House panel approves bill to make ISPs keep Web logs

@hawks5999 Tor is not up to the task. Not only is it painfully slow, but its security is not even that great. That is why the Tor documentation itself insists you should not use this to hide things from the government, you should assume the Federal government knows how to break the security on Tor. Other governments probably can't, though.

@tom@...
the big picture is: Gov. can trace every digital move you make. Criminals are able and knowledgeable about circumventing the measure. So who will you catch? Do you really think that any scammer, or pedophile will surf the net openly?

Thanks for sharing this information. Graduate Degree | bachelor degree

@LoverockDavidson

"Loverock, we see you been going to a lot of porn sites over the last year..."

Irrelevant.

@Tim@... Why is it every time a Democrat gets in the White House, a certain type of people become convinced, a la McCarthy, that there's a literal plot to take over the country and impose a dictatorship? And once a Republican gets back into office, suddenly the conspiracy goes away?

It sounds like you are indeed being controlled... through fear instilled in you by people trying to get you to vote them back into power.

@William_P

Add me to that club also.

I would not doubt for one minute that the RIAA and the MPAA certain "interests" also have a hand in this.

@sbaden01@...

Yup, and glad of it. Without police chaos would result. This could do a lot of cleanup.

@godfreye Of course not. That was just the lie they told the voters to get elected. What they REALLY want is to reduce the whole country to serfdom, a new 21st century serfdom, far more heartless and cruel than any that went before it.

@databaseben@... It won't get that far. It won't pass the Senate.

@bwalker
Your assumpton that an IP/MAC address proves anything is wrong and shows your credibility to be lacking. Of the many posts so far I don't see more than a couple by thiinkng-capable people.

@anothercanuck
Hell, most of them have already been stolen; that'll continue and it'll have nothiinig to do wth the gvt.

@alandeanreeder@...
You missed the day ini school on checks & balances, huh? The "gvt" is not just one entity; it's 3, each containing many more specalizations.
I'm for anything that can be used to put criminals and terrorist either in jail or in the dirt.

@jgm

Well... how reasonable your, 08/02/2011, post would seem. Unfortunately, I feel that my assertions are hardly a mis-perception (...if you have actually examined the facts, and know the history of these specific actions). Nor do I feel that my posts are simply an overreaction to a fundamentally-unimportant matter. I truly wish they were. However, lacking any hyperbole, I am flatly asserting that this is part of a, quite intentional, expansion of... yes... totalitarian-authority (not, mere, incompetence/stupidity). And, I (along with many other citizens, and even a good number of politicians) truly believe this to be a flagrantly un-Constitutional, and quite intentional, attack on our most basic rights, which is why I am taking it so seriously. This position is rather consistently, and very thoroughly, demonstrated by a long-term analysis of the verifiable facts (much of the information actually available from government agencies and documentation). For example, the "Patriot Act", was not "a lousy knee-jerk reaction law" (sorry if you are offended by my use of quotes)... though, it [The Patriot Act] was presented, and passed, as such. The Patriot-Act was actually previously, very specifically, detailed and promoted by the Justice Department, and was essentially written, long before 9-11 (additionally, I wasn't actually referring to the "Patriot Act". I was referring to other laws which were crafted, and en-stated to specifically give the government the power to unilaterally grant itself the ability to search through a citizen's effects, and communications, without a legitimate warrant). That reality, is simply another fact. Furthermore, this current electronic-communications-access push has been sought (and been moved forward) for quite some time (by various interests, corporate, and governmental, throughout the world) going back to the eighties and nineties (depending on the media).

This, particular, Internet-data vacuum scheme (preemptively spying on everyone's Internet-activity, in case... a "crime" is later suspected) actually has two parts. The first consists of mandatory "data retention". The second consists of creating a framework of, virtually-unfettered, access to such stored data. Interestingly, "western" countries around the world have tackled this process in different orders. Some created the laws granting, virtually unlimited access to any such data (lacking true "due-process", or recognition of any legitimate legal restraint/recognition of personal-rights) and then, "data-retention" was mandated (the United States and Canada followed this pattern). Others mandated data-retention, first, and then legislatively granted themselves access to such data, after it was already being collected and stored (the EU primarily followed this sequence, thought there is more , and more, push-back against this... by EU citizens... now that the continuing expansion of power, and potential abuses against human-rights, have begun to manifest themselves more evidently).

However, the verifiable reality is that this particular action is not, merely, an ill-conceived violation of people's privacy. Nor, is it truly necessary to address any alleged "threats" (unless, you flatly espouse the position that the Founding Fathers of this nation were utterly wrong about the importance of "liberty" as a legally-protected, guiding principle of human-dignity). However, most of the people, with whom, I have discussed this have unquestionably expressed the opinion that this, is, very clearly part of an intentional assault on of one of the most important (and basic) principles of American liberty (directly-violating the "search and seizure" clause of the U.S. Constitution... not to mention the overwhelmingly-negative effects this will have on the more fundamental principle of "Free Speech" and thought, in general). And, yes... I freely admit that I really do experience a certain, powerfully-emotional, response to such unacceptable actions, especially when certain individuals, so cavalierly, dismiss (or, even, defend) the disgusting ramifications of such fundamental societal-alteration and public-manipulation (using the flimsiest rationalizations).

Also, I feel the need to point-out that it is a sad sociological fact (proven repeatedly by history) that a percentage of any population will accept virtually any injustice, or lie, in order to avoid dealing with unpleasant realities (again history is replete...).

Further, it is also an observable fact that... that particular group of people (who, ever-blissfully, march forward, in denial of the reality around them) will actually, often vehemently, attack anyone that effectively demonstrates the falsity of those charades. And, a further fact is that these people have repeatedly been shown by history, to be the the most valuable resource, and weapon, of tyrants (from ancient times, to our own American revolution, to Fascism and Communism in Europe in the twentieth century, through McCarthyism, on through the ongoing wars on "drugs", "terrorism", and "child abuse").

So... I do not feel any need to apologize (nor alter) my positions (or expressions) on such, supremely-important (to me, at least), issues.

Oh... I would like to thank you for the, rhetorical, dissertation on your opinions on grammar and psychology. I plan to contemplate your, incredibly-sensible, insights... with all of the diligence and lack of temerity that I feel it is due (...with regards to the actual situation that we Americans, and our Republic, now find ourselves, facing). And, yes... I am already quite politically active on these subjects, thank you.