# U.S. Congress is getting ready to pass an internet censorship law



## Transdude1996 (Feb 25, 2018)

https://archive.is/CSyhD
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/02/fosta-would-be-disaster-online-communities


> The House of Representatives is about to vote on a bill that would force online platforms to censor their users. The Allow States and Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act (FOSTA, H.R. 1865) might sound noble, but it would do nothing to stop sex traffickers. What it would do is force online platforms to police their users’ speech more forcefully than ever before, silencing legitimate voices in the process.
> The House Rules Committee is about to approve a new version of FOSTA [.pdf] that incorporates most of the dangerous components of SESTA. This new Frankenstein’s Monster of a bill would be a disaster for Internet intermediaries, marginalized communities, and even trafficking victims themselves.



https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/1865
The bill changes section 230 of the CDA, the law that protects website owners from liability for what their users post, to carve out an exception for instances of human trafficking. *Site owners can be held liable and subject to a criminal fine or imprisonment for not more than 20 years.

WHAT THIS MEANS IN PRACTICE IS THAT ALL IT WOULD TAKE FOR A WEBSITE TO BE SHUT DOWN AND ITS OWNER ARRESTED IS A FALSE FLAG OPERATION OF SPOOKS ENGAGING IN HUMAN TRAFFICKING. ALL U.S. SITES WOULD BECOME FORCED TO IMPOSE EXTREMELY HEAVY-HANDED MODERATION AND CENSORSHIP OR SHUT DOWN ENTIRELY, GBAtemp INCLUDED.

THIS BILL HAS STRONG BIPARTISAN SUPPORT AND WILL LIKELY PASS UNLESS HEAVY RESISTANCE CAN BE ORGANIZED QUICKLY AND ON A LARGE SCALE.*

Voting on the House Floor is scheduled for *THIS TUESDAY*. Start spreading this information on as many websites as you can before it's too late. If you know anyone with a large audience try and get them to spread the word.
*If this bill becomes law then it's GAME OVER for free speech on the internet.*


----------



## SquidGuy (Feb 25, 2018)

Youtube in a nutshell


----------



## SirNapkin1334 (Feb 25, 2018)

FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK. This is BAD. Oh god oh god. This could be the end of the temp.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Feb 25, 2018)

I'm confused as to how this is "censorship." From what I can tell, this only applies to postings related to sex trafficking...


----------



## SquidGuy (Feb 25, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> I'm confused as to how this is "censorship." From what I can tell, this only applies to postings related to sex trafficking...


If this law is applied then there is going to be a troll who is going to kill GBAtemp


----------



## Transdude1996 (Feb 25, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> I'm confused as to how this is "censorship." From what I can tell, this only applies to postings related to sex trafficking...


With the way the law is worded, all it would take to shut down a site and have it's owners in jail is for some joker to make a post.


----------



## Carnelian (Feb 25, 2018)

Time to go to Dark Web...


----------



## smileyhead (Feb 25, 2018)

First Net Neutrality, now this?


Transdude1996 said:


> ALL U.S. SITES WOULD BECOME FORCED TO IMPOSE EXTREMELY HEAVY-HANDED MODERATION AND CENSORSHIP OR SHUT DOWN ENTIRELY, GBAtemp INCLUDED.





SirNapkin1334 said:


> FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK. This is BAD. Oh god oh god. This could be the end of the temp.


I thought Temp was based in France.


----------



## Carnelian (Feb 25, 2018)

-snip-


----------



## SquidGuy (Feb 25, 2018)

Transdude1996 said:


> joker


Did anyone call me?


