Gonzales pulls out the big "T" word for ISP snooping

[walrus]

Originally Posted by karomesis

Same old same old. Liberties being undermined and eradicated in favor of non existent security.

This is actually one of my personal soapbox issues. Everytime we allow the government to infringe on one of our personal freedoms...for the good of society, it actually becomes easier the next time for them to do the same and their appetite only becomes greater with each small piece.

With the terrorist paranoia to bolster them, it should be of no surprise that they would push to take even more personal freedoms for the greater good. The sad thing is, there are plenty of people who will believe that 1) it is for the greater good and 2) it won't be abused by those in power and that therefore, this is not a bad thing.

[Surfn]

Something to think about regarding our government is Historically it only takes from the people and never gives anything back in regards to their legislation. No matter how "temporary" they say it will be.

Which is why we should all support "sunset legislation"

[karomesis]

Which is why we should all support "sunset legislation"

Agreed.

With the terrorist paranoia to bolster them, it should be of no surprise that they would push to take even more personal freedoms for the greater good. The sad thing is, there are plenty of people who will believe that 1) it is for the greater good and 2) it won't be abused by those in power and that therefore, this is not a bad thing.

Govts are power hungry?, get outta here. I thought they only wanted what was best for me.

[walrus]

Originally Posted by karomesis

Govts are power hungry?, get outta here. I thought they only wanted what was best for me.

and there really is a toothfairy and a santa claus, virginia

[RedCherry]

Originally Posted by walrus

and there really is a toothfairy and a santa claus, virginia

Great to know.

The thing that gets me when they say shit like this is, do they every consider the logistics of storing that would be? There is no way that any ISP would have enough storage to even comply with such a ruling. Get a clue Gonzales. I'd just like to him for thinking this stuff up.

[lassiter]

Originally Posted by RedCherry

Great to know.

The thing that gets me when they say shit like this is, do they every consider the logistics of storing that would be? There is no way that any ISP would have enough storage to even comply with such a ruling. Get a clue Gonzales. I'd just like to him for thinking this stuff up.

<rant>

I think it's quite deliberate. Rather than go after online porn through obscenity prosecutions (which are always a chancy thing to do - juries are unpredictable), they use the "regulatory" route. In either case the goal is to drive as much (US) porn out of business so they can tell their religious right nutballs they "did something about porn."

Of course, the East Europeans and (increasingly) Asians get to move into the gap. And there certainly won't be the pretty decent self-regulation that most legit US sponsors and webmasters adhere to, since, like drugs, the production and wholesale distribution will all be free of US jurisdiction, while the largest body of consumers/buyers remains the USA.

The same folks that bought us the War on Drugs, the War on Terror, and the Katrina Rescue are gonna forcibly wean the poor besieged US public from its porn habit? Yeah, right.

</rant>