President Obama has officially signed the bill, enacting both the $1.1 trillion budget and CISA - Polidicks

I just don't understand why we need this sort of stuff. How often does it actually work? I'm still hella hyped about the NASA bill though. It makes up for most of it, I just don't like feeling my privacy is being pointlessly violated. If it's actually effective, fine. But if it's not it's just even worse. Besides now I can't work for NASA they'll take one look at my Internet history and I'll be marked "DO NOT HIRE" :v:

[QUOTE=OmniConsUme;49350783]So why did we win Net Neutrality... Okay guys this sucks, but seriously DO NOT get defeatist. We CANNOT win all the battles, But We the people have a lot of power.[/QUOTE] Are you kidding? We DID NOT win Net Neutrality. We only delayed them fucking us the same way we did with this. There is no fucking winning against the US government. They will fuck us over no matter what.

[QUOTE=paindoc;49351041]I just don't understand why we need this sort of stuff. How often does it actually work? I'm still hella hyped about the NASA bill though. It makes up for most of it, I just don't like feeling my privacy is being pointlessly violated. If it's actually effective, fine. But if it's not it's just even worse. Besides now I can't work for NASA they'll take one look at my Internet history and I'll be marked "DO NOT HIRE" :v:[/QUOTE] Why are people forgetting a certain thing... The only time the governmant can grab them is when a company get's fucking hacked... and no... It's not going to be your internet history. It's going to be user data that is on the time where a "cybersecurity threat" is detected, Meaning your Billing Address, email address, Password, IP address and/or Username (and Actual Name).

[QUOTE=dustyjo;49351096]Are you kidding? We DID NOT win Net Neutrality. We only delayed them fucking us the same way we did with this. There is no fucking winning against the US government. They will fuck us over no matter what.[/QUOTE] I'd say we won against Net Neutrality, but only because we demonstrated that there are as many powerful corporations for it as there are against it. With a snooping bill, there is no winning, because it's not corporate cronyism, it's the government trying to expand its own power, which is the one force in the US government stronger than corporate cronyism.

Time to start casually using my VPN all the time

I'm guessing the best vpn's are behind paywalls or does anyone have any free recommendations?

Recommend me a good VPN service, paid or unpaid.

[QUOTE=HybridTheroy;49350827]i couldn't really care less about stuff like this. privacy=/=freedom. i've nothing to hide v0v[/QUOTE] Nice short-sighted thinking. First of all, you do not speak for everyone. Second of all, you have no idea what is going to happen to your data. You don't know where it is, you don't know who has access to it and you don't know if the saved data is correct. Just a little addendum: [quote]Of the 140,000 Jews who had lived in the Netherlands before 1940, only 30,000 (21%) survived the war. But the real picture was even worse than this suggests. The Netherlands had the highest Jewish death toll of any western European country. [...] This high death toll had a number of reasons. One was the excellent state of Dutch civil records: the Dutch state, before the war, had recorded substantial information on every Dutch national. This allowed the Nazi regime to determine easily who was Jewish (whether fully or partly of Jewish ancestry) simply by accessing the data. The Dutch disbelief the Nazis would be so cruel and the attitude of "going along to get along" with the Nazis made many Dutch workers more or less willing collaborators in the effort.[/quote] ([url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netherlands_in_World_War_II#Holocaust[/url]) I guess the jews did have nothing to hide either.

[QUOTE=OmniConsUme;49351107]Why are people forgetting a certain thing... The only time the governmant can grab them is when a company get's fucking hacked... and no... It's not going to be your internet history. It's going to be user data that is on the time where a "cybersecurity threat" is detected, Meaning your Billing Address, email address, Password, IP address and/or Username (and Actual Name).[/QUOTE] It was a joke mate. Lighten up and maybe consider making your posts not so rambly.... Instead of just putting.... Periods everywhere to slowly.... Drift between sentences.

[QUOTE=ZakkShock;49350632]We can't win. They'll do whatever they want, regardless of how the populace feels about it. As evidenced by this bullshit[/QUOTE] Or more thoroughly by this paper! [url]http://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/mgilens/files/gilens_and_page_2014_-testing_theories_of_american_politics.doc.pdf[/url] Page ten. Your opinions don't matter and haven't since the 80's.

So besides CISA and the NASA budget what else, good and bad, does this bill have?

[QUOTE=OmniConsUme;49351107]Why are people forgetting a certain thing... The only time the governmant can grab them is when a company get's fucking hacked... and no... It's not going to be your internet history. It's going to be user data that is on the time where a "cybersecurity threat" is detected, Meaning your Billing Address, email address, Password, IP address and/or Username (and Actual Name).[/QUOTE] Most people on this forum assume that any bill involving government surveillance in any form means the NSA is reading your porn history and won't accept any evidence to the contrary.

