NSFCD

Generally Speaking => Serious Discussion => Topic started by: Mona on November 16, 2011, 08:46:14 PM

Title: SOPA
Post by: Mona on November 16, 2011, 08:46:14 PM
So apparently Congress wants to pass a bill that would give the United States government the power to censor the internet. I personally don't think it's going to happen. Too many people are against it and even the president says he'll veto the bill if it reaches his desk. Any thoughts?
Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: Tupin on November 16, 2011, 09:01:15 PM
I don't think it will pass either. There would be too much resistance to it, as any form of Internet censorship would draw allusions to Chinese censorship.
Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: Kayo on November 16, 2011, 09:16:47 PM
Oh god this.

I'm doubting it'll get anywhere, but still my doubt is decreasing. If it passes, I'll probably just get to Canada as quickly as I can because it's safe.. and mere hours from my house.

Of course, that is if it passes and ruins intercourse ing everything. And I'm exaggerating my measures a but. But this seriously shouldn't do anything.
Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: Zero on November 17, 2011, 01:09:53 AM
The movie and music industries really want this to pass and are the ones that probably influenced its proposal in the first place. They're convinced that piracy is causing them to lose millions each year, so they complain to the government without any real evidence to make that sort of conclusion.

Anyway if this passes it just shows yet again that this country favors big business.



Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: Mona on November 17, 2011, 08:04:50 AM
Except it won't really stop piracy.
Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: Zero on November 17, 2011, 08:59:14 AM
Quote from: Michio Kaku on November 17, 2011, 01:09:53 AM
so they complain to the government without any real evidence to make that sort of conclusion.


We're in agreement
Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: Kayo on November 17, 2011, 01:08:29 PM
Quote from: Mona on November 17, 2011, 08:04:50 AM
Except it won't really stop piracy.
the lowdown:

It won't really prevent what it's SUPPOSED to prevent.
But it will get in the way of things that don't need to be disturbed.

Basically it does extra harm without even doing the "good" it's supposed to do.
Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: Mona on November 17, 2011, 01:40:16 PM
Quote from: Kayghost on November 17, 2011, 01:08:29 PM
the lowdown:

It won't really prevent what it's SUPPOSED to prevent.
But it will get in the way of things that don't need to be disturbed.

Basically it does extra harm without even doing the "good" it's supposed to do.


Exactly.

There are petitions all over the internet that are aiming to stop the bill from being passed. I've already signed one. The government has done some crazy things in the past so I don't want to take any chances.
Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: Potestas on November 26, 2011, 11:49:05 AM
It won't pass. If it does, the internet is in trouble, since a large portion of it is still located in the US, so I'm against this as well.

Naturally our country won't be in trouble and something as silly as letting private coorperations have the power of censorship would probably end your political career if you would ever propose it here.

While I can rant for hours about american politics, it will probably piss a huge amount of people off when I do so, so I won't.

With this bill however, it's not just about politicians being retarded but a lot of lobbying as well. You'd have to be really dense not to see the huge amounts of corruption here, especially if it passes.
Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: Ravioli on November 27, 2011, 07:22:09 AM
o canadia we stand on guard 4 theeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: Flying Chickens on November 27, 2011, 08:08:05 PM
Quote from: Ravioli on November 27, 2011, 07:22:09 AM
o canadia we stand on guard 4 theeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee



Looks like it's just like old times: America being oppressive, and Canada being free.
Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: Ravioli on November 27, 2011, 08:46:47 PM
and we're the socialists eh
Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: Zero on November 27, 2011, 09:24:14 PM
Quote from: Ravioli on November 27, 2011, 08:46:47 PM
and we're the socialists eh


Lobbying has just got to go.

Money just has far too much influence in our government. It's intercourse ing ridiculous.

Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: PrivilegedYoshi on November 29, 2011, 09:32:58 PM
Quote from: Michio Kaku on November 27, 2011, 09:24:14 PM
Lobbying has just got to go.

Money just has far too much influence in our government. It's intercourse ing ridiculous.


