| "Under siege"? The only group I feel under siege from 99% of the time is the government, esp. Congress. |
|
|
|
me1212
join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO | Why does any government NEED to regulate the internet? Whats so bad about it being the "wild wild west"? Yeah yeah I know the soccer moms will say cus muh babeh's feelingzz/cyber "bullying", but thats not a good enough reason to ass rape the rest of the country and take away our privacy/rights(which is exactly what any internet censorship bill/anit-piracy bill will do) |
|
 LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 | reply to NotTheMama
Re: "Under siege"? quote:
There's plenty of talk about how cybersecurity is a big problem and we're "under siege" and all of that nonsense
We are under siege. » www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Eco···j02.html» www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-5···attacks/» www.cnn.com/2013/02/01/tech/chin···dex.htmlThose who think we aren't under attack are sadly deluded and have their head in the ground like an ostrich. There can be much discussion on how to deal with the attacks, but claiming they don't exist is stupid. --
A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasury. |
|
openbox9Premium
join:2004-01-26
japan
kudos:2 | reply to me1212
Re: Why does any government NEED to regulate the internet? said by me1212:Whats so bad about it being the "wild wild west"? The fact that our national security depends on a "known and trusted" Internet. With the amount of our nation's critical infrastructure that is intertwined with the Internet, we can't afford a while west.
CISPA wasn't about regulating the Internet, regardless of what privacy advocates claimed. It was about allowing/enabling the sharing of threat information between the government (largely the IC) and private industry for the protection of critical infrastructure. |
|
me1212
join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO | Then the government needs to get off of the internet and do something else. National security is a noble goal, but if it costs us our freedom, privacy, and rights what good is there really no better way to do it? Computers, especially the internet, used to be about freedom and having no limits the government wants to change that near as I can tell. I wont let it go without a fight. |
|
openbox9Premium
join:2004-01-26
japan
kudos:2 | Did you read the proposed CISPA legislation? Not the "news" outlets' stories, but the actual proposed bill.
The Internet is not going away. We simply can't afford to not leverage the Internet for our nation's infrastructure. It is a National Security (in the broad sense, not a NSA spook-wise manner) issue. |
|
| reply to me1212
said by me1212:The soccer moms will say cus muh babeh's feelingzz/cyber "bullying", but thats not a good enough reason to ass rape the rest of the country and take away our privacy/rights
No different then infringing on the second amendment simply because one guy first had to murder his own mother to obtain weapons he could not have legally obtained in the first place.
--
"My weakness is that I care too much" |
|
me1212
join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO | I agree. I support an open and free internet as much as gun rights. He who sacrifices liberty for security deserves neither. |
|
| reply to me1212
Same reasons we need government to regulate the real world. |
|
me1212
join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO | Except its not the real world. I agree we need on-line businesses regulated, but thats real world businesses going on line so its different. |
|
| reply to openbox9
...and there's the problem... The government should NEVER share resources like this with the private sector ( meaning use the same infrastructure). These should happen only at specific points where the governmental need to interface with the public. By definition, the internet is NOT "known NOR is it a trusted system" ...and trusted systems mean something to the government. If the government would use their own network most of these problems would be solved...
CISPA will never regulate "the internet", as the internet is not own solely by one group or stakeholder. The most that can happen is that the US can control aspects of their part of the internet to a limited extent. |
|
| reply to Linklist
Re: "Under siege"? I think you didn't understand what I was saying. |
|
openbox9Premium
join:2004-01-26
japan
kudos:2 | reply to jjeffeory
Re: Why does any government NEED to regulate the internet? said by jjeffeory:...and there's the problem... The government should NEVER share resources like this with the private sector ( meaning use the same infrastructure). This isn't about the government, this is about our nation's infrastructure.said by jjeffeory:CISPA will never regulate "the internet", as the internet is not own solely by one group or stakeholder. I said this isn't about regulating the Internet. |
|
| reply to me1212
I agree with you to a point, but the internet has become another part of the real world, especially regarding ethics. It's just as important as many parallels in the real world these days. The more people use something the more real it becomes unfortunately. |
|
| reply to openbox9
There really is no "national" infrastructure. It's a collective of private companies' infrastructure that's at risk. "The Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA) is a proposed law in the United States which would allow for the sharing of Internet traffic information between the U.S. government and certain technology and manufacturing companies. The stated aim of the bill is to help the U.S government investigate cyber threats and ensure the security of networks against cyberattack."
So it looks like the bill is trying to regulate the Internet to me. Only, they don't control it.
It's a pretty complicated issue for sure. |
|
openbox9Premium
join:2004-01-26
japan
kudos:2 | Where do you see regulation? The bill was about easing the sharing of classified threat information with private industry (and vice versa with proprietary, potentially damaging intrusion/attack info from the private sector to the government with minimal/no retribution) so that they may better protect the infrastructure. Our nation's infrastructure, regardless of who owns, maintains, or protects it, is a National Security issue. |
|
 mromeroPremium
join:2000-12-07
The O.C.
kudos:1 | Obama will introduce cybersecurity executive order »www.theverge.com/2013/2/8/396963···he-union |
|
LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 | said by mromero:http://www.theverge.com/2013/2/8/3969630/obama-will-reportedly-introduce-cybersecurity-executive-order-after-state-of-the-u nion
Yes. Who needs a new bill. We get CISPA in an exec order anyway: » www.theverge.com/2013/2/8/396963···he-union--
A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasury. |
|
 camaro92Question everythingPremium
join:2008-04-05
Westfield, MA
 ·Comcast
| reply to jjeffeory
Re: Why does any government NEED to regulate the internet? said by jjeffeory:...and there's the problem... The government should NEVER share resources like this with the private sector
If it wasn't for the private sector the government would be broke and they wouldn't know a damn thing that is going in the country. (Reference to the spying) |
|
 GlobalMindDomino Dude, POWER Systems GuyPremium
join:2001-10-29
Hollywood, FL | Too funny. Dutch was my soccer coach like 30 years ago. |
|
