The bill is called the "Protecting Children From Internet Pornographers Act of 2011".... and really is a misnomer that does nothing of the sort. Read the full article at the link.
Our freedoms are being eroded at a rate I've never seen before.
.... Internet providers would be forced to keep logs of their customers' activities for one year--in case police want to review them in the future--under legislation that a U.S. House of Representatives committee approved today.
The 19 to 10 vote represents a victory for conservative Republicans, who made data retention their first major technology initiative after last fall's elections, and the Justice Department officials who have quietly lobbied for the sweeping new requirements, a development first reported by CNET.
House Judiciary committee prepares to vote on sweeping data retention mandate. (Credit: U.S. House of Representatives)
A last-minute rewrite of the bill expands the information that commercial Internet providers are required to store to include customers' names, addresses, phone numbers, credit card numbers, bank account numbers, and temporarily-assigned IP addresses, some committee members suggested. By a 7-16 vote, the panel rejected an amendment that would have clarified that only IP addresses must be stored.
It represents "a data bank of every digital act by every American" that would "let us find out where every single American visited Web sites," said Rep. Zoe Lofgren of California, who led Democratic opposition to the bill.
Lofgren said the data retention requirements are easily avoided because they only apply to "commercial" providers. Criminals would simply go to libraries or Starbucks coffeehouses and use the Web anonymously, she said, while law-abiding Americans would have their activities recorded."
...
Full article at link
[This message has been edited by ryan.hess (edited 07-29-2011).]
"Less government" my patoot. Good thing we filled the house with people who would vote for this in the last election cycle, huh? Why would Republicans, claiming they are for less government, approve this bill? Say one thing do the other, the politician way.
And Ryan is right, its an emotionally charged bait and switch, and uses Children as an excuse to exercise more control and gives us even less privacy.
quote
The 19 to 10 vote represents a victory for conservative Republicans, who made data retention their first major technology initiative after last fall's elections, and the Justice Department officials who have quietly lobbied for the sweeping new requirements, a development first reported by CNET.
[This message has been edited by tbone42 (edited 07-29-2011).]
A last-minute rewrite of the bill expands the information that commercial Internet providers are required to store to include customers' names, addresses, phone numbers, credit card numbers, bank account numbers, and temporarily-assigned IP addresses, some committee members suggested. By a 7-16 vote, the panel rejected an amendment that would have clarified that only IP addresses must be stored.
Sounds like a dream come true for hackers.
Imagine, if they could only take all of your personal information, put it in one place, with perhaps millions of other people. Then make it accessible at any time, because you know the Government may need it.
Lofgren said the data retention requirements are easily avoided because they only apply to "commercial" providers. Criminals would simply go to libraries or Starbucks coffeehouses and use the Web anonymously, she said, while law-abiding Americans would have their activities recorded."
What do you want to bet that there will soon be cards you have to have to access the internet in public places. Some ID number that you have to put in before you can go anywhere online.
Brad
IP: Logged
12:35 PM
Pyrthian Member
Posts: 29569 From: Detroit, MI Registered: Jul 2002
What do you want to bet that there will soon be cards you have to have to access the internet in public places. Some ID number that you have to put in before you can go anywhere online.
Brad
The military already has done this, without your CAC card (common access card) you can not enter the network. The chip has been added to the military ID card. Other data stored on the card is your medical records and service information to include digital photos with face / finger prints. I think you are right and they will soon require all states to add this chip to your driver license or ID. Also I would not be surprised in our life time if your ID does not become your total access card for everything to include debt / credit card.
Originally posted by BlackThunderGT: I think you are right and they will soon require all states to add this chip to your driver license or ID. Also I would not be surprised in our life time if your ID does not become your total access card for everything to include debt / credit card.
See/search Real ID... was including Bio data, meaning Digital photo, eye/finger print, etc.... Until some states said no, cost too much.
------------------ Dr. Ian Malcolm: Yeah, but your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn't stop to think if they should. (Jurassic Park)
Originally posted by ryan.hess: The 19 to 10 vote represents a victory for conservative Republicans, who made data retention their first major technology initiative after last fall's elections...
Color me surprised...
