As Google's CEO, Eric Schmidt recently had his head nearly handed to him as he blurted out that privacy on the internet is a thing of the past. While we pretend to believe privacy is still alive and well, the fact is it is becoming much less so with each passing day and any belief to the contrary is just not so.
1 posted on
07/31/2011 4:38:47 PM PDT by
lbryce
To: lbryce
A lot of people still don’t get it.
2 posted on
07/31/2011 4:44:28 PM PDT by
TribalPrincess2U
(The democRATS—just doing the groundwork for al Qaeda?)
To: lbryce
Yea I just assume the government will hear or see anything I do if it really wants to. We live behind digital bars my FRiend. No way around it best I can tell.
3 posted on
07/31/2011 4:46:17 PM PDT by
Clump
(the tree of liberty is withering like a stricken fig tree)
To: lbryce
Can you say, "1984?"
4 posted on
07/31/2011 4:53:34 PM PDT by
Don Corleone
("Oil the gun..eat the cannoli. Take it to the Mattress.")
To: lbryce
Wouldn't any reasonably intelligent Child Pornographer simply sit outside of one of the millions of restaurants, hotels, cafe etc. that offer free wireless internet or cruise around some residential area, until he finds some idiot who leaves their wireless connection open and unprotected (I can detect three like in my neighborhood right now). The provider might have to report it, but all the Government is going to learn is “some computer” connected to a wireless connection hosted by “Piere’s Coffee Shop” from 12:00AM to 12:45AM and uploaded child pornography.
6 posted on
07/31/2011 4:57:41 PM PDT by
apillar
To: lbryce
On Thursday, the US House of Representatives approved an internet snooping bill that requires internet service providers (ISPs) to keep records of customer activity for a year so police can review them as needed.The author of this article apparently doesn't understand the difference between a bill being voted out of a House Committee and a bill that "the US House of Representatives approved"...
Maybe somebody will be nice enough to buy the author a clue...
7 posted on
07/31/2011 5:08:22 PM PDT by
Zeppo
("Happy Pony is on - and I'm NOT missing Happy Pony")
To: lbryce
Child pornography is the ruse used to obtain this law.
Who can argue against a law that seeks to stop child pornography?
This law will be used for a lot of other things besides child pornography, The IRS and States taxing purchases over the internet come to mind.
8 posted on
07/31/2011 5:11:45 PM PDT by
Venturer
To: lbryce
The author fails to mention that Tor already has a button implemented for FireFox. Besides, for anyone who values their privacy, using a Google product is antithetical.
10 posted on
07/31/2011 5:15:06 PM PDT by
FourPeas
("Maladjusted and wigging out is no way to go through life, son." -hg)
To: lbryce
I once worked with a guy who along with his family lived in Czechoslovakia during WWII. His father was very outspoken against Hitler. One day the gestapo arrested his father and he was neither seen nor heard from again. A neighbor had reported his father to the local gestapo.
Now we have a collectivist government here.
11 posted on
07/31/2011 5:18:30 PM PDT by
Enough is ENOUGH
(Fabian Globalism: Environmentalism halts production, forces population into dense controllable areas)
To: lbryce
Just visit your friendly public library and use one of their PCs. From what I have read, I am not aware of any one of them that is blocking access to porn websites. I am aware of complaints by library users about men using the library PCs for porn use, and the library saying it can due nothing about it.
12 posted on
07/31/2011 5:22:27 PM PDT by
CdMGuy
To: lbryce
Too bad Tor is so slow. One way to secure data is to use TrueCrypt, though unfortunately that doesn’t do anything for data sent over the internet.
As an aside, how would your ISP get your financial information when any decent billing system uses SSL?
13 posted on
07/31/2011 5:40:30 PM PDT by
Mike3689
To: lbryce
14 posted on
07/31/2011 5:41:09 PM PDT by
GOP Poet
(Obama is an OLYMPIC failure.)
To: lbryce
Could sure find dirt on a lot of people, that’s for sure. Imagine a politician’s records get subpoenad, they could point out anything that he checked out adult sites or that he was seeing a marriage counselor.
15 posted on
07/31/2011 5:49:45 PM PDT by
MNDude
(so that's what they meant by Carter's second term)
To: lbryce
The government lost the battle over encryption about 10 years ago. You know that is not going to sit for long. Since encryption also protects perverts it is already coming up again.
17 posted on
07/31/2011 7:00:36 PM PDT by
IDFbunny
To: lbryce
The original bill only mandated tracking the temporary IP of each customer:
SEC. 4. RETENTION OF CERTAIN RECORDS BY ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATION SERVICE PROVIDERS.
(a) In General- Section 2703 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
`(h) Retention of Certain Records- A provider of an electronic communication service or remote computing service shall retain for a period of at least 18 months the temporarily assigned network addresses the service assigns to each account, unless that address is transmitted by radio communication (as defined in section 3 of the Communications Act of 1934).’.
(b) Sense of Congress- It is the sense of Congress that records retained pursuant to section 2703(h) of title 18, United States Code, should be stored securely to protect customer privacy and prevent against breaches of the records.
If this report is true, about the committee changes to the bill on 28 July, I doubt it will have a chance of passing the House.
18 posted on
07/31/2011 7:28:59 PM PDT by
VeniVidiVici
("Si, se gimme!")
To: lbryce
Remember “conservatives” bleating “the Constitution is not a suicide pact!” and Rush saying “There are no civil rights when you're dead!” and “Lincoln GOT it! / FDR GOT it!”.
How's that workin’ out for you?
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson