Thing is, the administration has effectively suspended action on both bills pending already solicited public feedback and suggested improvements. Reacting to that with blackouts and protests that "we MUST stop this fascist law threatening the very existence of all ehumanity111" seems like the typical over the top hysteria that breaks out every time the US government considers clamping down on peoples "freedom" to do any irresponsible or larcenous thing they like on the internet that government created. It might be a great way for people to vent their spleens, but will not change anything, because it does not provide any of the superior alternatives the administration has requested.
You really shouldn't trivialize this. Even if I can't convince you of the detriment these bills would cause, you can't pretend this is just the geeks flipping out over nothing. There are a lot of MAJOR companies actively lobbying for both sides. Hundreds of websites are going to black out tomorrow, including some huge names. Heck, even Google has thrown their weight in and announced that they're going to protest the bill on their homepage. To my knowledge this sort of thing has never happened before.
Also, this is nowhere near over, as you seem to be saying. SOPA, which was tabled for a bit, has just been revived. PIPA goes to the floor for a vote in 7 days. Oh, and about the blackouts? Most of them were formulated/planned before the white house's announcement. Guess what, though? Google, Scribd, Wordpress and a lot of other big sites joined the protest AFTER the Obama administration had already come out against the bills. Clearly, there are some major powers out there that don't think this is anywhere near "over."
Meanwhile, the government WILL enact SOME kind of legislation to restrict activity it deems undesirable; there are ample and powerful strategic reasons to do so wholly apart from any commercial ones. That "next generation security protocol that we badly need"? I am QUITE sure Congress, the President and the DoD agree with you on that need; instead of inciting mass epanic over their attempts to implement SOMETHING in that direction, why not include that in a response to their reasonable request that people tell them "not what is wrong, but what would be RIGHT"? Because as long as the definition of "right" is "nothing at all" they will dismiss that ludicrously untenable "suggestion."
That's just the thing; there's already a LOT of legislation out there! The entertainment industry has enormous censorship powers online. How many times have you gone to watch a video, only to see "this video has been removed due to copyright violations?" Such things don't require anything more than a request! Heck, arstechnica, a major tech blog with over 10 million unique viewers per month, lost their official Facebook page for several days due to an anonymous copyright complaint that didn't specify the infringing content. How about that? There is more than enough legislation in place.
Let's move on, though, and talk about your comment regarding the White House's request for "what would be right?" There is, of course, nothing wrong with them asking that question. It doesn't make sense, though, to pass a bad bill just because there's no other solution on the table. The current situation, flawed though it may be, is preferable to the SOPA/PIPA bills. The overwhelming opinion among those not connected to the entertainment/content industry is that this bill will cost the economy far more than it saves. It doesn't make sense to pass something if the "solution" does more harm than good!
The US government will not preserve, not just commercial vulnerabilities to piracy, but national vulnerabilities to military espionage, surveillance and sabotage, simply because the netizens of the world feel threatened by attempts to eliminate those vulnerabilities. Nor should it. There WILL be a new regulatory law; the only question is whether the people most affected by it choose to be involved with its design and thereby produce a largely positive law that accomplishes necessary reform and regulation without unduly censoring anyone or restricting their access to data that should be freely available. If, however, this is just another case of people asserting their "right" to download the location of US missile silos, and their computer access codes, then the government will ignore them, as it should.
Wait, what? "National vulnerabilities to espionage?" Neither SOPA nor PIPA have any meaningful impact on "national security."
Just out of idle curiosity, do we have an estimate of how many of the sites and servers that might be shut down under this law are actually owned and operated by the US government? I know the internets infrastructure has experienced a lot of private growth in the past decade or two, but have we reached the point where the internet could just keep on truckin' if the US government took all its systems offline tomorrow? If the answer is "no" is it all that unreasonable for them to perform at least a LITTLE regulation of that infrastructure, certainly their share of it? Just enough that the hundreds of daily cyberattacks from China do not shut down our radar defenses or download schematics of an Abrams MBT?
There would be zero impact if the US government took its systems offline, except for the websites they directly operate (.gov and .mil sites, primarily). The government does not own or operate any of the internet's important infrastructure. It does maintain final approval over the root DNS zone, but that's only a regulatory thing that it won't let go of, not a service provided to help the internet stay afloat.
English Wikipedia Anti-SOPA Blackout
17/01/2012 08:31:46 AM
- 2101 Views
Yeah, man, because currently copyright holders have no recourse, am I right?
17/01/2012 11:47:35 AM
- 935 Views
"altering the infrastructure of the Internet so as to render RAFO virtually inaccessible"?
17/01/2012 08:12:27 PM
- 1038 Views
I'll go ahead and ask before I get my panties in a bunch: do you understand these bills?
