New ISP will defend users from government spying , page 1


Pages: <<  1    2    3  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 30 times
Topic started on 18-4-2012 @ 04:42 AM by Wide-Eyes

New ISP will defend users from government spying


www.youtube.com
As the battle rages on over regulations for the Internet, one man is proposing a solution that could curb the concerns over online privacy. Legislation is being pushed in America right now that could stop online piracy, but would at the same time also infringe on the rights of many. Could all that change, though? One new Internet Service Provider will challenge the government if a user's information is requested. Nicholas Merrill, executive director for The Calyx Institute, joins us to explain.
(visit the link for the full news article)


reply posted on 18-4-2012 @ 04:43 AM by Wide-Eyes
edit on 18-4-2012 by Wide-Eyes because: (no reason given)




reply posted on 18-4-2012 @ 04:44 AM by silo13
Here's your video.



I'm looking forward to feedback - if this is possible - if it will be done - how I sign up - etc.

Thanks!

peace


reply posted on 18-4-2012 @ 05:04 AM by BigBruddah
reply to post by Wide-Eyes



In all honesty, I think this is a bad idea. I mean how many criminals, pedophiles etc are going to be connected through this provider? I'm against the government wanting every little bit of information but somewhere the line has to be drawn and it's painfully obvious this is just going to let people get away with bad things. I know there are already other ways to protect your virtual identity and that the government can also use other methods to catch criminals but this is too far in my opinion.

Although he would have to put up a hell of a fight to get away with not handing over the information in the first place.


reply posted on 18-4-2012 @ 05:34 AM by Swizzy
reply to post by BigBruddah




That's exactly the argument the government uses to protect us from the dangers of the internet.

Pedophilia needs to be solved at it's source, the internet is simply a medium they use.

What if they start using physical pictures and paper? Outlaw cameras? pf...


reply posted on 18-4-2012 @ 05:39 AM by domasio
reply to post by Swizzy



I agree, too many people use the "paedophile" argument against allowing freedom of the internet.

Yes, it means criminals will get away with things, but at the end of the day, the criminals are much less than 1% of society, which means that the 99.???% of people would have to be putting up with these laws for a tiny tiny tiny minority. In other words, the minority wins, the opposite of democracy.


reply posted on 18-4-2012 @ 06:09 AM by mainidh
Originally posted by Swizzy
reply to
post by BigBruddah




That's exactly the argument the government uses to protect us from the dangers of the internet.

Pedophilia needs to be solved at it's source, the internet is simply a medium they use.

What if they start using physical pictures and paper? Outlaw cameras? pf...


Not only that, the internet is a Small part of it all, you hear about these sick lowlifes being caught with thousands and thousands of images and video, on removable media. They aren't zipping up terrabytes of CP and sending it over the internet, they're meeting to do major trading.

So, penalising everyone is just a typical government manoeuvre to put walls around freedom. It will do absolutely nothing to stop sick people. In fact, it will most likely keep them safe as they tighten their own methods, and ultimately do the exact opposite such bills are for. Pure stupidity, but as transparent as it is... it's the government afterall.



reply posted on 18-4-2012 @ 06:18 AM by Wide-Eyes
reply to post by djyorkie



Yes, this is were I'm a little unclear about the idea of this ISP. Like I said, I'm not very tech savvy with networks and software. Is he saying it's untraceable or just that he will refuse to hand details over without probable cause?


reply posted on 18-4-2012 @ 06:40 AM by purplemer
Originally posted by BigBruddah
reply to
post by Wide-Eyes



In all honesty, I think this is a bad idea. I mean how many criminals, are going to be connected through this provider? I'm against the government wanting every little bit of information but somewhere the line has to be drawn and it's painfully obvious this is just going to let people get away with bad things. I know there are already other ways to protect your virtual identity and that the government can also use other methods to catch criminals but this is too far in my opinion.

Although he would have to put up a hell of a fight to get away with not handing over the information in the first place.