IP: Logged
01:38 PM
Xanth Member
Posts: 6886 From: Massachusetts Registered: May 2006
This reminds me that in 1978, I was fingerprinted while in the first grade. The premice was that the law could help locate me if I were ever to be kidnapped.
And if you believe that the pin prick of blood sample that they took from my son minutes after birth is only going in his medical records, then let's have a Kool Aid party.
Be afraid. Be very afraid.
And I agree with Formula88, your vision can be blurred when trying to pick sides. As I recall, there is only one side... America. (Just hit me. Is it racism if you hate another political party? I mean, it is hate just the same? *sarcasm off* )
Tony
Edit: You all know where I stand on racist pricks.
[This message has been edited by Tony Kania (edited 07-29-2011).]
Why the heck do I put my pride in us being for "less government" when Representatives just voted for more government intrusion? I feel betrayed.
Because represenative Government is a fallacy. They tell you whatever you want to hear to get elected, and then throw that out the window after they are in office. All politicians do it, nobody is going to bat for you or me.
And every election cycle we are told if we dont vote we cant complain or whatever... but see what happens if you do vote?
Is this what any of us voted for?????
Dont matter who wins.. this last November proved that. The wool has been pulled from the eyes of many here with this item, but I bet they will get scared of he truth and put it right back over their eyes again.
Your elected offcials are complicit in the destruction of our liberty.. every dang one of them. Patriot Act too.. it just sickens me.
If this bill goes through (And I hope to GOD it gets vetoed) I drop my home net access. Thats it.
They will not be chipping or national IDing me either... not without shots fired.
IP: Logged
12:55 PM
MidEngineManiac Member
Posts: 29566 From: Some unacceptable view Registered: Feb 2007
They will not be chipping or national IDing me either... not without shots fired.
Thank you, Sir....and call me up when that happens....I can fly a plane and run a riffle, and aim a rocket....and the only chip they will ever put in me is in the corpse...
The military already has done this, without your CAC card (common access card) you can not enter the network. The chip has been added to the military ID card. Other data stored on the card is your medical records and service information to include digital photos with face / finger prints. I think you are right and they will soon require all states to add this chip to your driver license or ID. Also I would not be surprised in our life time if your ID does not become your total access card for everything to include debt / credit card.
Because represenative Government is a fallacy. They tell you whatever you want to hear to get elected, and then throw that out the window after they are in office. All politicians do it, nobody is going to bat for you or me.
My only problem with this is: all politicians are like us. They went to the same schools, learned the same things, and many had the same parents (yes, there is probably some form of class-difference in here, I'll admit). I would love to find myself in political office later in life. With my job I'll be able to meet the people necessary to do that. And I'm a Joe Schmoe! I refuse to believe that all politicians are a different breed than I am. I think many if not most politicians had the desire to get into politics because they wanted to help represent the People and change things for the better. Maybe I'm living in a dream, I don't know... But I'll always keep voting for who I think holds my interests at heart, and hopefully I don't get betrayed too heavily by doing so.
My only problem with this is: all politicians are like us. They went to the same schools, learned the same things,
No, most didn't. Most grew up in out of touch wealthy families and went to private schools and had a 'privileged' upbringing and career. Often times they are even generational legislature families.
They learned they are 'better' than us and are 'smarter'. Once they get to Washington their pathological arrogance shows.
IP: Logged
05:11 PM
Doug85GT Member
Posts: 9480 From: Sacramento CA USA Registered: May 2003
SEC. 4. RETENTION OF CERTAIN RECORDS BY ELECTRONIC 8 COMMUNICATION SERVICE PROVIDERS. 9 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 2703 of title 18, United 10 States Code, is amended by adding at the end the fol- 11 lowing: 12 ‘‘(h) RETENTION OF CERTAIN RECORDS.—A pro- 13 vider of an electronic communication service or remote 14 computing service shall retain for a period of at least 18 15 months the temporarily assigned network addresses the 16 service assigns to each account, unless that address is 17 transmitted by radio communication (as defined in section 18 3 of the Communications Act of 1934).’’. 19 (b) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of Con- 20 gress that records retained pursuant to section 2703(h) 21 of title 18, United States Code, should be stored securely 22 to protect customer privacy and prevent against breaches 23 of the records.
