Controversial cybersecurity bill passed with resounding Senate support

24

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 80
    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

    It's been evident for some time that the differences between the parties are close to neglible.

     

    The parties have been shrunk into parodies of the Overton Window as part of their decades-long push leftward within said window.

     

    Enough is enough. The one thing Andrew Jackson did wrong was to force ‘winner take all’ in elections, which made it nigh impossible for more than two parties to exist at once. Time to repeal that and represent the entire spectrum.

     

    By that, of course, I mean to not want the entire spectrum represented...

  • Reply 22 of 80
    The parties have been shrunk into parodies of the Overton Window as part of their decades-long push leftward within said window.

    Enough is enough. The one thing Andrew Jackson did wrong was to force ‘winner take all’ in elections, which made it nigh impossible for more than two parties to exist at once. Time to repeal that and represent the entire spectrum.

    By that, of course, I mean to not want the entire spectrum represented...

    Not the Transhumanist Party...or the United States Marijuana Party?

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_political_parties_in_the_United_States
  • Reply 23 of 80
    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

    Not the Transhumanist Party...

     

    Canners and splicers. They’re mentally ill; shouldn’t be taken seriously.

     

    the United States Marijuana Party?


     

    I’ve always been of the belief that if you’re going to commit suicide, do so with a gun to save society the medical costs of keeping you alive while you’re doing it. Just put a single bullet in your brain and end it in seconds, cleanup taking a few days. Don’t draw it out and make your family suffer with you.

     

    I’ve also always been of the belief that you oughtn’t commit suicide at all.

     

    You can believe what you want to believe, sure. That's a founding tenant of the country and exists pretty much solely to protect the range of beliefs that are legitimate and objectively true. But with said right comes the knowledge that if you believe something that is demonstrably false, objectively false, or just plain illogical, you will–and should–be mocked, ridiculed, ostracized, and punished for it.

  • Reply 24 of 80
    pistispistis Posts: 247member
    what;'s so hilarious is that some naive people actually trusted the US Government. This bill finally puts an end to the pretense that we live in a democracy. The end stage of the fall of Capitalism is beginning



    Democracy means

    Freedom to publicly assemble (no we don't)
    right to privacy (not)
    Free press (nice try)
    Representative democracy (oh please)
    and they have the nerve to wonder why we don't vote any more
    and they have the nerve to claim that they want to pursue democracy in other countries when there is none here. How hypocritical

    The fact they can now do this in the open is the final proof that the coup d'etat is complete.

    We now live in a total oligarchy just like in Russia , where the amount of Freedom and Justice you can have is decided by the amount of money you have and which elite you are a member of.

    The terrorists are correct at least they have the balls to stand up to them unlike us sheep. Of course violence is not the method I advocate but I understand why they would resort to it in the face of such evil from the monsters that "govern" us
  • Reply 25 of 80
    pistispistis Posts: 247member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post





    It's been evident for some time that the differences between the parties are close to neglible.



    Both parties are authoritarian in nature. Hillary is an example so are the candidates from the Republican party. The only question remaining is how much difference is the authoritarian system we now have to totalitarian system its seems to be becoming?

  • Reply 26 of 80
    Originally Posted by pistis View Post

    This bill finally puts an end to the pretense that we live in a democracy.



    That pretense shouldn’t have existed in the first place, since we’re not a democracy and never have been.

     

    The end stage of the fall of Capitalism is beginning


     

    Not even remotely close to being accurate and has nothing whatsoever to do with this discussion.

     

    Freedom to publicly assemble (no we don't)


     

    We do. That most of us are apathetic is orchestrated.

     

    right to privacy (not)


     

    And the people responsible for taking this right will be... punished.

     

    Free press (nice try)


     

    CRAP, I had something great saved but I can’t find it...

     

    Representative democracy (oh please)


     

    Representative republic. That was eroded first with the 17th Amendment.

  • Reply 27 of 80
    gtrgtr Posts: 3,231member
    [B]Solution[/B]:

    Vote for Vladimir Putin when he arrives in America with the Russian army next year...

    By the way, check out this PR photo from Putin's official website:

    [IMG]http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/64731/width/400/height/800[/IMG]

    Is that HITLER in the background?

    ????
  • Reply 28 of 80
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 14,668moderator
    If you want smaller government, and less intrusiveness into your life, you have to vote for those who support libertarian principles.