[QUOTE=catbarf;49352071]Most people on this forum assume that any bill involving government surveillance in any form means the NSA is reading your porn history and won't accept any evidence to the contrary.[/QUOTE] I mean what else is for them to care about besides my consumption of thoroughly depraved materials jeese

[QUOTE=paindoc;49352384]I mean what else is for them to care about besides my consumption of thoroughly depraved materials jeese[/QUOTE] maybe if you don't want big brother to snoop on you, stop looking at so much furry porn :v:

[QUOTE=catbarf;49352071]Most people on this forum assume that any bill involving government surveillance in any form means the NSA is reading your porn history and won't accept any evidence to the contrary.[/QUOTE] Well, then give us the evidence! My sources say something different ([url]http://www.wired.com/2015/10/cisa-cybersecurity-information-sharing-act-passes-senate-vote-with-privacy-flaws/[/url]).

[QUOTE=catbarf;49352071]Most people on this forum assume that any bill involving government surveillance in any form means the NSA is reading your porn history and won't accept any evidence to the contrary.[/QUOTE] Well, considering [url=http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/21/us/politics/edward-snowden-at-nsa-sexually-explicit-photos-often-shared.html]they've shared nude photos around that they've gathered from electronic surveillance[/url] and [url=http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/27/politics/nsa-snooping/]some used their powers to snoop on lovers[/url], it actually isn't too much of a stretch to assume that yeah, they probably are collecting data on everything else about us as well-- including our porn histories. They're definitely collecting a lot on us already, [url=http://www.zdnet.com/article/nsa-whistleblower-overwhelmed-with-data-ineffective/]too much in fact to feasibly sift through by their own admission[/url], so it's not at all unreasonable to make this assumption.

[QUOTE=NoOneKnowsMe;49352558]Well, then give us the evidence! My sources say something different ([url]http://www.wired.com/2015/10/cisa-cybersecurity-information-sharing-act-passes-senate-vote-with-privacy-flaws/[/url]).[/QUOTE] Do you want me to like link you to [url=https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-bill/754]an overview of CISA[/url] or something? It's a law that allows private companies to share data with the government in the event of a data breach. It explicitly requires companies and the government to strip user-identifiable information: [quote]The federal government and entities monitoring, operating, or sharing indicators or defensive measures must: (1) utilize security controls to protect against unauthorized access or acquisitions, and (2) remove personal information, or information that identifies a specific person not directly related to a cybersecurity threat, prior to sharing an indicator. [/quote] In the event of another data breach it will allow companies to share data with the government. That's its purpose. It is not carte blanche for the government to hoover up any and all data going through an ISP, nor does it grant the government any specific investigatory or surveillance powers. Yes, there are actual privacy concerns. Some of the wording may, for example, allow personal info in a database of records to be turned over to the government if the company reasonably believes it is unattributable and this turns out not to be the case. But everyone on the Internet seems to think it's giving the American government the right to spy on all companies and that's just total bullshit. [QUOTE=Govna;49352667]Well, considering [url=http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/21/us/politics/edward-snowden-at-nsa-sexually-explicit-photos-often-shared.html]they've shared nude photos around that they've gathered from electronic surveillance[/url] and [url=http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/27/politics/nsa-snooping/]some used their powers to snoop on lovers[/url], it actually isn't too much of a stretch to assume that yeah, they probably are collecting data on everything else about us as well-- including our porn histories. They're definitely collecting a lot on us already, [url=http://www.zdnet.com/article/nsa-whistleblower-overwhelmed-with-data-ineffective/]too much in fact to feasibly sift through by their own admission[/url], so it's not at all unreasonable to make this assumption.[/QUOTE] Thank you for proving my point by responding to a topic about CISA with evidence of the NSA's irrelevant misdeeds. Now just find any sort of connection between the two and you might have an argument.

[QUOTE=catbarf;49352872]Do you want me to like link you to [url=https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-bill/754]an overview of CISA[/url] or something? It's a law that allows private companies to share data with the government in the event of a data breach. It explicitly requires companies and the government to strip user-identifiable information:[/QUOTE] Wrong, that's the old version of the bill. The new version removes any kind of privacy protections, not requiring any information to be stripped from the data at all. [url]https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20151215/06470133083/congress-drops-all-pretense-quietly-turns-cisa-into-full-surveillance-bill.shtml[/url] [quote] The latest version of CISA that they're looking to put into the omnibus: Removes the prohibition on information being shared with the NSA, allowing it to be shared directly with NSA (and DOD), rather than first having to go through DHS. While DHS isn't necessarily wonderful, it's a lot better than NSA. And, of course, if this were truly about cybersecurity, not surveillance, DHS makes a lot more sense than NSA. Directly removes the restrictions on using this information for "surveillance" activities. You can't get much more direct than that, right? Removes limitations that government can only use this information for cybersecurity purposes and allows it to be used to go after any other criminal activity as well. Obviously, this then creates tremendous incentives to push for greater and greater information collection, which clearly will be abused. We've just seen how the DEA has regularly abused its powers to collect info. You think agencies like the DEA and others won't make use of CISA too? Removes the requirement to "scrub" personal information unrelated to a cybersecurity threat before sharing that information. This was the key point that everyone kept making about why the information should go to DHS first -- where DHS would be in charge of this "scrub". The "scrub" process was a bit exaggerated in the first place, but it was at least something of a privacy protection. However, it appears that the final version being pushed removes the scrub requirement (along with the requirement to go to DHS) and instead leaves the question of scrubbing to the "discretion" of whichever agency gets the information. Guess how that's going to go?[/quote]