You can pass more legislation to outlaw lobbying, make the government a direct democracy, start catering to the masses, and then the US will wind up like the most stereotypical Occupy people who only make decisions through groupthink and tyranny of the loudest group. The interest groups will then turn to their lawyers, find a loophole in the law, and merrily continue doing what they were previously doing while small business owners and those that can't afford the spinsters will continue to be excluded.

In other words, you're merely kicking the can further down the road and not addressing the root cause of the problem.

A more practical solution in two easy steps:
1) Scale back the size of government and the lobbying incentive for large pressure groups will be diminished.
2) Actually, I just needed one step. Huh.

I also note a lot of omg evil corporation strawmen in this discussion. Let's use the term "special interest" or "pressure" groups so that we don't forget all of the other non-corporate collectives that want to cheat, you, the individual, out of your liberty and money, namely labor unions, and the pet startup projects of officials (Solyndra).
Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: Zero on November 29, 2011, 11:44:59 PM
Scaling back the size of the government could have some negative repercussions.

You sure that its as simple as that? Elaborate.
Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: PrivilegedYoshi on December 02, 2011, 12:14:22 AM
Quote from: Michio Kaku on November 29, 2011, 11:44:59 PM
Scaling back the size of the government could have some negative repercussions.


It could. Not scaling it back has and will continue to do so.

I'm (completely seriously) interested to know what you think the negative repercussions will be. I've listed some of the more common objections I get when talking about this below:

1) If income disparity/"equality"/etc. is your main beef, a libertarian or anarcho-capitalist philosophy won't address that concern, largely because they are concerned with freedom from coercion by others (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_liberty), not guaranteeing resources necessary to accomplish all of one's desires (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_liberty) that progressivism loves to espouse that it will provide (and will never succeed in providing). So, yes, if you're worried about the Medicare/Medicaid/Food stamp/government student loan/entitlement x gravy train stopping, you frankly shouldn't agree with my position. I do, however, would like to make note of the extreme cognitive dissonance in the minds of people who go "stop special interests" while willingly taking advantage of every possible program that Uncle Sam offers.

Further applying this to social issues (and because everything on this forum inevitably devolves into discussion of sodomy, anyway):
Negative liberty: Thou shalt not stop two men from sleeping together and saying they love each other just because thou findesth it icky.
Positive liberty: Thou shalt provide two men in love with the state-sponsored perks that thou givesth straight couples.
For the record: I don't think there should be any state-sponsored marriage whether hetero or homosexual and if people are worried about things like spousal visitation privileges in hospitals, they are more than capable of:
a) Going to a hospital that won't go "EWWWW! I DON'T LIKE YOU BECAUSE OF [REASON HERE]!"
and
b) Drawing up a contract that espouses which rights, financial or social, they want to jointly share.

2) If you're worried about further economic instability, I would argue that the Fed and the rest of the government distorts the true worth of the market via a shell game of regulation, redistribution, and controls. You may want to consider reading this (http://www.fee.org/library/books/economics-in-one-lesson/) for a primer on Austrian economics. The section on the broken window/glazier's fallacy is especially good and pretty much destroys the rationale for economic stimulus.
Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: Chris8492 on January 31, 2012, 06:58:51 PM
Well well, SOPA got delayed (no surprise there) are they honestly gonna just keep delaying it? Let it die out already. I kinda find it funny how the internet is one of the only things we are free to use without a radical limitation, but now the government is trying to place a limitation on it which would make us all have no voice in the internet. Violation of the First Amendment much?
Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: Kayo on January 31, 2012, 07:48:37 PM
Quote from: Chris93 on January 31, 2012, 06:58:51 PM
Well well, SOPA got delayed (no surprise there) are they honestly gonna just keep delaying it? Let it die out already. I kinda find it funny how the internet is one of the only things we are free to use without a radical limitation, but now the government is trying to place a limitation on it which would make us all have no voice in the internet. Violation of the First Amendment much?
It's entirely argumentative with the First Amendment, but hopefully it'll keep getting pushed back until it kind of just dwindles out and people forget all about it.
Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: BOREDFOREVER on February 12, 2012, 10:07:20 PM
Quote from: Pennington on January 31, 2012, 07:48:37 PM
It's entirely argumentative with the First Amendment, but hopefully it'll keep getting pushed back until it kind of just dwindles out and people forget all about it.