17/01/2012 09:09:22 PM
- 1130 Views
I admit I have not looked into it much
17/01/2012 11:42:30 PM
- 985 Views
And yet you're still arguing the matter.
18/01/2012 02:34:04 AM
- 1090 Views
I love you. *NM*
18/01/2012 03:41:03 AM
- 631 Views
heh, thanks. I usually find myself pushing minority opinions. Nice to be "appreciated" for once. *NM*
18/01/2012 04:01:10 AM
- 618 Views
Can i second the adulation?
18/01/2012 04:07:17 AM
- 821 Views
I too (three?) appreciate the common sense and reasonable explanations. *NM*
18/01/2012 04:12:59 AM
- 616 Views
Right, because the argument is not just over THIS bill but, apparently, over ANY bill.
18/01/2012 11:09:13 AM
- 987 Views
Alternatives to SOPA/PIPA have been proposed for months now. Please stop arguing this.
18/01/2012 05:42:10 PM
- 940 Views
Also, in the case of the OPEN Act, it has not "been proposed for months."
18/01/2012 07:28:15 PM
- 1405 Views
"sensitive federal content"? Provide a source justifying this claim and it's relevance, please.
18/01/2012 05:59:47 PM
- 1004 Views
I would not have thought a source necessary.
18/01/2012 06:24:44 PM
- 1000 Views
Okay, I'm with Aemon now.
18/01/2012 07:36:21 PM
- 1013 Views
OK.
18/01/2012 10:16:16 PM
- 1036 Views
should be interesting
17/01/2012 12:41:47 PM
- 859 Views
Could be; depends on a lot of factors.
17/01/2012 07:38:55 PM
- 927 Views
See, that's one of the biggest problems that people aren't understanding.
17/01/2012 09:31:38 PM
- 945 Views
So tell them that.
17/01/2012 11:54:19 PM
- 1089 Views
Joel, I think I'm done with this unless you want to do some research.
18/01/2012 02:53:19 AM
- 892 Views
Research would tell me what is wrong with these bills and how a good bill should look.
18/01/2012 11:22:46 AM
- 1009 Views
Could've done without the snide rejoinder, but, good.
17/01/2012 02:20:08 PM
- 864 Views
I love the black banner, like some kind of internet Holocaust.
17/01/2012 08:03:27 PM
- 1003 Views
Are you aware that SOPA/PIPA has nothing to do with hackers and everything to do with copyright?
18/01/2012 02:08:56 AM
- 845 Views
There seems to be some overlap.
18/01/2012 01:08:22 PM
- 968 Views
Re: There seems to be some overlap.
18/01/2012 08:13:15 PM
- 839 Views
Re: There still seems to be some overlap.
18/01/2012 10:27:32 PM
- 1104 Views
Re: There still seems to be some overlap.
18/01/2012 11:30:39 PM
- 959 Views
Just because the news does not mention something does not automatically make it non-applicable.
19/01/2012 04:08:58 PM
- 972 Views
Re: Just because the news does not mention something does not automatically make it non-applicable.
19/01/2012 10:39:40 PM
- 958 Views
If you re-read your last sentence it should be clear why this law is being pushed.
20/01/2012 09:12:29 PM
- 1240 Views
Re: If you re-read your last sentence it should be clear why this law is being pushed.
21/01/2012 03:19:49 AM
- 866 Views
Er, what Ghav said.
18/01/2012 02:30:37 AM
- 869 Views
Sorry, protecting Pirate Bay and offshore gambling are not compelling counterarguments.
18/01/2012 11:38:08 AM
- 911 Views
Okay, another analogy:
18/01/2012 02:04:12 PM
- 896 Views
The devil is always in the details, and it seems clear the details need great revision.
18/01/2012 03:31:20 PM
- 901 Views
what they SHOULD do is stop taking money from proponents of sopa/pipa
18/01/2012 03:51:09 PM
- 1015 Views
Yes, they should, but, once again, that approach will not prevent a new law.
18/01/2012 04:05:02 PM
- 989 Views
Re: The devil is always in the details, and it seems clear the details need great revision.
18/01/2012 04:27:30 PM
- 940 Views
If the US government wants to summarily block sites within the US, it already can and will.
18/01/2012 06:15:53 PM
- 891 Views
You know all this anti-SOPA bullshit is making me hope the bill passes.
18/01/2012 04:00:17 AM
- 956 Views
I would not go THAT far; it seems clear these bills have many objectionable provisions.
18/01/2012 11:41:23 AM
- 981 Views
Re: I would not go THAT far; it seems clear these bills have many objectionable provisions.