No, most didn't. Most grew up in out of touch wealthy families and went to private schools and had a 'privileged' upbringing and career. Often times they are even generational legislature families.
They learned they are 'better' than us and are 'smarter'. Once they get to Washington their pathological arrogance shows.
But if those same people go to Wall Street they are demigods.
So the lesson here is to use 3G or ( ISP provided ) wifi...
I think the lesson is that this is all a big overreaction by a lot of chicken littles. This bill requires ISPs to record who is assigned to what IP for 18 months. So what? If you have a static IP address, like most people who have broadband service, then your ISP knows your IP address anyway.
Here is part of a more balanced news story on this bill:
The U.S. Department of Justice and an organization representing police chiefs from around the country have previously called for legislation mandating ISPs to retain certain customer usage data for up to two years, saying that policies that only require ISPs to preserve usage data at the specific request of law enforcement authorities are not sufficient to go after online predators and criminals. The DOJ however wants wireless carriers as well to be required to keep user records.
Investigators need the assistance of ISPs to identify users and distributors of online child pornography, Smith said in a statement on his web site. The new bill requires ISPs to retain subscriber records, similar to records retained by telephone companies, to aid law enforcement officials in their fight against child sexual exploitation, he added.
When investigators develop leads that might result in saving a child or apprehending a pedophile, their efforts should not be frustrated because vital records were destroyed simply because there was no requirement to retain them, Smith said.
The bill also amends Section 2703 to state that it is the sense of Congress that records retained pursuant to the new Section 2703(h) of title 18, United States Code, should be stored securely to protect customer privacy and prevent against breaches of the records.
Many ISPs already retain the records solely for law enforcement use in these cases, and many children's lives have been saved because of it, Schultz said in the statement.
I suppose, but how long until they use that information for something else? Even if the law doesn't allow it now, what's to stop them from passing some future legislation to see who's been going somewhere on the web that isn't "approved of" by the current administration? That's if they even take time to pass some other legislation. What if they find in some other legislation, something that they think gives them that legal opportunity?
IP: Logged
11:04 AM
Marvin McInnis Member
Posts: 11599 From: ~ Kansas City, USA Registered: Apr 2002
I think the lesson is that this is all a big overreaction ...
I agree. For example, the phone company has always kept track of your telephone number ... even published it for all the world to see.
quote
If you have a static IP address, like most people who have broadband service, then your ISP knows your IP address anyway.
FWIW, most non-business IP address delegations by an ISP are dynamic, not static. These days they tend not to change very often, but the ISP can and will change them without notice. That said, since the ISP makes the IP delegation out of the block they are assigned by IANA the ISP certainly knows your address.
[This message has been edited by Marvin McInnis (edited 07-31-2011).]
IP: Logged
11:14 AM
jimbolaya Member
Posts: 10652 From: Virginia Beach, Virginia Registered: Feb 2007
"Less government" my patoot. Good thing we filled the house with people who would vote for this in the last election cycle, huh? Why would Republicans, claiming they are for less government, approve this bill? Say one thing do the other, the politician way.
And Ryan is right, its an emotionally charged bait and switch, and uses Children as an excuse to exercise more control and gives us even less privacy.
Because politicians are always politicians. They never have the courage to lead and stand up for what is right. This was an emotionally charged bill, and few were brave enough to stand against it. Buckle your seat belt fellas, the world is coming to an end.
Jim
Edit: In case it's not clear, my thumbsdown icon is aimed toward the bill, not your quote Tbone.
[This message has been edited by jimbolaya (edited 07-31-2011).]
IP: Logged
11:39 AM
fierobear Member
Posts: 27083 From: Safe in the Carolinas Registered: Aug 2000
"Less government" my patoot. Good thing we filled the house with people who would vote for this in the last election cycle, huh? Why would Republicans, claiming they are for less government, approve this bill? Say one thing do the other, the politician way.
While I agree that Republicans shouldn't be voting for bills like this, don't give us any crap about Democrats being for smaller government. You know damn well that isn't true, especially over the last few years.
edit: FYI, the co-sponsors of the bill...15 Republicans, 10 Democrats.
Originally posted by tbone42: Dont matter who wins.. this last November proved that.