It'll keep getting pushed back and renamed until we forget about it and they can pass it (or some version of it).
Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: Zero on February 13, 2012, 06:45:27 AM
Quote from: IhsoyOhcysp on December 02, 2011, 12:14:22 AM
It could. Not scaling it back has and will continue to do so.

I'm (completely seriously) interested to know what you think the negative repercussions will be. I've listed some of the more common objections I get when talking about this below:

1) If income disparity/"equality"/etc. is your main beef, a libertarian or anarcho-capitalist philosophy won't address that concern, largely because they are concerned with freedom from coercion by others (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_liberty), not guaranteeing resources necessary to accomplish all of one's desires (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_liberty) that progressivism loves to espouse that it will provide (and will never succeed in providing). So, yes, if you're worried about the Medicare/Medicaid/Food stamp/government student loan/entitlement x gravy train stopping, you frankly shouldn't agree with my position. I do, however, would like to make note of the extreme cognitive dissonance in the minds of people who go "stop special interests" while willingly taking advantage of every possible program that Uncle Sam offers.

Further applying this to social issues (and because everything on this forum inevitably devolves into discussion of sodomy, anyway):
Negative liberty: Thou shalt not stop two men from sleeping together and saying they love each other just because thou findesth it icky.
Positive liberty: Thou shalt provide two men in love with the state-sponsored perks that thou givesth straight couples.
For the record: I don't think there should be any state-sponsored marriage whether hetero or homosexual and if people are worried about things like spousal visitation privileges in hospitals, they are more than capable of:
a) Going to a hospital that won't go "EWWWW! I DON'T LIKE YOU BECAUSE OF [REASON HERE]!"
and
b) Drawing up a contract that espouses which rights, financial or social, they want to jointly share.

2) If you're worried about further economic instability, I would argue that the Fed and the rest of the government distorts the true worth of the market via a shell game of regulation, redistribution, and controls. You may want to consider reading this (http://www.fee.org/library/books/economics-in-one-lesson/) for a primer on Austrian economics. The section on the broken window/glazier's fallacy is especially good and pretty much destroys the rationale for economic stimulus.


Forgot about this thread. Honestly I don't really have much to contribute, PY. I'm not going to pretend to be as knowledgeable as you are in the realm of politics/economics, but I'll certainly provide my thoughts. I don't necessarily disagree with you(though it really would intercourse ing blow if my student loans/grants got cut, no joke), but yeah, here I go.

I will say that off the top of my head, the problems I think of when scaling back the size of the government are:

-The question arises of when to stop scaling back. How far do you go?
-How do you maintain a government of that size?
-The government employs around 2.65 million people. How many jobs get cut? Which jobs get cut? How are we going to create jobs in this new, smaller government?
-How do you maintain military strength to deter threats from other countries when you have a small government?
-How do you keep human greed from interfering with legislation? Scaling back the size/power of government won't stop this completely.
-How do you even go about scaling back the size of government to begin with? Voting for senators and sending letters only does so much when nearly everyone in politics has an insatiable desire for wealth and power, even if it is by the expense of others.

There are probably more.

If the government could just act on the behalf of US and not special interest groups, we probably wouldn't even be having this discussion.
Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: Kayo on February 13, 2012, 06:14:45 PM
I think we're just beating a dead horse here. That is of course, on the hopes of that slim chance it doesn't come back. There's still that little ray of hope that we've seen the last of it, but we can't be so sure.
Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: Zero on February 14, 2012, 07:30:30 AM
I couldn't disagree more. This discussion would only be beating a dead horse if the threat wasn't on the horizon at all. The governments of the world are making it clear that they want even more control than they already have all across the board.

Call me a nutjob but the reality George Orwell envisioned in 1984 probably isn't too far off if this kind of law gets passed.
Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: Kayo on February 14, 2012, 07:35:48 PM
Quote from: Michio Kaku on February 14, 2012, 07:30:30 AM
I couldn't disagree more. This discussion would only be beating a dead horse if the threat wasn't on the horizon at all. The governments of the world are making it clear that they want even more control than they already have all across the board.

