Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

southcakalac

Money Down The Drain...

23 posts in this topic

Future uses...

Amber alerts

Silver alerts

Probation/parole violations (red flags)

Speeding violations

Makes sense. Frees up police to do actual footwork in other areas. As much as I don't like monitoring, it's inevitable (red light cameras for example).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and FEMA camps, dont forget the FEMA camps

and the bullets

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Theres no expectation of privacy in public. Technology has just caught up to that concept, that's all. I know that I am being recorded at every Panthers game I go to but it's no big deal, for example.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Theres no expectation of privacy in public. .

And from a legal perspective, there never has been.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://action.theeca...action_KEY=5863

The Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA) is currently being debated by the House of Representatives and focuses on the very real issues of cyber threats and the need for greater cyber security. The legislation amends and updates the National Security Act of 1947, which doesn’t contain provisions regarding cyber crime. While this law absolutely needs to be updated, this legislation is the latest example of Congress debating technology issues, while not understanding the full implications of the legislation they’re trying to pass.

CISPA would have technology companies, like video game systems, internet service providers (ISPs) and more share your use of technology with the Government under the guise of cyber security. It’s George Orwell’s classic book 1984 right here, right now.

Here are the problems with the legislation as it stands:

  • The description of what can be shared is rather vague. So it could include your browsing history, searches and even what games you play.
  • There aren’t any restrictions on the recipients who can receive and use that information. If this is about cyber-security, it should only be used for that.
  • Private communications will be flowing from the private sector to the NSA. Yes, really.
  • It broadens spying organizations’ powers with little transparency and limited public oversight.
  • There are vague countermeasures included that allow “cyber security systems” to obtain information in order to protect networks.
  • Websites that publish whistleblower documents could be shut down, censoring speech and the web.

This is the government snooping into your use of the internet and technology with the help of corporations without the usual judicial process and the protections we’re guaranteed by the US Constitution. We can’t see any reason the Government needs to know how much Mass Effect you play, the maps you enjoy in Call of Duty or how many people are in your World of Warcraft Guild... Can you?

seems relevant.

this is my issue... security, freedom and common sense are not mutually exclusive but for some reason the approach we are taking disregards that.

how is monitoring everyone's web traffic a better solution to web security than requiring crucial companies/services to update their security protocols?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have always said that the TSA is a big scam...and I believe they do steal, hell monday traveling out of Charlotte they jacked me for my toothpaste......a holes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Of course, he's so massive he has his own gravitational pull. 
    • You miss the point. Taylor was here before. We picked him because of what he could do for our wide receivers not because he had some great knowledge no other person had on the staff. Shula and Rivera and Gettleman studied multiple college systems for months before signing Taylor or drafting McCaffrey or Curtis and would have drafted the same whether Taylor was here or not. They liked the way Taylor developed McCaffrey which showed his talent but Stanford's offense wasn't Taylors idea or unique to him. Shula has a connection to Taylor as early as when Shula was at Alabama.  The debate was whether Taylor was chosen to replace Shula because Shula didn't know what to do to run a college offense and if he screwed up Taylor would replace him. And that Taylor was the reason and most influential in getting McCaffrey. I said it wasn't even close to the truth and this plan predated Taylor and was more thorough and we'll thought out. Everything since then just confirms I was right once again like usual.  
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      18,243
    • Most Online
      2,867

    Newest Member
    GSO Goat
    Joined