You must WANT to believe it doesn't matter. It is the freshmen Republicans who have been fighting to get the debt in check, for example, and to pass a balanced budget amendment. They've been pissing off the GOP establishment, and I think that's a GOOD thing.
Anyway, if you read past the sensationalized article headline, this isn't about tracking your exact web surfing habits, it is about keeping records of your IP address. Like someone said, that's not much different than your phone records.
Anyway, if you read past the sensationalized article headline, this isn't about tracking your exact web surfing habits, it is about keeping records of your IP address. Like someone said, that's not much different than your phone records.
I dont want them keeping records of my IP address either. If you do, thats you wanting to give up your anonymity and maybe later risk your surfing habits being scrutinized and possibly prosecuted. Looks like a stepping stone to me when they will say next "Well, we already keep track of their ISP:.. and then the next step is taken. Not for me, thanks. But you go ahead and keep on cheerleading for bigger, more intrusive government. We know where you really stand.
[This message has been edited by tbone42 (edited 07-31-2011).]
Because politicians are always politicians. They never have the courage to lead and stand up for what is right. This was an emotionally charged bill, and few were brave enough to stand against it. Buckle your seat belt fellas, the world is coming to an end.
Jim
Edit: In case it's not clear, my thumbsdown icon is aimed toward the bill, not your quote Tbone.
heh.. "thumbsup" Jim! I knew what you meant.
IP: Logged
01:26 PM
fierobear Member
Posts: 27083 From: Safe in the Carolinas Registered: Aug 2000
Originally posted by tbone42: But you go ahead and keep on cheerleading for bigger, more intrusive government.
That's bullshit, tbone. I've been against bigger government, and you KNOW IT. I'm not cheerleading anything, I'm just trying not to jump to conclusions about this bill.
quote
We know where you really stand.
No you don't. You're just setting up a strawman and arguing against it. The jury is out on whether this bill is bigger government and/or more intrusive then laws such as phone records.
No you don't. You're just setting up a strawman and arguing against it. The jury is out on whether this bill is bigger government and/or more intrusive then laws such as phone records.
Did Glenn Beck teach you that term? He's the only one I have ever heard use it (and A LOT) besides you and the other poll-parrots who worship him.
And yeah I do know your position.. you could care less what happens in this country as long as you perceive your "side" as winning. I think its unpatriotic and foolish.
[This message has been edited by tbone42 (edited 07-31-2011).]
IP: Logged
02:58 PM
Marvin McInnis Member
Posts: 11599 From: ~ Kansas City, USA Registered: Apr 2002
I dont want them keeping records of my IP address either. If you do, thats you wanting to give up your anonymity ...
As a matter of law the U.S. Constitution guarantees freedom of expression and freedom of association, but it does not explicitly grant the right to exercise those other rights anonymously.
Personally, I strongly support a right to privacy (unlike Justice Scalia, among others), but not anonymity.
[This message has been edited by Marvin McInnis (edited 07-31-2011).]
IP: Logged
03:18 PM
fierobear Member
Posts: 27083 From: Safe in the Carolinas Registered: Aug 2000
Originally posted by tbone42: Did Glenn Beck teach you that term? He's the only one I have ever heard use it (and A LOT) besides you and the other poll-parrots who worship him.
No. And no.
I've know about the term "strawman" for several years. I started watching Beck 2 years ago.
And yeah I do know your position.. you could care less what happens in this country as long as you perceive your "side" as winning. I think its unpatriotic and foolish.
Then you don't know crap.
You sure don't seem to be getting many things correct, given that you make a lot of assumptions, and they are often incorrect.
IP: Logged
04:40 PM
fierobear Member
Posts: 27083 From: Safe in the Carolinas Registered: Aug 2000
As a matter of law the U.S. Constitution guarantees freedom of expression and freedom of association, but it does not explicitly grant the right to exercise those other rights anonymously.
Personally, I strongly support a right to privacy (unlike Justice Scalia, among others), but not anonymity.
You and I often disagree and seem to be on different ends of the political spectrum. Do you think this bill is OK?
Because politicians are always politicians. They never have the courage to lead and stand up for what is right. This was an emotionally charged bill, and few were brave enough to stand against it. Buckle your seat belt fellas, the world is coming to an end.