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Feb 25, 2018)

SquidGuy said:


> If this law is applied then there is going to be a troll who is going to kill GBAtemp


I'd have to assume there's a time limit imposed for how long posts can stay up, and what action is taken depending on the legitimacy of the threat. GBAtemp mods are already very good at taking down spam and troll posts


----------



## DeslotlCL (Feb 25, 2018)

does this mean my precious yiff will be censored? it's a legit question guys


----------



## SquidGuy (Feb 25, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> I'd have to assume there's a time limit imposed for how long posts can stay up, and what action is taken depending on the legitimacy of the threat. GBAtemp mods are already very good at taking down spam and troll posts


BUT there is still a chance that one of the mods might not notice it, I mean we're humans


----------



## smileyhead (Feb 25, 2018)

SquidGuy said:


> Transdude1996 said:
> 
> 
> > joker
> ...


Special Blizzard, is that you?


----------



## DeslotlCL (Feb 25, 2018)

SquidGuy said:


> BUT there is still a chance that one of the mods might not notice it, I mean we're humans


there are times of the day where no mods are online, neither the admins... so, it's highly likeable that the site would be open for a false flag discussion.


----------



## SquidGuy (Feb 25, 2018)

smileyhead said:


> Special Blizzard, is that you?


Why and most importantly how would that be me?

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



DeslotlCL said:


> there are times of the day where no mods are online, neither the admins... so, it's highly likeable that the site would be open for a false flag discussion.


Exactly


----------



## smileyhead (Feb 25, 2018)

SquidGuy said:


> Why and most importantly how would that be me?


He too loves cringy Persona jokes.


----------



## Carnelian (Feb 25, 2018)

It's only the US right?


----------



## smileyhead (Feb 25, 2018)

Carnelian said:


> It's only the US right?


I think so, that's why it doesn't affect Temp.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Feb 25, 2018)

*sigh...*

@Costello, you want to weigh in on this? I'd rather not have speculation flying everywhere when we can just consult a site owner


----------



## SquidGuy (Feb 25, 2018)

smileyhead said:


> He too loves cringy Persona jokes.


Oh that's not me then


----------



## CallmeBerto (Feb 25, 2018)

Another the sky is falling topic. No temp is not going away if someone trolls the site with sex trafficking. Geez chill out guys.


----------



## dAVID_ (Feb 25, 2018)

We'll just have to see how this rolls out.


----------



## SkittleDash (Feb 25, 2018)

Remember when the internet was fun? Good times.


----------



## the_randomizer (Feb 25, 2018)

Congress and all the politicians who vote for this can burn in hell for all I care. I hate our government more than ever now.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Feb 25, 2018)

the_randomizer said:


> Congress and all the politicians who vote for this can burn in hell for all I care.


I mean, the intent is definitely nobil. I think that there's definitely a disconnect between what the lawmakers expect to happen with this and what would really happen, though


----------



## the_randomizer (Feb 25, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> I mean, the intent is definitely nobil. I think that there's definitely a disconnect between what the lawmakers expect to happen with this and what would really happen, though



Why does the government have to intervene at all? Why do they think that they should babysit every little aspect of our lives, what happened to personal responsibility?  Is that too much to ask for people? Government isn't for the people, they only do what they do
to line their own pockets with gold. Like the offender registry system, it doesn't help the offenders make life changes for the better and right their wrongs, it only makes money for lawmakers. I would hate to see sites like this get affected for the actions of a few morons. I've rarely seen things passed by Congress that truly helps the people, I could be wrong though, and that's fine.


----------



## D34DL1N3R (Feb 25, 2018)

CallmeBerto said:


> Another the sky is falling topic. No temp is not going away if someone trolls the site with sex trafficking. Geez chill out guys.



Thank you. Just like all of the other sky is falling internet law change posts throughout the years.


----------



## smilodon (Feb 25, 2018)

These guys understood that the immense majority of internet white knights have no power other than generate clickbait titles on social networks.


----------



## the_randomizer (Feb 25, 2018)

robingilh said:


> These guys understood that the immense majority of internet white knights have no power other that generate clickbait titles on social networks.



