Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page:  « First  ‹ Previous  1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (7 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Quinton Aiken
You already know what I think.
01:35 PM on 04/26/2013
So sharing information is okay by republican standards - I mean sharing information on anything but guns.
Oh I know, I know, somehow this is different.
photo
Opposition Research
Studying the enemies of civil liberty for 20 years
02:55 PM on 04/26/2013
The GOP likes their guns, or how else could they shoot the messenger?
03:35 PM on 04/28/2013
Apples and oranges. That's like saying the CISPA is good because it "shares information" with the government. We're talking about a lowly regulated internet. Just like we should have lowly regulated firearms. Obviously the age of 18 for purchasing a rifle and 21 for a handgun would still be there, along with all other current laws. But banning guns with more than 10 rounds, banning certain makes and models, banning anything with "one military characteristic or more" which means no pistol grips or an adjustable stock etc, is insane. Why should we ban scary looking guns? . Inb4 you bring up mass shootings.... Violent crime has been dropping ever since the automatic weapons ban was removed. When the assault weapons ban was there, it didn't stop columbine. We can't even enforce the laws we have now correctly, why should we add more restrictions on the second amendment? None of the proposed laws would have stopped the sandy hook shooting and having a speech with little children in the background is pimping the graves of dead children. Flat out lying and saying 90 percent of gun owners support his agenda and then calling his failure to pass his bill " a shameful day in Washington" is demagoguery. Restrictions and bans aren't going to bother criminals. That's why they're criminals. On the other hand, law-abiding gun owners would be put at a disadvantage against their attackers. Black markets = yay for criminals.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Quinton Aiken
You already know what I think.
10:44 PM on 04/28/2013
Thanks for making my point. Somehow it's different, it's always different. No matter what it is, no matter how it is, Guns are always a different story. It's always about protecting those guns. Anything and everything else is of no consequence, as long as you protect those guns.
botazefa
Sounds like Bodhisattva
01:33 PM on 04/26/2013
Dear Senate: How about taking-up bills that help the people instead of bills that help government agencies?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Susan GB
Time is an illusion in the process of dissolving.
01:44 PM on 04/26/2013
The point of the article was to say that very thing. They will note vote on it.
botazefa
Sounds like Bodhisattva
01:49 PM on 04/26/2013
I disagree. I think the point of the article was to say the Senate was going to reject the House bill to instead create it's own version of the bill.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
03:42 PM on 04/26/2013
If you had any idea as to what a full on, even partially successful cyber attack could do; You may see this as something that does help and protect the people. It may not be the "right" or "best" law we will have to see what the Senate comes up with.
botazefa
Sounds like Bodhisattva
03:52 PM on 04/26/2013
I have deep experience with cyber security. Deep, daily, 20+ years experience.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
David Furritus
I'm not here to justify your labels
01:23 PM on 04/26/2013
Okay, on one hand I can see how needed security could help stop unwanted cyber crime - on the other hand, I don't think it will stop the serious cyber criminals since they've been dealing with this kind of security since they had their first 300 baud modem. All it's really going to do is make life a living hell for the common person that tries to use information devices on a daily basis.

What next? Background checks and mental health screenings before handing out Facebook accounts?

I am SO glad that the Senate is taking the high ground on this one
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
colorowdy
what you do in life is what makes the difference
12:28 PM on 04/26/2013
Good It is spy techniques plain and simple.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:25 PM on 04/26/2013
Rockefeller wants this this invasion of privacy? surprising NOT!
photo
Opposition Research
Studying the enemies of civil liberty for 20 years
02:50 PM on 04/26/2013
The support in the House came overwhelmingly from Republicans. Sadly, some Dems signed on, too.
photo
Marioth
Artist, Scientist, Musician
12:12 PM on 04/26/2013
Pass a bill mandating strong encryption. Isn't it a tiny bit suspicious in 2013 no email programs include easy encryption, even though the tech has been around for decades?

While strong encryption would solve many headaches, it would also mean an effective end to the warrantless data-mining and censorship efforts undertaken by most govts. Media companies would also have no one to cry at when their "intellectual" property is revealed to have originated from the stable floor, and is only worth a fraction of what is expected.

Encryption is coming. Bet on it.
photo
Opposition Research
Studying the enemies of civil liberty for 20 years
02:51 PM on 04/26/2013
I design my own encryption algorithms. And before anyone dismisses that as amateurish, cryptography has been a hobby of mine for 45 years,
12:04 PM on 04/26/2013
Some beg off from helping out with grassroots organizing to counter such legislation, claiming it is ineffectual-that the powerful elites and special interests have so much access and pull that the 'people' cannot ever win. They also then usually toss in a complaint about the political apathy of others, which from an organizer's perspective is cruel irony. I see this type of timidity and surrender mentality from third party politics to single issue efforts, and it cuts across the ideological spectrum.