Call me a nutjob but the reality George Orwell envisioned in 1984 probably isn't too far off if this kind of law gets passed.
I'm still just being hopeful, here.
Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: Zero on February 14, 2012, 10:25:40 PM
Quote from: Pennington on February 14, 2012, 07:35:48 PM
I'm still just being hopeful, here.


I see. Well I hope your optimism wins out.
Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: Hero_of_Darkness on February 15, 2012, 08:08:23 AM
That "delay" means that the bill is effectively dead. It will never pass. They're not discussing it or trying to change it. It's simply not going to be voted on. They don't just delay voting due to opposition and later bring it back hoping the opposition will just go away, especially when the opposition includes companies like Google and Microsoft.

That said, while the bill itself is gone for good, they may eventually stick the provisions of it into another, more important one that has to be passed. The chances are more 50/50 than anything.
Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: Zero on February 15, 2012, 09:00:43 AM
That's incredibly optimistic Hero.

There's still ACTA.
Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: Hero_of_Darkness on February 15, 2012, 09:19:05 AM
Quote from: Michio Kaku on February 15, 2012, 09:00:43 AM
That's incredibly optimistic Hero.

There's still ACTA.

It's not optimistic. It's the way these things work. SOPA itself is dead. I'm sure that what SOPA was trying to accomplish will return in some form, but the direct approach won't ever work.
Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: Zero on February 15, 2012, 01:41:14 PM
That's not even what I was arguing man, and I refuse to believe that you didn't know this. I even used the words "this kind of law" in my post that Kayo responded to.

A threat by another name is still the same threat.
Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: Kayo on February 15, 2012, 07:07:59 PM
Quote from: Hero_of_Darkness on February 15, 2012, 08:08:23 AM
That "delay" means that the bill is effectively dead. It will never pass. They're not discussing it or trying to change it. It's simply not going to be voted on. They don't just delay voting due to opposition and later bring it back hoping the opposition will just go away, especially when the opposition includes companies like Google and Microsoft.

That said, while the bill itself is gone for good, they may eventually stick the provisions of it into another, more important one that has to be passed. The chances are more 50/50 than anything.
This is kind of what I'm thinking, though you're explaining it much better than me. I think they realize that they're getting the dirty looks from Google and Microsoft, and they're either going to shelve it permanently or subtly try to bring SOPA's points back through crafty wordplay and loopholes in some future proposal (at which point we'll catch them anyway).

In other words I don't think it will be successful, no matter what they call it.
Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: Hero_of_Darkness on February 15, 2012, 09:26:09 PM
Quote from: Pennington on February 15, 2012, 07:07:59 PM
This is kind of what I'm thinking, though you're explaining it much better than me. I think they realize that they're getting the dirty looks from Google and Microsoft, and they're either going to shelve it permanently or subtly try to bring SOPA's points back through crafty wordplay and loopholes in some future proposal (at which point we'll catch them anyway).

In other words I don't think it will be successful, no matter what they call it.

I wouldn't go that far. They're going to stick it into a bill that really needs to be passed; one that's so important, no type of opposition could stop it. Sadly, it's probably only a matter of time until we're told what we can and can't see on the internet.
Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: Nayrman on March 11, 2012, 09:38:23 AM
Indeed. That's what I really hate about bill structures. You can add so much poop behind the bill that as long as you make the bill title and name "Help our troops!" act you can add pretty much add dictator level stuff in there and get away with it.

And even if there weren't tons of corporate lobbying to get the internet butchered beyond all belief, the government would certainly want to just to make sure they can spy on us at all times. Because, after all, they want to keep an eye out for TERRORISTS *winkwinknudgenudgesaynomore* Because, after all, if you're not a terrorist you have nothing to hid and should willingly let the government search through everything you've ever looked at. The direction this country is going in is just awful.
Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: Kayo on March 11, 2012, 05:10:06 PM
Quote from: Nayrman on March 11, 2012, 09:38:23 AM
Indeed. That's what I really hate about bill structures. You can add so much poop behind the bill that as long as you make the bill title and name "Help our troops!" act you can add pretty much add dictator level stuff in there and get away with it.