White knight/SJWs are nothing but attention seeking pinheads


----------



## SirNapkin1334 (Feb 25, 2018)

smileyhead said:


> First Net Neutrality, now this?
> 
> 
> 
> I thought Temp was based in France.


But it's available in the U.S.


----------



## the_randomizer (Feb 25, 2018)

SirNapkin1334 said:


> But it's available in the U.S.



Who's to say this site won't get blocked or otherwise affected though?


----------



## Deleted User (Feb 25, 2018)

smileyhead said:


> First Net Neutrality, now this?


Well atleast ajit pai is under investigation now.


----------



## VinsCool (Feb 25, 2018)

It wasn't being censored (a bit, maybe less) already?


----------



## the_randomizer (Feb 25, 2018)

VinsCool said:


> It wasn't being censored (a bit, maybe less) already?



I'm not sure, either way, government shouldn't be sticking its nose in others' business IMO


Ominous66521 said:


> Well atleast ajit pai is under investigation now.



Good


----------



## Transdude1996 (Feb 25, 2018)

But, wait, there's more!

https://archive.fo/nNqOv
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/...s-expansion-police-snooping-cross-border-data


> This week, Senators Hatch, Graham, Coons, and Whitehouse introduced a bill that diminishes the data privacy of people around the world.
> The Clarifying Overseas Use of Data (CLOUD) Act expands American and foreign law enforcement’s ability to target and access people’s data across international borders in two ways. First, the bill creates an explicit provision for U.S. law enforcement (from a local police department to federal agents in Immigration and Customs Enforcement) to access “the contents of a wire or electronic communication and any record or other information” about a person regardless of where they live or where that information is located on the globe. In other words, U.S. police could compel a service provider—like Google, Facebook, or Snapchat—to hand over a user’s content and metadata, even if it is stored in a foreign country, without following that foreign country’s privacy laws.


----------



## DeslotlCL (Feb 25, 2018)

Transdude1996 said:


> But, wait, there's more!
> 
> https://archive.fo/nNqOv
> https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/...s-expansion-police-snooping-cross-border-data


That's some pretty bullshit right there boy.
America really is becoming great again. */s*


----------



## GhostLatte (Feb 25, 2018)

Talk about overreacting.


----------



## the_randomizer (Feb 25, 2018)

GhostLatte said:


> Talk about overreacting.



How is this a good thing? Any and all politicians that support the invasion of privacy, our rights, etc, don't deserve our support and should be forced out of office. They can suck it.


----------



## dAVID_ (Feb 25, 2018)

CLOUD? Well, in my opinion, what CLOUD suggests has already been happening, but just now is the government telling us about it, like we're oblivious.

In case that anything DOES happen to GBAtemp, it'll eventually be back up again, probably on the dark web.


----------



## D34DL1N3R (Feb 25, 2018)

Seriously. C'mom people. Do you honestly believe that if someone trolled temp with human trafficking posts, that they wouldn't be able to tell that it was a troll attempt and that GBAtemp isn't a human trafficking site? LMFAO. C'MON!!! BRAINS!!


----------



## Transdude1996 (Feb 25, 2018)

D34DL1N3R said:


> Seriously. C'mom people. Do you honestly believe that if someone trolled temp with human trafficking posts, that they wouldn't be able to tell that it was a troll attempt and that GBAtemp isn't a human trafficking site? LMFAO. C'MON!!! BRAINS!!


Do you really think they care? It gives the government more *illegal* power, and they can wield it however they want.

Or, do you believe the government will come to their senses and "do the right thing", like how the EU didn't surpress a study stating that piracy actually doesn't effect sales, nor force countries to follow the will of the Union regardless of what the citizens actually want?


----------



## bitjacker (Feb 25, 2018)

Why couldn't the ban hammer be swung at the troll's face? hard.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Feb 25, 2018)

Transdude1996 said:


> Do you really think they care? It gives the government more *illegal* power, and they can wield it however they want.


How's that, exactly?


