What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
Best Buy Employees Turn Carolers For A Day view!
www.youtube.com/bestbuy - Go behind the scenes to see real employees croon their way to star in Best Buy's holiday campaign.
95 Comments
- FlyboyP, on 10/12/2007, -0/+54Fear the Others. Surrender your Liberty.
We have always been at war with Oceania. - zweben, on 10/12/2007, -1/+29Hey, if they're going to do this, why don't they just make everyone in the US sign in to a National Security Web Activity Recorder before we can use the soon to be "Network Neutrality" free internet.
And at the end of the day, Homeland security will read our browsing history, and if we typed the words "freedom" or "liberty" too much, they'll arrest us.
I wouldn't be too surprised anymore.
(PS- for all of you idiots who digg sarcasm down because you think the person is serious, NO, I don't REALLY think people are going to get arrested for typing "liberty" too much. This is just me being pissed off.) - ucbrave92, on 10/12/2007, -2/+24all they are doing is using child porn as an excuse to implement a total police state environment on the web. this way if anyone is against it they can immediately throw out the, "you are against stopping child porn" label. don't you love how "free" we are now! remember in the united states it is guilty until proven innocent! i guess our wonderful administration probably looks at commie china at thinks "man, if we could only do what they're doing." it's a sad day when a government supposedly of the people no longer listens or cares what the people think.
- r©ain, on 10/12/2007, -1/+23The sad thing is that on Digg, you DO have to explain sarcasm.
- tomfinn, on 10/12/2007, -1/+22Child porn is the excuse on the web and terrorism is the excuse for everything else.
- PBoiIceBerg, on 10/12/2007, -4/+23People need to get this notion out of their head that Bush is the cause of all the wrongs going on. He's just a front man used to hide the people that will stay in power long after he is out of office.
- orabox, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14We pay for it
Tax money is my money - sporkwitch, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14Taking a "well they won't find anything on my system anyway" stance is never good. Whether they monitor what you do, or physically come into your house and search at a whim, it's just as invasive, and they have no right to do so without probable cause (something that seems to have been forgotten around 9/11). Just because the most illegal thing they'd find in my traffic is the occasional "questionable download" (sorry, I can't warrant the 300 dollar investment of Adobe PhotoShop and ImageReady when I'm just slapping together little gifs and recompressing my photos), doesn't mean I'm willing to hand up my right to privacy.
Snooping into what I'm browsing is no different than monitoring what books I read at the library, it's just one more way to try to persecute those that are thinking in a manner they don't want. Just because they don't burn the books, so to speak, doesnt' mean they're any less evil than Nazi Germany when it comes to some of their policies these days. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -12/+25I believe the reason everything is becoming more restricted and less free has to do with a nasty 4 letter word..................Bush.
Lets hope in a few years things can be reversed. - DougTanner, on 10/12/2007, -3/+16I just hope this doesn't apply to my Canadian ISP. It probably doesn't, but Dugg anyway because setting a precedent like this is scary as hell.
- jimrooney, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13I thought about commenting, but this one is just doubleplus good. I can add nothing.
- drawkbox, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14People say Bush may be good in history, bs... Doesn't anyone want a president that makes our life good now, that whole argument is basically Bush sucks but after they rewrite history and throw it down the memory hole then he will be looked at as a good legacy? This is really sad.
- youareretarded, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12The title is a bit misleading but the AT and others are looking into REQUIRING data retention.
"Congress is now considering policy changes, as News.com reported last week. At least one U.S. House of Representatives leader indicated he is mulling legislation that would require data retention."
Just because it hasn't happened or may even be unlikely to happen doesn't mean we should ignore it! - linuxrebel, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12You and I pay for it.
BTW 1984 began in 2004 .... The Gov is always 20 years behind..... - sporkwitch, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10Agreed. Communism and Socialism both work wonderfully on paper, but thanks to corrupt individuals in the governing hierarchy, as well as human nature in itself, it just doesn't work (as much as I wish it did.)
- tearor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10 It seems that "the children" have become the reason for everything that is being forced on us. And while I agree on principles, not everything in life that looks good on paper is feasible.
- drawkbox, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Is a country free if all digital traffic is imprisoned and checked after and filtered like we are criminals?
- locojones, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9The ramblings of one senator that he's mulling legislation is hardly cause for people to go *****. When and if this bill ever comes to a committee, they're going to have to look at hard, objective evidence to support it. That means an investigation into the breadth, depth, and frequency of child sex crimes on the Internet which, and this is just my guess, isn't the "epidemic" these Senators insist it is, or as news organizations would like to dramatize it. Then they're going to have to weigh the cost to the public to enact the bill against any benefit that comes from the bill. And there will be serious questions that will need answers:
1) How many ISPs will shut down due to cost, or the threat of criminal sanctions if they don't retain their records?
2) This cost will obviously be passed along to the consumer, how much are you going to risk people just disconnecting their service because they either can't afford it, or don't want the receipients of their e-mail saved indefinitely?