And even if there weren't tons of corporate lobbying to get the internet butchered beyond all belief, the government would certainly want to just to make sure they can spy on us at all times. Because, after all, they want to keep an eye out for TERRORISTS *winkwinknudgenudgesaynomore* Because, after all, if you're not a terrorist you have nothing to hid and should willingly let the government search through everything you've ever looked at. The direction this country is going in is just awful.
Just because I'm not hiding any convoluted plans for explosive attacks doesn't mean I want to make my life an open book. Giving the government access to view everything people do on the internet is just a negative step toward communism.
Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: Zero on March 11, 2012, 10:05:29 PM
Communism isn't the word you're looking for
Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: Nayrman on March 12, 2012, 06:48:45 AM
Quote from: Michio Kaku on March 11, 2012, 10:05:29 PM
Communism isn't the word you're looking for


I think he means more of China's brand of "Communism" rather than actual communism itself.
Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: Hero_of_Darkness on April 11, 2012, 12:31:58 PM
It's back in a worse form.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6rVV5tFCuqo&feature=player_embedded[/youtube]
Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: Zero on April 11, 2012, 05:40:32 PM
Oh hey corporations>people once again

intercourse  the world
Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: Kayo on April 11, 2012, 06:15:52 PM
'AT&T, Facebook, IBM, Intel, Microsoft, Oracle Corporation, Symantec and Verizon" all support CISPA.

.

Fucking.
Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: Zero on April 11, 2012, 06:26:41 PM
Facebook activity would decrease if people lost the ability to share most websites over it.

Internet activity in general would decline. This isn't good for an overwhelming majority of online businesses. If only they could see the big picture.
Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: Kayo on April 11, 2012, 06:35:29 PM
Quote from: Z on April 11, 2012, 06:26:41 PM
Facebook activity would decrease if people lost the ability to share most websites over it.

Internet activity in general would decline. This isn't good for an overwhelming majority of online businesses. If only they could see the big picture.
Yeah, I'm pretty sure the companies supporting it haven't considered everything.
Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: Hero_of_Darkness on April 13, 2012, 04:25:37 AM
Quote from: Kayo on April 11, 2012, 06:15:52 PM
'AT&T, Facebook, IBM, Intel, Microsoft, Oracle Corporation, Symantec and Verizon" all support CISPA.

.

Fucking.

I wasn't expecting Microsoft. :/ We're definitely screwed this time.

Hilarious how none of those are media companies. They just want to be able to spy on us.
Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: Zero on April 13, 2012, 09:21:06 AM
I really don't see how anyone can find this lawful. At all.

Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: Kayo on April 13, 2012, 12:18:35 PM
Quote from: Hero_of_Darkness on April 13, 2012, 04:25:37 AM
I wasn't expecting Microsoft. :/ We're definitely screwed this time.

Hilarious how none of those are media companies. They just want to be able to spy on us.
Microsoft and Facebook are probably going to be what does us in. If CISPA loses their support though, we'll have a shot.

I hope Anonymous is ready for this.
Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: Neerb on April 13, 2012, 01:56:32 PM
Quote from: Kayo on April 13, 2012, 12:18:35 PM
I hope Anonymous is ready for this.


That sounds epic, like one last great ride of the cavalry. Anon's final battle against the government.

That said, I think this will get shot down and they'll just revive it yet again later on.
Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: Zero on April 13, 2012, 05:33:30 PM
why can't we have nice things
Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: Tahrann on April 13, 2012, 06:44:06 PM
Let's all cheer on Anon as they fight for free internets!

Anyway, what is to bet they are putting this through again to try to distract us from something they are trying to have pass under the radar?
Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: Ravioli on April 14, 2012, 01:26:05 AM
As always, Maddox was right. (http://thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=pass_sopa)
Title: Re: SOPA
Post by: Zero on April 15, 2012, 10:19:32 AM
its convenient that he provides a list of officials that back the bill