So you would have the net controled because of a few pedophiles etc.....


reply posted on 18-4-2012 @ 07:13 AM by nithaiah
Originally posted by BigBruddah
reply to
post by Wide-Eyes



In all honesty, I think this is a bad idea. I mean how many criminals, pedophiles etc are going to be connected through this provider? I'm against the government wanting every little bit of information but somewhere the line has to be drawn and it's painfully obvious this is just going to let people get away with bad things. I know there are already other ways to protect your virtual identity and that the government can also use other methods to catch criminals but this is too far in my opinion.

Although he would have to put up a hell of a fight to get away with not handing over the information in the first place.


That is the price of freedom. You have a guaranteed right, such as freedom of speech, and there are going to be some nuts out there who spew nothing but hate, ugliness, and terrible discrimination and/or murder, like Westboro Baptist. But to take it away to shut up the people whose opinions are actively harmful, you take it away from EVERYONE.

Furthermore, even without a guaranteed right for the law-abiding, criminals will still commit crimes by exploiting that right. Because they don't care if there's a law or not, they are still going to find a way to do what they do.

I hope that guy does it. If he does, I will be all over it like white on rice.


reply posted on 18-4-2012 @ 07:50 AM by detachedindividual
reply to post by BigBruddah



People already get away with bad things.

Anonymous managed to take down a massive pedo ring that the police around the world couldn't touch. And we're supposed to believe these laws are intended to "protect" people? Not a chance.

The gov in the UK is also now planning to extend their monitoring, recording every single connection on the internet, and opening content at will.

There are already a lot of methods to become anonymous on the internet, regardless of this snooping. Are we supposed to believe that people who want to communicate secretly cannot use encryption methods?

These methods are not intended to prevent crime or terrorism. If you are engaged in either you can simply go off the radar using a proxy or a "book" encryption that NO AGENCY can hack.

What these measures will do is allow governments to intercept, monitor and prevent the democratic process of rallying the people for protest. This is intended to be used to prevent domestic unrest, to stop people from being able to organize peaceful protest around the world.

It is no coincidence that just as the economy tanks, and as we're expecting the Euro to collapse, that the UK government now wants total control over who communicates with who, when, and why. They know that massive social unrest is coming, and that the two-party system is finally at risk. The PTB cannot afford to let the people create their own parties, without influence of the elites, and actually lead their own nations - they would loose their control over entire nations.

If you have any doubt about this, just look at the infiltration of existing peaceful protest groups over the last ten years. This has been going on for a long time and they admit it.

They will be using these methods to stop you from going to that rally to call for democratically elected government, not to stop you from acting illegally.


reply posted on 18-4-2012 @ 07:56 AM by Mart0
reply to post by djyorkie



It is illegal for ISP's to actively monitor your Internet traffic unless warranted by the Police, So taking that this ISP will refuse to cooperate with police, That doesn't seem likely.
It sounds from the article that the ISP are making a system that even they themselves cannot tell what the user is doing or connecting too, So they are not "harboing" criminal activites so to speak. I think plausible deniability comes into play here? Not to sure about American Law.


reply posted on 18-4-2012 @ 01:06 PM by Wide-Eyes
reply to post by n00bUK



Thank you for reading/watching and replying.

I agree with what you said, words of wisdom. I really appreciate that you are going to share this with those you care about, I am going to too. We just need to keep our eye on developments with this because chances are, he will be stopped. One way or another.

Let's hope not and keep our eyes on this.
Pages: <<  1    2    3  >>    ^^TOP^^



Israel angered over IAEA vote on nuclear arsenal
  Posted 13 days ago with 79 member flags
Neil Armstrong dead at age 82 - report
  Posted 17 days ago with 63 member flags
Judge orders release of detained Marine veteran
  Posted 19 days ago with 58 member flags
Birds hold \'funerals\' for dead
  Posted 10 days ago with 55 member flags
TSA agents swarm Ron Paul\'s plane, demand explosives check
  Posted 11 days ago with 47 member flags
Mysterious Changes in Ocean Salt Spur NASA Expedition
  Posted 1 days ago with 36 member flags
Ga. Murder Case Uncovers Terror Plot by Soldiers
  Posted 15 days ago with 32 member flags