19/01/2012 01:57:46 AM
- 804 Views
Yeah, the extreme bias on both sides is why the bills will likely pass more or less as written.
19/01/2012 03:31:52 PM
- 988 Views
joel, you need to consider three things
18/01/2012 06:06:16 AM
- 949 Views
You need to consider that they WILL pass some legislation, and what you want it to contain.
18/01/2012 12:15:38 PM
- 998 Views
again, it's not about piracy, it's about protecting the mpaa/riaa business model at our expense
18/01/2012 03:34:32 PM
- 1072 Views
Yeah, see, that is the problem: "it's not about piracy."
18/01/2012 03:57:55 PM
- 910 Views
if piracy is such a problem then the mpaa/riaa need to PROVE their losses
19/01/2012 02:43:31 AM
- 930 Views
How do you expect anyone to prove what people WOULD HAVE bought if they could not just take it?
19/01/2012 03:57:24 PM
- 1214 Views
A technical examination of SOPA and PROTECT IP
18/01/2012 08:32:44 AM
- 875 Views
"As a disclaimer, I am not a lawyer, I'm a sysadmin."
18/01/2012 12:47:16 PM
- 1134 Views
Wikipedia has already convinced me
18/01/2012 03:26:01 PM
- 755 Views
Trying to stop this legislation without proposing an alternative is trying to stop ANY legislation.
18/01/2012 03:44:18 PM
- 980 Views
It isn't their job to propose legislation
18/01/2012 04:12:53 PM
- 900 Views
No, but they have as much RIGHT to do so as anyone else.
18/01/2012 05:31:55 PM
- 878 Views
Strike three.
18/01/2012 05:37:55 PM
- 937 Views
That is fine; that is what people SHOULD be doing.
18/01/2012 06:03:59 PM
- 753 Views
Things being better now than they would be under SOPA seems like a legitimate argument to me
18/01/2012 09:04:18 PM
- 1016 Views
Against SOPA, sure; against ANY new law, no.
18/01/2012 10:46:48 PM
- 859 Views
About "proposing new legislation"
18/01/2012 04:45:08 PM
- 1014 Views
So true
18/01/2012 05:08:45 PM
- 953 Views
Re: About "proposing new legislation"
18/01/2012 05:59:55 PM
- 1091 Views
Hm, you should read my post one above about combatting online piracy.
18/01/2012 06:20:16 PM
- 1044 Views
I would not recommend photocopying a book and handing it out on street corners.
18/01/2012 06:45:52 PM
- 963 Views
Not to blame, neccessarily. But you have to live in the real world.
18/01/2012 07:31:18 PM
- 884 Views
Re: Not to blame, neccessarily. But you have to live in the real world.
18/01/2012 08:55:59 PM
- 973 Views
I always liked the codewheels SSI provided with copies of their Gold Box AD&D games.
18/01/2012 10:07:40 PM
- 1095 Views
These are really different arguments
19/01/2012 12:05:10 AM
- 865 Views
TV is slightly different, because regional availability becomes a factor.
19/01/2012 04:18:58 PM
- 858 Views
Yeah, so I use Russian wikipedia for a day. Or German wikipedia, or French, or Italian... *NM*
18/01/2012 06:23:36 PM
- 669 Views
Or just hit stop right before the script runs. *NM*
18/01/2012 06:52:40 PM
- 653 Views
Or just disable Java. *NM*
19/01/2012 01:58:03 AM
- 515 Views
That's not as much fun though. *NM*
19/01/2012 02:13:44 AM
- 643 Views
Exactly, this way its kind of a game. *NM*
19/01/2012 02:20:37 AM
- 457 Views
I really don't see the fun in that. Wikipedia is just a tool, not a game. *NM*
19/01/2012 04:59:14 AM
- 560 Views
I don't know about those (except French), but none of the ones I ever used are remotely as good. *NM*
18/01/2012 08:13:47 PM
- 644 Views
Russian wikipedia is very good if you're not checking some obscure Western cultural phenomena.
19/01/2012 01:57:43 AM
- 1039 Views
Or Answers.com, or even the actual sources that are often copy/pasted into Wikipedia...
19/01/2012 01:07:38 AM
- 1002 Views
Re: Or Answers.com, or even the actual sources that are often copy/pasted into Wikipedia... *NM*
19/01/2012 01:34:46 AM
- 690 Views
Oh, no; now Congress will be inundated with complaints from lazy college students!
19/01/2012 04:40:12 PM
- 1024 Views
13 previously unopposed senators now do not support SOPA.
19/01/2012 11:36:15 PM
- 986 Views
How does that "rebutt" what was a facetious post in the first place?
20/01/2012 09:24:27 PM
- 1086 Views