Us Gov Wants You!

[redtigerdragon]

Check it out here. The cybersecurity bills are starting to frighten me now.

[cjloki]

Check it out here. The cybersecurity bills are starting to frighten me now.

so how does an individual such as myself go about reporting my dissatisfaction with this type of legislation to my representatives ?...send 'em an email ? ...politics, sheesh...

[InCrYsIs]

so how does an individual such as myself go about reporting my dissatisfaction with this type of legislation to my representatives ?...send 'em an email ? ...politics, sheesh...

 

 

I have tried every form of contact to get a hold of people and nobody is listening or replying. Good Luck. This administration is the beginning of the end for our way of life in America.

 

Actually let me rephrase. This administration is the end of what began years ago.

[molotovdaskwerl]

to become an internet based future or nation, these restrictions will have to be taken off

ugghh, remember that bit about obama expressing his distaste of free information, by saying he doesn't know anything about it

[LoArmistead]

They can't repeal the first amendment, so the socialists are going to do everything they can to chip away at it. They want to write the truth. They want to write the history, and they want to be able to censor those who disagree with them. That's how socialists operate, that's how they've always been and that's how they always will be. They are doing it on multiple fronts - they try to do it in the name of "cyber security," they try to do it in the name of competition and "net neutrality," but do not believe it for a nanosecond. There is no such thing as a law that can be more efficient than a free market. It just isn't possible, so any time someone says they can pass a law to make things more efficient, they are lying to you straight up, and you need to immediately question their motives.

 

Keep the God forsaken leftist politicians out of our internets!

[wevsspot]

Understanding the need to put disaster response and recovery plans in to place to protect critical infrastructure in case of cyber warfare, but absolutely no confidence in this administration (or any other for that fact) to actually put a comprehensive and working plan into place that will both protect our networks and protect our free access rights as citizens of the US.

[hierovision]

I fail to see this as anything other than a large scale disaster perparedness plan like many big companies already have in place. Our infrastructure relies on the internet. The internet is provided by private ISPs. This is to provide some emergency protection for the ISPs in case of some epic attack or threat with extreme likelyhood of attack.

 

"In order for the President to declare such an emergency, there would have to be knowledge both of a massive network flaw — and information that someone was about to leverage that hole to do massive harm. For example, the recent “Aurora” hack to steal source code from Google, Adobe and other companies wouldn’t have qualified, one Senate staffer noted: “It’d have to be Aurora 2, plus the intel that country X is going to take us down using that vulnerability.”"

 

Doesn't exactly sound like something to cry armageddon about. In fact, it sounds pretty intelligent. Lots of right-wingers here aren't there?

[LoArmistead]

I fail to see this as anything other than a large scale disaster perparedness plan like many big companies already have in place. Our infrastructure relies on the internet. The internet is provided by private ISPs. This is to provide some emergency protection for the ISPs in case of some epic attack or threat with extreme likelyhood of attack.

 

"In order for the President to declare such an emergency, there would have to be knowledge both of a massive network flaw — and information that someone was about to leverage that hole to do massive harm. For example, the recent “Aurora” hack to steal source code from Google, Adobe and other companies wouldn’t have qualified, one Senate staffer noted: “It’d have to be Aurora 2, plus the intel that country X is going to take us down using that vulnerability.”"

 

Doesn't exactly sound like something to cry armageddon about. In fact, it sounds pretty intelligent. Lots of right-wingers here aren't there?

 

Just a bunch of people who've seen what governments with too much authority are capable of.

[CowKing]

I fail to see this as anything other than a large scale disaster perparedness plan like many big companies already have in place. Our infrastructure relies on the internet. The internet is provided by private ISPs. This is to provide some emergency protection for the ISPs in case of some epic attack or threat with extreme likelyhood of attack.

 

"In order for the President to declare such an emergency, there would have to be knowledge both of a massive network flaw — and information that someone was about to leverage that hole to do massive harm. For example, the recent “Aurora” hack to steal source code from Google, Adobe and other companies wouldn’t have qualified, one Senate staffer noted: “It’d have to be Aurora 2, plus the intel that country X is going to take us down using that vulnerability.”"

 

Doesn't exactly sound like something to cry armageddon about. In fact, it sounds pretty intelligent. Lots of right-wingers here aren't there?

yeah, I don't see what's wrong with this. This doesn't give the President unlimited power to control the internet despite what Gleen Beck's butt buddies might tell you. The actual occurrence of something like this is pretty damn slim, and than we add to the fact that we have to know that it's coming

[Locutus]

What a ridiculous idea. The internet has taken many large blows and has never needed the government's help before.

 

During 9/11 when all the phones weren't working because everyone was trying to call each other, the internet worked fine. There's no reason for the government to try to take away our rights to manage our own property. If they want to control a network they should set up their own infrastructure (They can call it the "G-Net")

[Kamikaze_Badger]

Apparently our government still doesn't understand the tubes very well. This speaks of nothing but ignorance on the government's behalf.

[LoArmistead]

Life is very simple. It's good vs. evil. Freedom vs. slavery. It really is just as simple as that, and the only people who try to convince us otherwise, that "life is complicated," are the ones who don't mind being halfway in bondage, and halfway free to live their lives. They are conflicted in trying to figured out which freedoms they would like to give up for which securities. Those people are weak and counterproductive. And ultimately the outcome to that view on life is that slavery wins out over freedom, and the person winds up just being a government pawn. UK guys, I love you all, but damn y'all are on a downward spiral. And I'm not saying that from a high-and-mighty American perspective; that same idea that ruined you guys as a world power is alive and well here in the states. We are not far behind you in the grand scale of insignificance. For every once-great power that is now extinct or insignificant on the world stage, it all started with one simple and oft-repeated idea, the most overused and fallacious idea in the history of freedom and democracy: "How about we give the government a limited and temporary authority to....."

 

There is not a single instance in recorded history where a society failed because its people were too free. 100% of the time, the reason a society fails is because government becomes too large and too powerful. The government does not need to control the internet, and it's just a backdoor effort by the same people who support net neutrality to get their foot into the door. Don't let them. Creeping incrementalism is alive and well. You can choose to be free, or you can choose to be a slave. There is no happy in-between.