[Chunkyman]

QUOTE (spaceeinstein @ Monday, Apr 16 2012, 08:05)

How does the free market protect people from cybercrimes anyway? Or crimes in general? There must be ways to protect people and businesses when they are using the Internet. We shouldn't be putting things off just because of unrealistic ideological differences. Everytime something is brought up, it's instantly shot down rather than improved upon. Wtf is the point of amendments then? More people will get hurt in the long run if nothing is done.

Governments primarily investigate crimes after they've already happened, they don't do a whole lot of protecting.

The only person who can truly protect you is yourself (whether it be online or in real life). Self-protection on the internet involves practicing due diligence before downloading anything or buying from online stores, only interacting with reputable online websites, and acquiring anti-virus programs.

Considering the internet works wonderfully as it is, it would be foolish to have bureaucrats possibly (likely) ruin that.

[GTA 360]

As much as I don't agree with them regulating the web I hate pirates, they make things more expensive for the rest of us and slow down the development and production of new software, so I agree with them banning pirates from the web but don't spy on us, just find those that visit pirating sites fairly regularly and cut their internet. End of.

[sivispacem]

QUOTE (Chunkyman @ Monday, Apr 16 2012, 15:57)

Considering the internet works wonderfully as it is

Oh yes, it's not as if online organised crime, the theft of proprietary information and digital fraud are one of the largest industries in the world by value, is it?

[Chunkyman]

QUOTE (sivispacem @ Monday, Apr 16 2012, 21:20)

Oh yes, it's not as if online organised crime, the theft of proprietary information and digital fraud are one of the largest industries in the world by value, is it?

And you think the government has magic powers that can solve all of this (without negatively affecting anything else)?

[Irviding]

QUOTE (Chunkyman @ Monday, Apr 16 2012, 09:57)

Governments primarily investigate crimes after they've already happened, they don't do a whole lot of protecting.

That's pretty, well, wrong. There are thousands of people employed in intelligence, counterintelligence, counterterrorism, etc. in this country who wouldn't take that comment too likely.

[sivispacem]

QUOTE (Chunkyman @ Monday, Apr 16 2012, 23:40)

QUOTE (sivispacem @ Monday, Apr 16 2012, 21:20) Oh yes, it's not as if online organised crime, the theft of proprietary information and digital fraud are one of the largest industries in the world by value, is it? And you think the government has magic powers that can solve all of this (without negatively affecting anything else)?

No, but nation states do a far better job of policing it than it's users do. For one, there's actually an incentive for them to do so, rather than just to profit from involving themselves in such activity to restore some kind of punitive sense of balance. To be honest, though, the internet is not free and never has been, nor will it ever be. To pretend one has anonymity or privacy of information on the internet is roughly akin to leaving secret documents in a park under the pretext that people won't look at them. It's a public space, not a private one. As I've said before, you rarely ever own the data you distribute, regardless of whether you create it or not.

[Chunkyman]

QUOTE (Irviding @ Monday, Apr 16 2012, 22:42)

That's pretty, well, wrong. There are thousands of people employed in intelligence, counterintelligence, counterterrorism, etc. in this country who wouldn't take that comment too likely.

There are still significantly more government officials involved in investigating crimes than there are people actively protecting citizens from criminal acts.

[spaceeinstein]

QUOTE (Chunkyman @ Monday, Apr 16 2012, 09:57)

The only person who can truly protect you is yourself (whether it be online or in real life). Self-protection on the internet involves practicing due diligence before downloading anything or buying from online stores, only interacting with reputable online websites, and acquiring anti-virus programs.

Do you think the average person is that computer literate? People in general can't protect themselves, but since society as we know it somehow hadn't manage to collapse yet, what do you think is doing the protecting? Corporations and the individual? And what about victims? Leave them behind for not being able to protect themselves? Let heinous crimes go unpunished?

This post has been edited by spaceeinstein on Tuesday, Apr 17 2012, 08:45

[MinnieMan121249]

What are my views on this? Simple. Just like PIPA, SOPA and ACTA, It's a stupid fad that the goverment is trying to continue threatening us with, and just like before, people are not stupid enough to fall for this bullsh*t, and will continue to rebel against the f*cking goverment and their inner plans to spy on people and make money. Simple as that. Case closed.

[sivispacem]

QUOTE (MinnieMan121249 @ Tuesday, Apr 17 2012, 09:45)

What are my views on this? Simple. Just like PIPA, SOPA and ACTA, It's a stupid fad that the goverment is trying to continue threatening us with, and just like before, people are not stupid enough to fall for this bullsh*t, and will continue to rebel against the f*cking goverment and their inner plans to spy on people and make money. Simple as that. Case closed.

I love how every topic of this nature immediately becomes a sh*tstorm of very angry individuals who recycle the same old rebellious rhetoric whist betraying their complete lack of understanding of the subject matter. In essence, what you are saying is "I don't want governments to have more power to prevent cyber crime, espionage and the theft of sensitive and personal details by hostile nations and criminal gangs". Is that really what you mean or would you like to re-evaluate your position?

[MinnieMan121249]

Nobody's angry. Nobody's rebelious either. If you like the goverment f*cking with you and you basically say "take my money and freedom", be my guest.
Sit back, enjoy your drink, and watch the internet you love, slowly parish away.