[QUOTE=catbarf;49352872]Thank you for proving my point by responding to a topic about CISA with evidence of the NSA's irrelevant misdeeds. Now just find any sort of connection between the two and you might have an argument.[/QUOTE] [url=http://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-bill/754]"This title requires the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) and the Departments of Homeland Security (DHS), Defense (DOD), and Justice (DOJ) to develop and promulgate procedures to promote the sharing of: (1) classified and declassified cyber threat indicators in possession of the federal government with private entities, nonfederal government agencies, or state, tribal, or local governments; (2) unclassified indicators with the public; (3) information with entities under cybersecurity threats to prevent or mitigate adverse effects; and (4) cybersecurity best practices with attention to the challenges faced by small businesses."[/url] (taken directly from the Congressional summary; you can read the full text of CISA by clicking the link, all versions old and new). The NSA is part of the Department of Defense; CISA involves them since their job entails, you know, national security and cybersecurity, information collection, surveillance, etc. (hence why the Department of Defense-- DOD-- is explicitly listed). Did you forget all this or something?

[QUOTE=NoOneKnowsMe;49351538]Nice short-sighted thinking. First of all, you do not speak for everyone. Second of all, you have no idea what is going to happen to your data. You don't know where it is, you don't know who has access to it[/QUOTE] I don't care what people do with my ~data~. I'm only speaking for myself (I never claimed to speak for anybody else), but I really couldn't care at all if someone wants to use information I have to make their job easier. I find it pretty funny that people think their internet history can/will be used for evil or something.

[QUOTE=HybridTheroy;49357165]I don't care what people do with my ~data~. I'm only speaking for myself (I never claimed to speak for anybody else), but I really couldn't care at all if someone wants to use information I have to make their job easier.[/QUOTE] Does that count pictures of you as well? [url]http://www.nationaljournal.com/s/72710/snowden-nsa-employees-are-passing-around-nude-photos[/url] [url]http://www.dailydot.com/politics/california-chp-nude-photo-trading-ring/[/url] I mean pictures, snooping ex's, leaking oversea-companies information and nudes really helps the 'investigation'. [QUOTE=HybridTheroy;49357165]I find it pretty funny that people think their internet history can/will be used for evil or something.[/QUOTE] Oh what am I saying .. people would NEVER abuse their powers. Just like police officers. Angels.

[QUOTE=HybridTheroy;49357165]I don't care what people do with my ~data~. I'm only speaking for myself (I never claimed to speak for anybody else), but I really couldn't care at all if someone wants to use information I have to make their job easier. I find it pretty funny that people think their internet history can/will be used for evil or something.[/QUOTE] It's because the government has no business with that data and should focus their energy on something else

[QUOTE=HybridTheroy;49357165]I don't care what people do with my ~data~. I'm only speaking for myself (I never claimed to speak for anybody else), but I really couldn't care at all if someone wants to use information I have to make their job easier. I find it pretty funny that people think their internet history can/will be used for evil or something.[/QUOTE] Have a nice paper of 28 pages about why your argument is dumb: [URL="http://poseidon01.ssrn.com/delivery.php?ID=648003027117114107010123118071003092030045040084056029106106075068070083089118092066005027030038009104050004118111019064124015029094090005023089103065094086109001042085044122004104092127117079066020109123069115096025120122030007082115108024071083098&EXT=pdf"]I've got nothing to hide[/URL] One comment in the paper brings a really good point [QUOTE]By saying “I have nothing to hide,” you are saying that it’s OK for the government to infringe on the rights of potentially millions of your fellow Americans, possibly ruining their lives in the process. To me, the “I have nothing to hide” argument basically equates to “I don’t care what happens, so long as it doesn’t happen to me.”[/QUOTE] Oh and this little gem: [QUOTE] “Everyone is guilty of something or has something to conceal. All one has to do is look hard enough to find what it is.”[/QUOTE] Point is this is another step towards a totalitarian government. We might not get into an Orwellian dictatorship like some fear, but Solove proposes that this would put us into a kafkaesque world, which is equally frightening. The worst part of this in my opinion is that these are rights that people have fought to get for so many years. And now here we are, people are just ready to hand in those rights because they feel scared.