|
|
On November 16 2011 11:06 aimaimaim wrote:
Why are the people in the USA letting their goverment run their nation? You guys are suppose to be running the nations .. those political figures are only representative .. This is fucked up.
its a representative democracy. I used to have a link for youtube that talked about it, but basically, you hire someone, who has their own opinions and views about how things should be run, to try to pass or block bills and laws that they THINK you want or don't want. It's not direct democracy. Which means that If you're in a store, they have a list of the food you want, and they have their own list. They buy anything that happens to connect between your list and theirs, so you get a fraction of what you wanted. As an analogy.
|
Just sent an email thanks for the heads up on this. What a ridiculous bill. Makes me so angry.
|
For all those people saying there is no way this law would pass, I think it is important to email your representative anyways. If nothing else it will make them think twice before considering a similar law in the future.
|
On November 17 2011 05:44 Humanfails wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2011 11:06 aimaimaim wrote:
Why are the people in the USA letting their goverment run their nation? You guys are suppose to be running the nations .. those political figures are only representative .. This is fucked up. its a representative democracy. I used to have a link for youtube that talked about it, but basically, you hire someone, who has their own opinions and views about how things should be run, to try to pass or block bills and laws that they THINK you want or don't want. It's not direct democracy. Which means that If you're in a store, they have a list of the food you want, and they have their own list. They buy anything that happens to connect between your list and theirs, so you get a fraction of what you wanted. As an analogy.
Additionally, most people are not tech savvy enough to scrape EFF, ACLU, and other organizations (they've never heard of) blog/tweet it to your Internet friends (they have none and do not know how to tweet).
These important issues are NOT well discussed in mainstream news (television & print). This is intentional.
When elections roll around, incumbent politicians pretend like they've been angels and looked out for your interests, but anyone who has done their homework knows otherwise. Sadly, these incumbents get reelected.
|
TL should spotlight or put the "censored" banner over their masthead temporarily to raise awareness. Between TL & the streaming sites there is so much "IP" getting thrown around.
|
On November 17 2011 05:55 mmp wrote:Show nested quote +On November 17 2011 05:44 Humanfails wrote:On November 16 2011 11:06 aimaimaim wrote:
Why are the people in the USA letting their goverment run their nation? You guys are suppose to be running the nations .. those political figures are only representative .. This is fucked up. its a representative democracy. I used to have a link for youtube that talked about it, but basically, you hire someone, who has their own opinions and views about how things should be run, to try to pass or block bills and laws that they THINK you want or don't want. It's not direct democracy. Which means that If you're in a store, they have a list of the food you want, and they have their own list. They buy anything that happens to connect between your list and theirs, so you get a fraction of what you wanted. As an analogy. Additionally, most people are not tech savvy enough to scrape EFF, ACLU, and other organizations (they've never heard of) blog/tweet it to your Internet friends (they have none and do not know how to tweet). These important issues are NOT well discussed in mainstream news (television & print). This is intentional. When elections roll around, incumbent politicians pretend like they've been angels and looked out for your interests, but anyone who has done their homework knows otherwise. Sadly, these incumbents get reelected.
Exactly. Probably only 10% of the population even knows about this bill. I know that statistic holds true among me and my friends, and most of my friends are very tech-savvy. Thats scary.
Do you really think mainstream media will cover a bill that they want to get passed, when the majority of the general population would object to it?
|
On November 17 2011 06:08 mmp wrote:
TL should spotlight or put the "censored" banner over their masthead temporarily to raise awareness. Between TL & the streaming sites there is so much "IP" getting thrown around.
Agreed. Mods.... get on board =] I can understand if you don't want to back political agendas or parties, but this can really affect TL in a negative way, and indeed the whole gaming community. TL could be targeted for the wealth of information and videos relating to starcraft/games that are linked on here.
|
you would get more hits if you made the title something more readable
|
|
|
Sent an e-mail to the retard in office in Georgia that supports it.
|
http://www.tumblr.com/protect-the-net
Tumblr scared me, the initial dashboard when you log on is greyed out lol.
This link asks for your number, address, and zip code and then will call you, give you talking points, and redirect the call to your representative where you tell them "yeah fuck dont vote on that bill".
glhf ^^
|
Section 104 of SOPA gives legal immunity to any service provider, payment network provider, Internet advertising service, advertiser, Internet search engine, domain name registry, or domain name registrar for voluntarily taking action against websites dedicated to infringement.
