maybe just make attack code usless (by modifying it as the hacker sends it). I assume the US would (eventually) have the potential to monitor and scan/detect most attacks done by software such as Metasploit. Maybe they will simply render such attacks usless and protect companies and maybe they will track down the offenders easier with this. I assume this would be powerful against botnets as well and possible in fighting other crimes (terror, organised crime, child porn, etc), since they can then monitor for known child porn files and see who recives what and sends what more easy with this law.
They can (again, they can and DO) already monitor the activity you are thinking of (child porn/piracy etc.) They have methods of viewing and sorting "suspicious things" but AGAIN this isn't about FB POSTS OR SEARCH ENGINE STUFF. They have access to those things. This about PRIVATE MSGS for ADVERTISING PURPOSES. The image is very clear. Think about Google and Ads. See a connection? Well, there's going to be a BIGGER ONE. Like I said, it's about the MONEY. Nothing on the net dies. It's all stored under your IP, deleted or not. It's scanned and used because your thoughts and likes are more valuable to a company that just your dollars. Hence the saying: If you're paying, you're the product. This is how FB sold for so much. Not because of it's social functions, because of it's potential to advertisers. Reddit, which never sold because the founders (young, not wealthy students) didn't want to 'cash out' and there are NO ADS. Ever.
this is a great example. 2 English kids booked their Vegas holiday. Before leaving the UK they tweeted about going to Vegas, destroying the place and something stupid about digging up marylin monroe. If said in England it simply means they are going to have a massive party and going to see a monroe museum. When landing in Vegas they were apprehended, interviewed, SEARCHED FOR SHOVELS, put in a cell for the night with Mexican drug dealers and shipped back to England the following day. These were stupid kids with stupid tweets - the point is they were convicted because of officials using evidence taken from a childish social media outlet. Their tweets were not public but just to their following friends. http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/01/30/leigh-van-bryan-and-emily-bunting-banned-from-entering-us-after-twitter-joke-about-destroying-america_n_1241104.html
Although tweets are public. Anyone looking at your profile can see your tweets. There is a private message function on twitter, but if you send out a regular tweet, you have to assume that the whole world can see it. (But, as Anthony Weiner can attest, it is easy to confuse the private and public messages.)
I believe that is a federal offense, although I have not looked it up to confirm. Also, there's the difference between what you might write on a piece of paper inside a sealed envelope and what you might write on a postcard.
Exactly. Thank you for summing up what I couldn't. Opening, reading, selling to the highest bidder. It's exploitation for the sake of a buck, plain and simple, and it's not good for this (or ANY) country. And the issue would be less of a hot-button for people like me if they were honest about their intentions. The back-handedness, and the willingness of congress to agree with that (248. On record) sickens me, despite the fact that this is nothing new.
I wouldn't like it, but at a certain point you have to trust them (unless you want to use pigeon post).
The real issue is where the tweet goes after it is out in the cloud. Yes, they can see it and read it. Why do they want to? Whats the purpose of HOURS AND HOURS AND MONTHS of coding? It's stored (deleted or not). This is why Google is switching to Dark Fiber. To handle all the database storage.
I remember Cliff Claven worried because he was being charged with tampering with US Mail I know what you mean liz, but I think all electronic messages have to be opened beit email or facebook. What CISPA can also do is demand private info such as your private inbox messages from Mark Zuckerburg who has no choice but to hand them over and you may never know...
I need help understanding this confusing legislation. If I had a prospective employer ask me for any of my passwords, I would not take the job. I don't have a lot of empathy for people who put stupid stuff in the public areas of their Facebook pages, except I feel bad for foolish kids that do it. But is there some legislation that allows someone besides the government to spy on people? Not that it's OK for the government to do it. Is this about selling my data to marketers? The government spying is currently outrageous and if you scare the people enough with the terrorism threat, that's what you get. I don't know how to push back against the ignorance (the public). Look at these idiot politicians now calling for the Boston bombers to be called "enemy combatants". Can that be any more frightening for any individual's freedom? The only saving grace is the McCarthy era eventually ended, hopefully this one will too. Hooray for the librarians who decided they wouldn't keep any records on patrons so their reading lists could not be subpoenaed. I stay away from Facebook and Twitter. But if the government wanted to spy on me, I have all kinds of subversive statements on a number of forums.