    Some Libertarian senators voted for this:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_Republican#U.S._Senators
    http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?&congress=114&session=1&vote=00291#position

    and Libertarians tend to side more with Republican, most of whom approved this. Only 2-3 Libertarians disapproved, the rest were either for it or didn't vote. 67% of the nay votes were from Democrats. So if you are against this then you know who to vote for.

    This bill doesn't demand data from companies though, this is different from the government requests for access to private data. This is more about liability for sharing data when private companies detect a cybersecurity threat:

    http://www.wnyc.org/story/senate-approves-cybersecurity-bill-what-you-need-to-know/

    "Back when Democrats controlled the Senate, they blocked a bill with a similar acronym — CISPA (the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act) — that had the same thrust. Now Republicans control the Senate."

    "Does the bill require information-sharing?
    No. Cooperation is voluntary. But there's a nice incentive built in. Say a company shares too much about its users or customers. The bill eliminates legal liability, so the company is shielded from private lawsuits and antitrust laws."

    It can open the door to private companies abusing customer privacy, although there are requirements to remove private data not related to a cybersecurity threat but it shouldn't adversely affect companies like Apple who try to maintain customer privacy.

    What it means though is that if DropBox had a security breach where celebrities had their accounts hacked, DropBox would be allowed to tell Apple that celebrities had their accounts breached and Apple could then block their accounts and inform them of a breach that may compromise their Apple account and neither Apple nor DropBox would be liable for sharing the account information.

    The downside to the sharing is that DropBox could share the data of hacked accounts along with passwords to check if the passwords matched another service rather than automatically locking out all those users. An employee at this company could then use this data to violate the privacy of hacked users at another company or they could store it insecurely and it leaks out at a later date.

    Certain members of the government will always be wanting to get bulk spying approved so every bill about data should be looked through thoroughly but most of the front-facing people in the government who handle the votes wouldn't want to be spied on as citizens either and you can see very clearly that they don't consider the citizens of the country to be their enemy, their motive is against foreign threats.

    Ideally, companies should all have rock solid security, heavily encrypt everything and share none of your data but this doesn't happen. Sony had all sorts of data going back years unencrypted. If this bill will allow for damage limitation then it's good. If it leads to further privacy breaches then it's bad. Sometimes you don't know if it will have a better or worse outcome until it's in place. If it encourages breaches of privacy then people will vote to have it changed or removed. Government is a never-ending back and forth debate about what are the best laws to live by based on the changes that happen in the world and new laws are necessary. If someone steals your data, you'd immediately declare it to be illegal but the only way it's illegal is because someone wrote a law saying that. If you remove that governance then it's legal.
  • Reply 29 of 80
    pistis wrote: »
    what;'s so hilarious is that some naive people actually trusted the US Government. This bill finally puts an end to the pretense that we live in a democracy. The end stage of the fall of Capitalism is beginning



    Democracy means

    Freedom to publicly assemble (no we don't)
    right to privacy (not)
    Free press (nice try)
    Representative democracy (oh please)
    and they have the nerve to wonder why we don't vote any more
    and they have the nerve to claim that they want to pursue democracy in other countries when there is none here. How hypocritical

    The fact they can now do this in the open is the final proof that the coup d'etat is complete.

    We now live in a total oligarchy just like in Russia , where the amount of Freedom and Justice you can have is decided by the amount of money you have and which elite you are a member of.

    The terrorists are correct at least they have the balls to stand up to them unlike us sheep. Of course violence is not the method I advocate but I understand why they would resort to it in the face of such evil from the monsters that "govern" us

    We never lived in a democracy, we live in a republic. What we need is to set term limits for senators and house representatives. Their only goal is to get re-elected because that's their job, not to actually represent us.
  • Reply 30 of 80
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by libertyforall View Post

     



    iCloud servers -- that is likely the weak link, got to learn more about the protections or lack thereof there...  


     

    Apple can decrypt very little in iCloud.  The key to the encrypted data in iCloud is on your device.  