Thats the really scary part.... Especially considering so many of the large ISPs are also owned by content providers... Time Warner, Comcast, etc... do we really want to grant them legal immunity for this? They could take down competitors and there would be no legal remedy.
|
Don't they decide on the bill today?
It's funny how a game changing bill like this just flies under the radar. I think people, including me, are way too content (maybe brainwashed?) to notice these things.
|
is it just me, or is this sort of really worrying legislation turning up a lot more frequently than it use to. I mean it was only a month or so ago since the last outrage like this was revealed.
|
On November 17 2011 06:48 driftme wrote:
Section 104 of SOPA gives legal immunity to any service provider, payment network provider, Internet advertising service, advertiser, Internet search engine, domain name registry, or domain name registrar for voluntarily taking action against websites dedicated to infringement.
Look at how bad the wiretapping immunity was abused.
|
On November 17 2011 06:51 matiK23 wrote:
Don't they decide on the bill today?
It's funny how a game changing bill like this just flies under the radar. I think people, including me, are way too content (maybe brainwashed?) to notice these things.
No, there's a hearing of the House Judicial Committee today regarding SOPA - they'll decide if it comes to vote. Most bills die at that stage.. lets hope this one is no exception! Unfortunately, PROTECT-IP made it through committee, but has been blocked by Sen. Wyden (WA) temporarily.
And the reason it flies under the radar is because the major content companies want it to =]
|
On November 17 2011 06:53 Zionner wrote:
is it just me, or is this sort of really worrying legislation turning up a lot more frequently than it use to. I mean it was only a month or so ago since the last outrage like this was revealed.
This is true but that bill got turned down pretty damn fast. I think alot of major corporations are against this bill too. Chances of it passing are like 0.01%
|
I read somewhere that Americans could still access the blocked websites by typing in the domain's IP address. No idea where the source is; anyone got any idea?
|
|
|
On November 17 2011 06:48 driftme wrote:
Section 104 of SOPA gives legal immunity to any service provider, payment network provider, Internet advertising service, advertiser, Internet search engine, domain name registry, or domain name registrar for voluntarily taking action against websites dedicated to infringement.
Thats the really scary part.... Especially considering so many of the large ISPs are also owned by content providers... Time Warner, Comcast, etc... do we really want to grant them legal immunity for this? They could take down competitors and there would be no legal remedy.
Legal immunity to commit actions that they can explain away or "plant evidence" to make it appear as if they were justified in doing it.
wtf. can I get legal immunity to murder people if there's justification where I can just plant something on them?
On November 17 2011 06:30 driftme wrote:Show nested quote +On November 17 2011 05:55 mmp wrote:On November 17 2011 05:44 Humanfails wrote:On November 16 2011 11:06 aimaimaim wrote:
Why are the people in the USA letting their goverment run their nation? You guys are suppose to be running the nations .. those political figures are only representative .. This is fucked up. its a representative democracy. I used to have a link for youtube that talked about it, but basically, you hire someone, who has their own opinions and views about how things should be run, to try to pass or block bills and laws that they THINK you want or don't want. It's not direct democracy. Which means that If you're in a store, they have a list of the food you want, and they have their own list. They buy anything that happens to connect between your list and theirs, so you get a fraction of what you wanted. As an analogy. Additionally, most people are not tech savvy enough to scrape EFF, ACLU, and other organizations (they've never heard of) blog/tweet it to your Internet friends (they have none and do not know how to tweet). These important issues are NOT well discussed in mainstream news (television & print). This is intentional. When elections roll around, incumbent politicians pretend like they've been angels and looked out for your interests, but anyone who has done their homework knows otherwise. Sadly, these incumbents get reelected. Exactly. Probably only 10% of the population even knows about this bill. I know that statistic holds true among me and my friends, and most of my friends are very tech-savvy. Thats scary. Do you really think mainstream media will cover a bill that they want to get passed, when the majority of the general population would object to it?
and the ones that do know..
On November 17 2011 05:53 Rarkon wrote:
For all those people saying there is no way this law would pass, I think it is important to email your representative anyways. If nothing else it will make them think twice before considering a similar law in the future.
It's too broad. Its too idiotic. It won't pass. We don't need to contact representatives. *two weeks later*. It passed? WTF! It wasn't supposed to pass. I know we didn't contact representatives, but it was so stupid I thought they wouldn't pass it. Big names were supposedly against it! How could it pass? Wait, they're all in bed with each other? My voice actually does matter because its about what looks good publicly, and knowing our feelings on it would make them want to change their mind? So I failed the system? Its my fault?
the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. A lot of insane constituents who don't get involved and then get surprised by the stupid laws that get passed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
