What control does the US Senate have over the internet?

**dj_stick** · Jul 24, 2004, 11:49 PM

Read the news article here before postign a reply please.

i don't see how any member of any government can ban protocols on the internet. The US government, nor any government, has any control over the internet whatsoever, apart from servers that lie within their borders.

Nacht · Jul 25, 2004, 12:51 AM

ahh it's just another person attempting to create legislation for something he/she doesnt understand. it happens all of the time, and it wont get through. nothing to worry about

**dj_stick** · Jul 25, 2004, 12:54 AM

but what i don't understand is the amount of times they try this

Warpy · Jul 25, 2004, 02:36 AM

Perhaps he is trying to set a "goodie two shoes" attitude towards his audiance. He probably doesn't even know what P2P is... If anything he probably has his finger in the pie along with the Bin Laden family... Would't surprise me if he is as corrupt as your current President.

After all it's about power isnt it, and I'm sure the Saudi's would love to be in on his plans to decieve the nation.

Bush is a dip stick and lets hope they count the numbers this year for all voters!

Falstaff · Jul 25, 2004, 04:52 AM

The chinese are extremely successful throttling any anti government web traffic, and they got help from Cisco, we take the internet for granted but like driving an automobile, it is a privelege, not a right and it can be taken away.

me.myself.&.ATi · Jul 25, 2004, 09:01 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by fallang_jeff
The chinese are extremely successful throttling any anti government web traffic, and they got help from Cisco, we take the internet for granted but like driving an automobile, it is a privelege, not a right and it can be taken away.

Jeff....i have the utmost respect for you & your artwork but what you just said crosses the line....
since when has driving a car been/become a privilige??

This is exactly the kind of (MISLEADING) thoughts that the upper class imposes on the lower class
just to have us under their thumbs!!!!!

I mean c'mon Bro'.......when will it become a privilige to be ALIVE then???!!!!!

Honestly.....they should try to reward the few people for the things they do right, put that in the spotlight &
maybe then more will follow....

instead of inducing FEAR & TERROR with such medieval thoughts.....

I hope you see what my point is .....

Plz do excuse me for the harsh tone....as right now i'm a very ill (Lyme-disease) but just could not resist to comment on this.

Remember....."As long as personal interest is of matter, No cause is a good cause!"

May all the Gods's watch over us .....

Truly Yours,

Me.Myself.&.ATi

LeanWolf · Jul 25, 2004, 09:31 AM

um.. don't be peeved now but jeff's right, driving is a privelege. Like it or not, your gov decides what you can and cannot do (ie what's legal)! Look at canabis vs alcohol for one example.

caqde · Jul 25, 2004, 10:06 AM

The computers come and the politicians go insane.

Senator Hatch is just following the wave of stupidity going around. Wonder what the next bright idea is going to be???

Hopefully one day they will learn to go forwards instead of backwards. But for now it looks like DMCA 2.0 is on their minds. But at least some representatives are against it. To bad they're the minority at the moment as it seems.

Nacht · Jul 25, 2004, 12:23 PM

jeff has a valid point. while we will never have to undergo the filtering of websites and ban of protocols, we dont realize how lucky we have it. driving, like voting is a priviledge. if you screw up, it can and will be taken away.

Falstaff · Jul 25, 2004, 12:34 PM

I worked for the intelligence community and my family has for quite a few years, whether we admit it or not, the government prefers we openly communicate behind fragile firewalls and protocols and continue to use our cell phones with wanton abandon. The NSA and similiar organizations have the power and routinely exercise the right to monitor and record all electronic traffic in the Continental United States and Europe, encrypted or not, information is gathered, collated, deciphered or transcribed for the benefit of intelligence. You and I are not secruity threats,but they know who are, and they would rather follow the fox back to the den, than catch him in the hen house. I am not decieved by the claims of total security and 100% firewalled servers, etc etc..The government has and will continue to remain vigilient, and let simple folks like us enjoy ourselves. Read the fine print in the Patriot Act, it was there to legitimize the activity that is already being performed or conducted to gather information. Some people call it the mark of the beast, and Bill Gates is the Anti Christ...whatever, but I never forget, the more dependent on electronic communication, and gullably pretend it is totally secure, the easier it is to assume we are beyond the reach of the NSA and their brother and sister entities worldwide...I cannot speak for the soviets,. and know little else about the chinese, but our governments and tech companies actually assist them. The "free" internet is not entirely without peril, no matter how hard we believe it is safe. I do not bear false witness, for I have lived within the bubble and know what we are capable of. Within two years, we will see dramatic changes in which our government pursues and prosecutes threats, what better way than to detect, and eliminate the threats without raising eyebrows.

digerati · Jul 25, 2004, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by me.myself.&.ATi
Jeff....i have the utmost respect for you & your artwork but what you just said crosses the line....
since when has driving a car been/become a privilige??

It says in my States driving booklets.

"Remember, driving is a privelage, not a right."

Which is why you can get your license suspended or revoked for drunk driving.

Guidoo · Jul 25, 2004, 04:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Nacht
jeff has a valid point. while we will never have to undergo the filtering of websites and ban of protocols, we dont realize how lucky we have it. driving, like voting is a priviledge. if you screw up, it can and will be taken away.

Actually voting is a right...a felony can result in suspension or revocation of said right, much as other rights are stripped away for criminal acts. Six states (Alabama, Florida, Iowa, Kentucky, Mississippi, and Virginia) take away vote for life. Others have various waiting periods, dependencies on crime commited etc etc. Unlike a privilege you do not have to pass a test (ie
drivers exam). As long as you are a citizen of legal age you have the right to vote.
Quote from the 26th amendment of the US Constitution

Quote:

The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age.

Guido

ToshiroOC · Jul 25, 2004, 04:58 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by me.myself.&.ATi
Jeff....i have the utmost respect for you & your artwork but what you just said crosses the line....
since when has driving a car been/become a privilige??

This is exactly the kind of (MISLEADING) thoughts that the upper class imposes on the lower class
just to have us under their thumbs!!!!!

I mean c'mon Bro'.......when will it become a privilige to be ALIVE then???!!!!!

There are no rights not given to us by the power of the majority, and no privilege given to us except by the power of the majority. If the majority of America decided that you should not drive a car, no amount of exclaiming that it is your right to drive a car will prevent you from stopping them. If the majority of America decided that you should not live, no amount of exclaiming that it is your right to live will prevent you from stopping them. Rights are not absolutes, they are protections that we have built into our own society for our own sake.

But as far as the car issue goes, would you argue that a drunken man should have the right to drive a car on public roads wherever he wishes? Is it somehow the upper class imposing an illegitimate will to keep that man from possibly hitting a pedestrian?

insurrection · Jul 25, 2004, 06:11 PM

^ somehow i dont think thats what he meant...

Quote:

The Induce Act, which enjoys broad support in the music industry and from a handful of software companies, is designed to overturn an April 2003 ruling from a California judge that said StreamCast Networks, which distributes Morpheus, and Grokster were not liable for copyright infringements that took place using their software. Critics of the bill warn that it could make hardware makers like Apple and Toshiba--and even journalists--liable for products and reviews that could "induce" the public to violate copyright law.

i cant believe im reading this crap. especially the thing about journalists. thats ridiculous.

Nacht · Jul 25, 2004, 08:25 PM

it doesnt matter what he meant, it shows he didnt think through the entire thing.