3) How much child pornography or child sex crimes will this legislation REALLY prevent?
4) Versus how many violations of personal privacy will ensue from the retention of the info and its inevitable use by the authorities investigating other crimes? This also represents the holy grail for the MPAA and RIAA to subpoena...
5) Won't sophisticated child predators just use anonymous networks such as Tor, or connect to their victims via proxies so that the ISP log only shows a proxied address?
6) And how come nobody is asking the real question - why does it take so long to track down a child predator or pedophile to require an ISP to keep its logs for a year?
7) Or alternatively, isn't child pornography just being used as a pretext to require data retention to further the development of a police state, since the whole terrorism rationalization has become tired and transparent? - cheerio, on 10/12/2007, -0/+81. One approach would require businesses to record only the Internet address that is assigned to a customer at a specific time.
2. The second version, which is closer to what Europe adopted, would call for retention of more information including telephone numbers dialed, contents of Web pages visited, and recipients of e-mail messages.
For 1, I thought they already did this. For #2, omg that is scary. All they would get from me a month 80ish GB of umm, legal compressed data. o_O This is going to cause heavy problems for broad band users. US Congress knows squat about technology. This is why we get lame laws passed that cause problems later because they are very missimformed. Companys like the RIAA lobby support for things such as these with "why it is important to have" and these people from the last century who cannot set their VCR clock just nodd "that make sence." Hopefully the EFF gets involved on this. Dug--(good article, scares me though) - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9What is the point of your comment? Are you implying that we should not try to break the cycle of history? Or are you simply stating the obivious for no particular reason?
- sporkwitch, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8IIRC they're actually trying to make it illegal for a business to have an UNsecured AP. But yeah, regarding personal use, the government never wants you to have encryption (look how they went after Skype, and luckily Skype waved the "*havy fake-french accent* screw you, you stupid american pig-dogs, we are not in your country!" flag ^_^), and basically they take the stance of "well, if you use encryption, you must have something to hide. Yes, yes I do, I'm doing the same thing I do when I close my shades, I'm hiding my PRIVATE life, Big Brother's eyes.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8whos going to pay for the added storage?
- cheshire76, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7at&t and Verizon will get serious tax breaks for helping out with the storage. But, it'll also postpone their overdue plans to have broadband nationwide by another 10 years.
- geminitojanus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7"Just because it hasn't happened or may even be unlikely to happen doesn't mean we should ignore it!"
On the contrary, we should be more mindful now, before it HAS happened, than later, when it may HAVE happened. Right now, we have the chance to change things before they go into effect. And I know this may have been beaten to a pulp by TWIT and others, but we've really got to be proactive about it, and who we vote for because of it, and a great organization that's working towards that is IPac (http://ipaction.org/ ). The only way we can change things is if we vote the people who are wanting these changes out of Office, and actively work towards keeping them out of office. - sporkwitch, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6As far as catching the squirmy criminals, I call "*****." I'd be willing to bet a lot of money (though granted I have almost none at the moment, thank you Bush economy) that this legislation MIGHT catch an extra 2 or 3 perverts. Now what I think this legislation will be REALLY effective at is catching an extra 200 or 300 people for targeting by the RIAA Terror Teams. Not to mention the government would love to know that you read about freedom, rights, stuff the US USED to stand for, and god forbid you look into things like socialism or moving to another country, or even just something security related, who cares if it's what you do for a living...
- combatchuck, on 10/12/2007, -0/+61) None. They'll pass the cost on to the customer.
2) People are sheep. They don't care as long as they can look for pictures of britney's *****.
3) Much like in the past, the fault lies not in the policy, it lies in the execution. Several different agencies working toward one common goal from different angles with no real communication or coordination.
4) Hopefully if it is put into action, it will be written so that there is a strict requirement that the person being investigated is a known or suspected child pornographer, and would be inadmissible for any other crimes. I'm referring specifically to the civil infractions of downloading music or movies. The recording industries would cream themselves if they could get into those logs.
5) They already do that.
6) The government moves glacially slow when compared to the internet. Come to think of it, the government moves glacially slow when compared to glaciers.
7) *shakeshakeshake* My anonymous source says "Signs point to yes." This country needs an enemy to fight to maintain maximum fear and consumption. - MattDavis, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7It isn't the JOB of ISP's in this country to help the government investigate it's citizens. All we can do is hope the people running those ISP's REALIZE it.... not holding my breath.
- linuxrebel, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7First IANAL but just curious. If everyone (and I mean everyone) went out and bought a wireless router.... and then turned that router on without a wep key or wpa. I wonder what this would do. I mean, if everyones net access is open to the world, who's to say who did what on who's network and when?