Hypocrite.

[sivispacem]

QUOTE (MinnieMan121249 @ Tuesday, Apr 17 2012, 12:55)

Nobody's angry. Nobody's rebelious either. If you like the goverment f*cking with you and you basically say "take my money and freedom", be my guest. Sit back, enjoy your drink, and watch the internet you love, slowly parish away. Hypocrite.

Oh really? Have you read this bill, or any of the executive summaries of what it hopes to achieve? No? Are you aware of the powers it has potential to grant, the limits of it's scope and proposed application? No? Didn't think so. You seem to be under the illusion (or should that be delusion) that the internet is currently both private and free; it is in reality neither. And exactly how am I a hypocrite? I don't recall advocating the complete freedom and privacy of the internet, perhaps because I don't like in a delusional dream world and actually understand the topic at hand.

[MinnieMan121249]

First off, nobody said the internet is either private nor free. But in no way do I want to see any bills that resemble PIPA or SOPA get passed. I'm not gonna put the effort into justifying what I wrote to some random guy on the web, so that kinda sums it up. If your head is really that far up your own ass that you can't see what's going on, then I feel really bad for ya, wait... No I don't.

[sivispacem]

QUOTE (MinnieMan121249 @ Tuesday, Apr 17 2012, 16:30)

First off, nobody said the internet is either private nor free. But in no way do I want to see any bills that resemble PIPA or SOPA get passed. I'm not gonna put the effort into justifying what I wrote to some random guy on the web, so that kinda sums it up. If your head is really that far up your own ass that you can't see what's going on, then I feel really bad for ya, wait... No I don't.

This is just a demonstration of how little you understand the subject, and how easily you are swayed by sensationalist rhetoric. This bill bears absolutely no similarity to SOPA, PIPA or ACTA in any way. It addresses an entirely different issue, through entirely different means, and even a layman with only the most basic understanding of computer terminology would be able to see that. But no, as usual, rhetoric gets in the way of intelligent debate and we have the usual procession of people far too eager to open their mouth on issues they no absolutely nothing about. Your unwillingness to actually explain your statements and views, and inability to deal with criticism without resorting to petty insults, is testament to this fact.

[manofpeace]

Click

QUOTE

Up until this afternoon, the final vote on CISPA was supposed to be tomorrow. Then, abruptly, it was moved up today—and the House voted in favor of its passage with a vote of 248-168. But that's not even the worst part.

QUOTE

Basically this means CISPA can no longer be called a cybersecurity bill at all. The government would be able to search information it collects under CISPA for the purposes of investigating American citizens with complete immunity from all privacy protections as long as they can claim someone committed a "cybersecurity crime". Basically it says the 4th Amendment does not apply online, at all. Moreover, the government could do whatever it wants with the data as long as it can claim that someone was in danger of bodily harm, or that children were somehow threatened—again, notwithstanding absolutely any other law that would normally limit the government's power.

QUOTE

CISPA is now a completely unsupportable bill that rewrites (and effectively eliminates) all privacy laws for any situation that involves a computer. Far from the defense against malevolent foreign entities that the bill was described as by its authors, it is now an explicit attack on the freedoms of every American.

It's time to stop waving signs around at these chuckleheads, folks. It isn't working. Even if this bill doesn't actually do anything, and simply adds to the pile of other useless internet bills/laws, the message it sends is despicable. These things are never used as they are said they are, and merely deface our privacy and freedoms.

[Djdevin10]

You son of a bitch, i wanted to start this topic -_-

OT: Why is the government trying to pass these internet bills, i mean they practically know everything........

[manofpeace]

Some people are speculating that Obama's promise to veto it is essentially a big show to make him look like a "hero" and boost his campaign for reelection. Doesn't sound too unlikely considering how close elections are. I just worry how they're treating the internet like some sort of toy to scare people.

[AlexGTAGamer]

Keep your eyes peeled folks, Anonymous will probably make an angry video on YouTube and then hack into the FBI, CIA, White House whatever computer systems in response (again).

Is it wrong that I can see people getting arrested in the near future now for the most petty of things due to this bill?

Perhaps this will be the end of some websites that the US Government have been trying to take down for a long time.

[lil weasel]

(1984)
Power for the sake of Power.
No mater what crime a persons accused of they always seize the 'computer' to fish for evidence of other crimes.

[zoo3891]

I've compiled a list a quotes that should console/inspire the US citizens of GTA Forums. Please note the first two, and take the last few into careful consideration, but interpret them in your own ways.

QUOTE

"The House passes all kinds of crazy stuff, the Senate is where legislation goes to die."

QUOTE

"Note that this is a 57% margin. If the same holds in the Senate, it won't pass cloture and won't reach the president's desk."

QUOTE

"Every US Citizen that reads & participates in [GTA FORUMS] needs to protest this. This will impact all of you if this goes through & is signed by the President. America, the home of the free & brave. This is no longer true anymore."

QUOTE

"GUNS"

QUOTE

QUOTE Where/When are the protests starting? "You start them. It's well within your power to make the people rise up. But you won't. No one does because everyone is fearful of their own government. I would, but Americans wouldn't listen to a [I'M NOT CANADIAN]. It's sad, watching from this side of the fence, really."

This post has been edited by zoo3891 on Friday, Apr 27 2012, 01:34