There is a ton of hand-shake agreements about the net being a "public sphere", one that needs laws to monitor dangerous behavior (the same way you can't walk around naked at California Pizza Kitchen because it might harm a child or harass a pretty lady walking down the street). The thing is, the police you know and obey on the street have names, faces and laws they must abide by themselves (lest the rights of the people be trampled). The people who monitor you on the net are basically keyword robots under organizations you don't know the name of (on purpose, btw) ordered around by organizations you don't know the name of without your knowledge. If it isn't in the wrong hands already, it can very easily (and for the right amount) handed over. I'm not opposed to treating the net as a public place. There are, however, differences between physically harming someone in public and emotionally damaging someone online. Slight, but different, and there needs to be proper functions put in place (functions that protect us rather than exploit us, functions that are overseen by people we can know and contact and vote for) that govern this sphere, not the same we use for foottraffic citizens who know the laws fully and choose to participate.
Unfortunately a lot of people cant afford to turn down jobs because of something so trivial as privacy The whole thing is about 3rd party snooping. Apparently the govt can't do it first hand so the legislation provides for private companies to do it for them
But we have the option of not having Facebook pages, don't we? I don't have one and when I start one to promote my book I don't plan to put anything up there I don't want public. I'm not for this privacy invasion, believe me. But in this country our privacy is completely invaded by marketers. You cannot avoid them unless you do no electronic financial exchanges. There's a famous account of people getting angry because Target Stores were sending out coupons for pregnancy items to people who had not yet told anyone they were pregnant. So now the store disguises the knowledge they have by throwing in unrelated coupons. Every grocery store has a card that you need to get lower prices. Either you pay more or you let them collect data on what you purchase. You can put in a fake name, but as soon as you pay with a credit card, the store knows the name associated with the store card. Your banks, credit card companies, and utility companies all make you sign agreements they can share your data with other corporations. I think it's just one more way around citizen's expected rights. It's a quid pro quo, the government rewards the corporations, the corporations don't fight the government's request for its data. The USAPATRIOT Act (Uniting (and) Strengthening America (by) Providing Appropriate Tools Required (to) Intercept (and) Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001) lets the government data mine everything from your Internet activity to your phone calls. Supposedly they only monitor phone calls with one end outside the country. I'm not sure I believe they really restrict their spying to that given how big their data storage facility is, i.e. given how pervasive the data spying is. The NSA Is Building the Country’s Biggest Spy Center (Watch What You Say) The gun manufacturers just blocked something as basic as background checks for gun buyers when >90% of the public agrees we should have because said manufacturers have such a huge influence on our legislators. Does it then surprise you that this kind of legislation allowing the third party ability to invade your privacy would be easily passed? Follow the money. Until the masses wake up (if they do), what do you propose we do about it? It seems rather hopeless to me.
Sadly, it is hopeless. People have been fighting corporations and the government over privacy/ethics concerns for years now, and nothing has changed.
Wow. Sad. Nothing is hopeless. Except your attitude. The rest of us will keep fighting, no matter whether or not you think it's working because it's a cause worth fighting for, and because when my children are fighting these same issues in different forms(as the battle is always ONGOING, just a part of life) I will be able to know I helped in some small capacity. That is all I can do. If you don't think that the mass voices of the people can help, think of the huge protests that have already done so much. It's your voice. You can use it or you can lose it. You can't prove it's hopeless and I can prove it isn't by example. As a general rule, if you don't know it's true maybe don't just say it. Especially in reference to a question. Don't discourage people. Empower them. There IS something that can be done. You signed the petition yourself, so you must know that.