I'm no fool here. Anything I so stupid as to allow my kids to do without parental guidance and supervision is dangerous. According to my kids and their friends the only ones who "find" predators are the ones looking for them actively. I'm told "Daddy it's so obvious they are losers" I've learned that despite the gum popping and eye rolling they do hear some of what I'm saying. But too often they are like one young kid I know of. Telling me that his mom never knows where he is. So for fun I called this kids house and asked for the kid. The kids mom spent 10 minutes yelling the kids name, came back to the phone and told me " " was just here a minute ago. The kid had been at my house for the last 24 hours (sleep over)
Gruesome Sex cases... sounds like the terrorist angle doesn't work anymore. - sporkwitch, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6I wouldn't be surprised if yours is already doing it. From what I've been reading these last couple months, Canada is the only place whose ISPs are actually WORSE than those in the US.
- blanski, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5So I haven't seen anyone ask what we can do about this. So I'll be the first. What can we do about it?
- camgangrel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5as for what this looks like is this. The MPAA and RIAA will now have a way to get TO YOU not haveing to go though the way it is right now. Just means more money for them in the long road. I should know I have been sued by the ***** MPAA over the movie Robots. that I had download when it first came out. Just to make 10 year old happy. I did not have the money to take her to the move nor did her Mom or Dad. So I tolded her Dad I would get a copy. Will about 8 Mouths past and then I get a John Doe bullsh*t thing from the MPAA wanting 25,000 from me. I have as of this date not payed them a Red Cent.
- jimrooney, on 10/12/2007, -5/+10Dude man... don't give them ideas!
The sad thing is that the people that don't get sarcasm ARE the ones making these laws. - syko21, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8Misleading title, the attorney general is looking into the idea of ASKING ISP's to retain information. This is a farcry from having mandatory data retention something that will most likely make broadband ISP's sit down and cry from all the torrent data flooding their servers. No diggs.
- SkeletaLlama, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Well if you guys don't support the government in this, then you must be terrorist child pornographers.
- youareretarded, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Yeah, I just didn't want to get into the details.
Take away a little here and a little there and soon enough you end up with nothing. - SkeletaLlama, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4And every time those governments become more restrictive and oppessive, they collapse. These things always come immediately before a collapse. If things continue down this path, expect a New American Revolution within your lifetime.
- pronto, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6pretty soon the word 'bush' is gonna be considerd a bad word if it isnt already :P
the government should let us do what we want the the net, well... get them child molsters...and get em good... - 5blocksfree, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6@drawkbox
I think you are quite wrong about this. The problem is that Bush has crappy advisors, refuses to see this, and refuses to heed the advice of those in the know, including his own father. The result is that he's allowing the wrong kinds of people to occupy positions that involve real policy making- we are left with these rediculous policies written (or influenced) by neo-con morons, whose agenda is far-fetched and unquestionably self-serving. Who else do you think we should blame for his failure to heed the advice of those who have more experience than he does? - alesis69, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4We are getting a similar law here in Europe. Known as the Data Retention Law.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Quit voting these mother ***** into office. Find a third party or third parties that oppose(s) all the ***** that has gone on in the country recently, and vote for their candidates and only their candidates (barring someone exceptional, like Representative Boucher trying to temper the DMCA for years).
- Murdats, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4isnt this true for any aspect of life, just look at how great democrocy and republicism are working out. any corruption in any system will bring it down, its the whole chain is only as strong as its weakest link thing
wether a political system, organic system, computer system, 1 thing going wrong has the power to bring it all down (or much more likely just cause problems) - youareretarded, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I thought just talking about it was good enough, I don't actually want to waste my time fighting this.:p
That's a good question though. - combatchuck, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4First, I would hope that if they write this, it wouldn't be available for civil suits. It would be for the specific purpose of internet crimes involving children or child pornography. The recording industry, not being a law enforcement agency, wouldn't have access to it. Of course, I'm living a fantasy. I know that the access would be available to the highest bidder.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3It's kinda like how cops hide in a cubby on the side of the road to catch speeders, versus, sitting out in the open. They WANT people to speed so they can catch them, instead of deterring them by being visible. Same goes with visible cameras versus hidden traffic cameras.
I think the right thing is to deter illegal activity from happening in the first place, not let it happen so you can catch it and fill a quota. Things might be different for computer traffic. I just know, I don't want to be treated like a criminal by default. But I don't want their job security to be based on catching people either, they should be deterring us, not catching us. - youareretarded, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Only because mistakes do happen or corruption for that matter.
- deepsub, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4The Bush administration is a religious theocracy run amok.
- youareretarded, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The governments already trying to make it illegal for either using an unencrypted AP or having one!
But I guess if everyone breaks the law they have no other option but to change the law. - sporkwitch, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3That's a moot point (as appealing as the thought is, lol), seeing as the Bush regime isn't being charged for the laws they've already broken with their illegal and unfounded domestic wiretapping.
- youareretarded, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I could go for that, but it would have to be death and no alternatives but death. One appeal only and a 5 year limit for the appeal.
- alesis69, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3very unpopular http://www.dataretentionisnosolution.com/
but mainstream public is uninformed and/or doesn't care -
Show 51 - 95 of 95 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is