|
Author
|
Topic: Congress and Computers
|
Dead Badger
Scrappy Doo
|
posted September 25, 2001 05:15 AM
 
quote:
"Why should computer crimes rise to the level of terrorist acts? When you think about the utilization of computers in air traffic control, you can imagine the chaos that could come from the disruption of that system if we had an assault launched through a computer virus or some other infection in the computer infrastructure. Not to mention other very serious controls that relate to other infrastructure whether it be power grids, power generation, supplies and the like ... We understand that these kinds of crimes can threaten the lives and well-being of multitudes of individuals."US Attorney General John Ashcroft, addressing House Judiciary Committee yesterday.
Terrorist acts carry a mandatory life sentence. And in a "not only ... but also", a measure is proposed that would allow the indefinite detention of suspicious aliens, without possibility of judicial review. Here's the news article. Just how many rights will be infringed, and unconstitutional measures imposed, before the country is "safe"? Could someone with better knowledge of the US legislative process give an idea of how long these sorts of measures might take to pass? Ashcroft seemed ... excessively keen, shall we say. IP: Logged |
Five Tons of Flax
Self-Made User
|
posted September 25, 2001 08:14 AM
According to Slashdot, this may pass as early as next week.
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/09/24/2044242&mode=nested Like it says: I feel safer already IP: Logged |
DaveInACar
Self-Made User
|
posted September 25, 2001 08:37 AM
Eek. IP: Logged |
Morat
Self-Made User
|
posted September 25, 2001 09:11 AM
Thank God for the bastion of sanity I like to refer to as "the Judicial Branch". In most cases the Senate acts as a handbrake to the more ridiculous ideas of the House. However, they will occasionally pass something they know won't survive judicial review so that they can claim they "did their job", blame it on "activist/liberal/conservative/pigheaded/etc" judges and go about their merry way. ------------------
Lisa! In this house we obey the Laws of Thermodynamics! --Homer Simpson IP: Logged |
farwell3d
Self-Made User
|
posted September 25, 2001 01:12 PM
According to the Christian Science Monitor (for those of you that don't know, it is not at all a religous publication despite the name) 72% of Americans are willing to give up some freedom in order to be safer.This was in response to the goverment passing a law that allows the FBI to do more monitoring and reading of email. As that great thinker of our time, my roomate Gavin Lehr said "If there's one thing I hate, it's privacy." He also said "So, 72% of americans are stupid." ------------------
"You won't find me gone
Raised Hands Surrond Us
3 Nails to Protect Us
I'll find my way back home
Raised Hands Surround Us
3 Nails to Protect Us"
-Project 86 "Open Hand" IP: Logged |
Morat
Self-Made User
|
posted September 25, 2001 01:38 PM
I was shocked the first time I read editorials there. I was expecting, I guess, the sort of Roberston level of political thinking. It was a pleasant surprise to see they were thoughtful, respectful, and learned. I tend to browse there quite often. As to the 72% of Americans, it doesn't surprise me. Eh, nothing worth having is risk free.
------------------
Lisa! In this house we obey the Laws of Thermodynamics! --Homer Simpson IP: Logged |
RedTwo
Self-Made User
|
posted September 25, 2001 02:35 PM
Not really on-topic, but another vote for the CSM. One of my journalism profs, who had been chief editor of two different newspapers in his earlier years, said the Christian Science Monitor had some of the best, most thorough, and most responsible journalism in the world.------------------
Lore> I want to go to the Jehovah's Witness paradise, 'cause you get to pet baby pandas. babybabble
IP: Logged |
Toon
Shuttlecock
|
posted September 25, 2001 08:47 PM
I'm perfectly willing to give up some freedom in order to be safer. I do that all the time. So does everybody.Privacy and freedom of speech, however, are not among the concessions I am willing to make.
I suspect that 72% would be a very different number if you asked specifically about whether people were willing to give up privacy of communications. ------------------
-=> Toon "Toon, it's okay -- just think of the config.sys file as bizarre post-modern poetry."
-Rob Wynne on #filkhaven IP: Logged |
farwell3d
Self-Made User
|
posted September 25, 2001 09:09 PM
Actually, that was exactlly what it was in relation to, the privacy of emails. IP: Logged |
Maverick
Self-Made User
|
posted September 26, 2001 05:48 AM
I'd be interested to know how many of that 72% actually use email, then.IP: Logged |
Morat
Self-Made User
|
posted September 26, 2001 08:39 AM
If it passes, I'll use PGP. All there is to it. I've got nothing to hide, but if they're gonna snoop my email, I might as well make them work for it. *shrug*. It's stupid anyways. Do they honestly think terrorists don't know we have spy satellites, listen in on cell-phone and sattelite phone conversations and have some of the best crypto people in the world? They're not going to send an heavily encrypted email detailing the plot. They'll hash it out face to face. The email's will have phrases like "I saw a baseball game last night. Grand slam in the seventh" not "The bomb is in place, will go off as scheduled". Stupid, stupid, stupid knee jerk reaction. On the bright side, Congress seems to be suspicious about how the Justice department's "solutions" resemble the "wish list" they've had for years. They wouldn't be the only ones tempted to use the crises to pass some pet projects or notions.
------------------
Lisa! In this house we obey the Laws of Thermodynamics!
--Homer Simpson [This message has been edited by Morat (edited September 26, 2001).] IP: Logged | |
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone!
Brunching UBB
