It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
(visit the link for the full news article)
Former Counter Terrorism Czar Richard Clarke told a leading expert on internet free speech, Stanford law professor Lawrence Lessig, that there was going to be an "i-9/11", in other words, an electronic terrorist act, and an "i-Patriot Act" to crack down on freedoms on the Internet under the guise of protecting against such threats:
where the instability or the insecurity of the internet becomes manifest during a malicious event which then inspires the government into a response. You’ve got to remember that after 9/11 the government drew up the Patriot Act within 20 days and it was passed.
There’s going to be an i-9/11 event. Which doesn’t necessarily mean an Al Qaeda attack, it means an event where the instability or the insecurity of the internet becomes manifest during a malicious event which then inspires the government into a response. You’ve got to remember that after 9/11 the government drew up the Patriot Act within 20 days and it was passed.
I wouldn't be surprised, this "LulzSec" group always gave me a bad feeling. But you do realize "Net Neutrality" is a "free and open web". You mean their agenda was to trample NN?
linking LulzSecurity to the FBI who
had the agenda of Net Neutrality
Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
I wouldn't be surprised, this "LulzSec" group always gave me a bad feeling. But you do realize "Net Neutrality" is a "free and open web". You mean their agenda was to trample NN?
Originally posted by boondock-saint
hahahaha
good luck with ur thread.
I wrote a thread a couple days ago
linking LulzSecurity to the FBI who
had the agenda of Net Neutrality
and it got deleted.
Maybe your thread will fare better.
edit on 6/18/2011 by boondock-saint because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
reply to post by boondock-saint
I wouldn't be surprised, this "LulzSec" group always gave me a bad feeling. But you do realize "Net Neutrality" is a "free and open web". You mean their agenda was to trample NN?
linking LulzSecurity to the FBI who
had the agenda of Net Neutrality
Network neutrality (also net neutrality, Internet neutrality) is a principle which advocates no restrictions by Internet service providers or governments on consumers' access to networks that participate in the internet. Specifically, network neutrality would prevent restrictions on content, sites, platforms, the kinds of equipment that may be attached, or the modes of communication.[1][2][3]
secure.wikimedia.org...
Exactly. So please use the term "net neutrality" properly, instead of attaching a negative meaning to it.
Originally posted by boondock-saint
the gov named it net neutrality cuz they are trying
to pass it off as they are protecting you from the
corporations meaning a neutral net equal for
everyone. But in actuality the NN law allows
gov take-over and regulation of the net.
the only way for them to do that is the monitoring
of those backdoors which violate your privacy.
Originally posted by macman
Originally posted by boondock-saint
hahahaha
good luck with ur thread.
I wrote a thread a couple days ago
linking LulzSecurity to the FBI who
had the agenda of Net Neutrality
and it got deleted.
Maybe your thread will fare better.
edit on 6/18/2011 by boondock-saint because: (no reason given)
Or maybe Lulz hacked the ATS Mod account and got rid of the evidence.
Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
reply to post by boondock-saint
Ummm...you guys must be thinking of a bill made to counter NN or something...because it is not what you say it is.
Originally posted by Fractured.Facade
Or maybe there was discussion of hacking techniques, methods or posts that could be used to aid in hacking/cracking.
The terms and conditions are very explicit on this, and if any of that comes out in any discussion, it will likely be deleted.... It is what it is.
Great.
I'll explain. NN Laws allow the gov to keep
the internet fair for everyone.
Please explain exactly what these NN laws entail, and how it allows them to invade our privacy. As far as I can tell, they would simply be forcing the larger service providers to make it fair for the rest of the providers who don't own all the telecommunications infrastructure? Where does it allow them to monitor/censor our browsing or something like that? Because that would be counter to net neutrality I'm afraid.
How do you think they intend to enforce
that law ???
Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
Please explain exactly what these NN laws entail, and how it allows them to invade our privacy. As far as I can tell, they would simply be forcing the larger service providers to make it fair for the rest of the providers who don't own all the telecommunications infrastructure? Where does it allow them to monitor/censor our browsing or something like that? Because that would be counter to net neutrality I'm afraid.