Knowledge is power. The more you know, the more you can do, and you are on the right track. HERE'S ANOTHER LINK THAT TALKS ABOUT (MULTIPLE) ACTIONS YOU CAN TAKE TO INFORM YOUR REPS (AND THE PRESIDENT) ABOUT YOUR DISPLEASURE ETC. THIS IS THE METHOD WE USED TO QUELL SOPA AND PIPA, SO DON'T LET PPL SAY THERE IS NOTHING TO DO. THAT'S JUST WHAT SOMEONE WHO HAS GIVEN UP SAYS. http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/spxx4/this_is_cispa_explained_sopa_was_meant_to_stop/ And that feeling of overwhelming hopelessness is what they want you to feel. Saul Alinsky knew it, so do millions of other radicals.
It probably is a hopeless fight but what's the alternative? I'm sure they thought the fight against slavery was hopeless as well. It's good there's still people about like the OP SI Dunbar who still have the time and energy to fight the good fight - maybe our children will thank them one day
I'm not saying don't fight. I was simply stating a fact based on privacy/ethics charges in the past. Governments/corporations rarely lose. One thing to keep in mind that you're fighting the government and large corporations, so it's a hard fight to win. Like I mentioned before, the internet is not a guaranteed right, so the government can pretty much say, "If you don't like it, don't use it." Just to use CISPA as an example, a lot of wealthy and powerful corporations are behind it, including Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Cisco, Intel, IBM, Goldman Sachs, Verizon, and Yahoo, just to name a few. Sadly, there's not much people can do when these large companies decide to lobby for a particular bill.
Everyone is an idealist until their methods prove effective. The SOPA protest worked. It didn't kill the bill, but it got it off the table. We may not get what we want, but we're sure as hell going to make a stink about it. There will always be crooked, greedy people. There will also always be people ready to fight them. Small cogs make the big wheel turn.
That is half-true, again. The SOPA protest worked. It didn't kill the bill, but it got it off the table. Again, this is off topic and time wasting. We understand it's a lot to tackle. It's not hopeless. That's not fact.
The United Nations Human Rights Council has unanimously agreed that access to the Internet is a basic human right, signing a resolution on Thursday (July 5) stating that access to the Internet and online freedom of expression should be guaranteed. The motion was led by Sweden and supported by countries including America, Brazil and Tunisia. Full story here http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/tech/news/a392118/internet-access-a-human-right-says-united-nations-council.html Electricity is not a guaranteed human right, if you don't want it don't use it. We need the internet like we need electricity. Simples... Imagine google - super duper tech company worths squillions. They've sent cars out to nearly every street in the western world to take pictures of not just every street but every house, shop, car etc etc. But that's all they were doing...mapping the world for us. But somehow they managed by completely accidental means, to log in to millions of home and business wi-fi's and nearly every country sued them for it but guess what? They never deleted the info and instead of licking the wounds to their bank accounts are still doing it http://www.neowin.net/news/google-fined-7m-for-accidental-street-view-car-wi-fi-tapping Google - Do no evil
Also this is the FUTURE of the net we're talking about. As I've said, connection today is NOT what connection 5 yrs from now will look like. In the video I mentioned that as more businesses, schools and social functions move to an online presence, there will be a greater call for policing of access and information. The internet is only growing, and there will likely be a time when it is used for most things (I mean, more than it is used already. Which is a lot. Banking, communications, like, a lot.) But seriously, how are we still debating search engines and the right to be online? This is about CISPA, which mostly affects advertisers and your P-R-I-V-A-T-E emails/ msgs being SOLD. This is about exploitation. I don't know how else to say it.
It's hard to say if protests swayed their decision or if it was something else. Take a look at the companies that opposed SOPA, and you'll see that there are some very big names there. It could also very well be that there's another reason entirely. When it comes to CISPA, I think we're pretty safe as far as it being passed is concerned. I honestly don't see the Senate passing it. This resolution has more to do with freedom of expression than anything else. The UN is trying to target countries such as China, where the government limits freedom of expression and regularly censors material. There is no law in the US stating that internet is a right.