But the anti-SOPA, anti-CISPA efforts are a welcome challenge to aforementioned perspective. The history of this grassroots effort should give people from all walks of life the hope that the system can change for the better if they are willing to do their small part and raise their voice in opposition. In the modern era, you don't always need a protest march, sit in, etc. You need strategic thinking by leaders, an internet-friendly group willing to get their feet wet with very basic political organizing, and resilience to keep pushing back when the special interests and their Congressional lapdogs play their process games.

Make no mistake, the enemies of privacy, the enemies of liberty, the special interests attached to using government to do their bidding, will be back with a new fear campaign on CISPA. Those who oppose them must remain vigilant. But the history of this fight is, for now, very encouraging.
photo
Marioth
Artist, Scientist, Musician
12:13 PM on 04/26/2013
Grass-roots are looking at the growing clouds of always on devices and implementing strong encryption absent the ISP model. http://projectmeshnet.org
photo
Well Armed Lamb
All tyrants first appear to be your protector
11:54 AM on 04/26/2013
Good!...finally the Senate does something useful...
11:42 AM on 04/26/2013
Good that this is delayed. We need to be ever vigilant because IT WILL BE BACK!
photo
whomx
Unions are people,corporations not so much.
11:41 AM on 04/26/2013
The House and Republi-cons, Claim Big government when it comes to BIg Business.

They are perfectly fine with big government taking away the rights of we the People.
lurkinman
Clear thinking is best served non-partisan
12:08 PM on 04/26/2013
"We're the government, and we're here to help you."

No thanks.
09:52 AM on 04/26/2013
It seems to me, the private sector and our government should be less active in sharing info and more active in developing counter-hacking technologies, and the only time their would be sharing of info would be when in fact the private company has been or is currently being hacked. The idea that the private sector automatically has to share Internet info with our government, means the private sector would trust the government not to abuse potentially sensitive info about their customers and/or patent, copyright info, and our government has shown time and again it doesn't deserve to be trusted on these privacy matters, mostly proven by the governments own failed security systems in the WikiLeaks affair. In effect, when a government security clerk might learn something vital and secret about a private company, the temptation for that government security clerk would be too great for the clerk to sell such info for huge profits. Best we have legislation designed to detect incoming hacker activity, without allowing the government to fully enter the database of the private company, and design counter-hacking systems to achieve this goal. In sum, allowing any government system total access to any private company's computer system is just asking for too much trust in the thousands of government workers who might have access to that company's system, for their would bound to be at least one corrupt government worker accessing that company's system.
11:24 AM on 04/26/2013
Gov't clerks wouldn't be running the operation, dummy. The NSA would be running it. Nevertheless, I don't want that to happen, and I am happy the bill was killed. It is nothing but a KGB kind of operation.
photo
MostlyRightLefty
the gop made it personal...!!
09:20 AM on 04/26/2013
killing this bill, even if it is only temporary is good for us.

it was just more of the in your face legislation from the gop.
giving big business and gov. inroads to take away a few more of our freedoms.

so tired of the gop telling us about how they are for smaller gov. as they pass bills that are "HUGE" when it comes to controlling our daily lives
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
woody7
Always a Dem, but..............
09:58 AM on 04/26/2013
agreed, but t he bill was co sponsored by a Dem...................................
photo
MostlyRightLefty
the gop made it personal...!!
10:06 AM on 04/26/2013
and what was the vote count in the house again?
photo
MostlyRightLefty
the gop made it personal...!!
10:17 AM on 04/26/2013
"New co-sponsors have received 38 times as much money ($7,626,081) from interests supporting CISPA than from interests opposing ($200,362).
Members of the House in total have received 16 times as much money ($67,665,694) from interests supporting CISPA than from interests opposing ($4,164,596)."........................
this is exactly the kind of paid for gov the gop is after.... it isn't all about who sponsored the bill
11:25 AM on 04/26/2013
The repubs are lead eaters.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Coinyer101
King of Doobiestan
08:40 AM on 04/26/2013
Take your policestate and put it where the sun won't shine...,
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Abbey Normal
There is no darkness but ignorance.­
06:35 AM on 04/26/2013
The GOP/bagger controlled House, where smaller government went to get bigger.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ChrisMKerrigan
The night is darkest just before the dawn.
06:18 AM on 04/26/2013
Basically, they're creating their own "plans" which are almost identical to CISPA without carrying the doomed CISPA name.