  • Reply 31 of 80
    boredumbboredumb Posts: 1,418member

    "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

    -Benjamin Franklin, 1755

    -forgotten by Congress...numerous times

  • Reply 32 of 80
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 9,713member

    All the outrage here. All the spittle being flung in support of ‘freedom.’ The hilarious part is nothing, absolutely nothing will come of it. Life will go on, there will be no surge in voting for ‘freedom’ candidates, no protests in the streets. It doesn’t matter anyway. You’ve demonized the police too and they are staying in their cars letting the bad guys have their way with you. Crime is up. Recruitment is down 43% in one large city. Nobody wants to be a cop anymore, especially African Americans. One black female police academy candidate interviewed said her family is very upset and angry that she wants to be a cop because African Americans are supposed to hate cops, not become one. So it won’t be long before the military has to take up the slack for law enforcement.

     

    Bottom line? We are all cowards. As long as we have food in our bellies and can watch YouTube videos we don’t care. Burning up the Internet with outraged comments accomplishes nothing except for blowing off steam. Now go take a Xanax and play Candy Crush.

  • Reply 33 of 80
    dachardachar Posts: 330member
    There may be a number of unforeseen consequences of this decision. Many people, especially in the USA, may feel that Apple is the safest company for protecting their information and change to Apple products . The EU might view American companies that store data about Europeans breaching Euopean data protection if it is made available to the USA law enforcement agencies. Will Europeans and other nationals be able to opt out?
  • Reply 34 of 80
    muppetrymuppetry Posts: 3,331member
    boredumb wrote: »
    "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
    -Benjamin Franklin, 1755
    -forgotten by Congress...numerous times

    Ah yes - that quotation, with all its associated irony, was sure to arise somewhere in this thread. You didn't go so far as to make a specific point with it but your "forgotten by Congress" comment suggests, as is usually the case when that quote is rolled out, that you have no idea what Franklin was talking about when he wrote it.
  • Reply 35 of 80
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 9,713member

    I wonder how many of the outraged commenters here complacently take off their shoes and belts in an American airport? How any empty their belongings into the little tray and watch their computers go down the conveyor belt? How many obediently raise their arms and walk through the body scanner? How many silently endure a TSA pat down without verbal protest? 

  • Reply 36 of 80
    muppetrymuppetry Posts: 3,331member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post

     

    I wonder how many of the outraged commenters here complacently take off their shoes and belts in an American airport? How any empty their belongings into the little tray and watch their computers go down the conveyor belt? How many obediently raise their arms and walk through the body scanner? How many silently endure a TSA pat down without verbal protest? 




    Another observation is that it is quite clear that most of the "outraged" posters in this thread have not read the bill in question, or even an accurate summary of its provisions. I get the impression that many just want an excuse to rant about politics, and that it is entirely irrelevant whether the subject of the rant has any basis in reality. Very strange.

  • Reply 37 of 80
    jbdragonjbdragon Posts: 2,246member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by blazar View Post



    I want privacy but i also want criminals, terrorists, kidnappers, etc. caught. It is impossible to fight for the rights of good people while also protecting them from the bad ones.

     

    If I was a Terrorist or Kidnapper, do you really think I'd be posting openly in the Cloud, or Facebook, or anything like that? Or a real Criminal?  Sure a few dumb criminals do, but a few shouldn't take away the rights and freedoms of everyone for mass surveillance!!!  

     

    It's just not worth it.

  • Reply 38 of 80
    jbdragonjbdragon Posts: 2,246member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mac_dog View Post





    thats why I'm voting for Bernie sanders. Libertarian? I'm not so sure. How about more government focus as consumer advocate?

     

    Bernie Sanders is nothing but BIG GOVERNMENT!!!

  • Reply 39 of 80
    jessijessi Posts: 302member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by rob53 View Post



    So what can we do to take our rights back? This bill is being supported by both democrats and republicans so we can't blame one side. It's obvious Washington DC has no concern for our rights. No government agency does.



    If you want freedom in america, read the New Libertarian Manifesto by SEK3.  He outlines a plan, called Agorism, which is peaceful, and was successful in bringing down the soviet union.

  • Reply 40 of 80
    jessijessi Posts: 302member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mubaili View Post



    These senators are just dumb. Well, with Apple's built end to end encryption it means Apple really cannot get the data. Not so lucky for other companies.



    The next step is they are going to make Apple's end-to-end encryption illegal.

     

    Apple and Google et. al. share some blame here- clearly they are not spending enough money on lobbyists and getting libertarians elected. 

Sign In or Register to comment.