----------



## DarthDub (Feb 25, 2018)

Sounds like SOPA all over again..


----------



## the_randomizer (Feb 25, 2018)

More pusillanimously sanctioned government cowardice to "protect" people. Shocking.


----------



## Deleted User (Feb 25, 2018)

I'm guessing the site owner could just remove the comment before any damage is done,then ban the trolls account,but I don't think that would stop them from coming back to do the same thing untill the site is taken down.In a way it's a false flag with higher consequences.


----------



## weatMod (Feb 26, 2018)

i saw this OP on /g/ with  4chinz in place  gbatemp


----------



## chrisrlink (Feb 26, 2018)

it shouldn't be like this fucking assholes it should go like arrest the poster/troll not shutdown the site but thats in an ideal world you fucked up america i tell you time and again TRUMP IS EVIL INCARNATED


----------



## DeslotlCL (Feb 26, 2018)

chrisrlink said:


> it shouldn't be like this fucking assholes it should go like arrest the poster/troll not shutdown the site but thats in an ideal world you fucked up america i tell you time and again TRUMP IS EVIL INCARNATED


Well americans decided to vote for him so you guys enjoy him for the next 3 years.


----------



## chrisrlink (Feb 26, 2018)

they could close the site "lock down" more like it and make this site invite only

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

stupid republicans should've thought of that first i doubt a  site thats console hacking would be a target imediatly especially if the admins are quick to ban trolls and I'm sure they track ip's saddlly if they realize it's a troll they'll arrest them cause i doubt they'll just go after temp anyways who knows the us government are the trolls for a loophole to shut down "legal" hacking sites

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

at this rate I am definitely fleeing the US for a different country (not canada cause off that post vietnam war agreement) maybe Philippines? somewhere cheaper


----------



## Lukerz (Feb 26, 2018)

Kinda fun to watch everyone freak out not gonna lie. Mark my words no one will care about this in a year.


----------



## D34DL1N3R (Feb 26, 2018)

DeslotlCL said:


> Well americans decided to vote for him so you guys enjoy him for the next 3 years.



I didn't vote for either Hillary or Trump, but technically Americans did NOT vote him in. They voted Hillary in.


----------



## the_randomizer (Feb 26, 2018)

D34DL1N3R said:


> I didn't vote for either Hillary or Trump, but technically Americans did NOT vote him in. They voted Hillary in.



And people think that these kinds of things wouldn't go through Congress if she was in charge? If people didn't complain what Republicans did, they would complain on what Democrats would do just the same. Doesn't matter who would've won, people wouldn't be happy with what either one does.


----------



## samcambolt270 (Feb 26, 2018)

the_randomizer said:


> If people didn't complain what Republicans did, they would complain on what Democrats would do just the same. Doesn't matter who would've won, people wouldn't be happy with what either one does.


 ^this. No matter who actually wins, they're automatically considered evil disregarding what they actually do as a president. Trump could do absolutely fuck all as president and ride it out and people'd still call him satan.


----------



## the_randomizer (Feb 26, 2018)

samcambolt270 said:


> ^this. No matter who actually wins, they're automatically considered evil disregarding what they actually do as a president. Trump could do absolutely fuck all as president and ride it out and people'd still call him satan.



I'm not saying either candidate is perfect, people are never happy with who the POTUS is, it's always been this way. I didn't want Clinton to win based off of her policies including her support for the TPP (she "opposed it" but would have supported it), among likely being for sanctuary cities and funding them,


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Feb 26, 2018)

samcambolt270 said:


> ^this. No matter who actually wins, they're automatically considered evil disregarding what they actually do as a president. Trump could do absolutely fuck all as president and ride it out and people'd still call him satan.


There are, of course, people who will invariably bash the people that run for the opposite platform no matter what they actually do, I'm not going to deny that.

That said, I think one of both the best _and _worst parts of the Trump presidency is that he's doing exactly that. Like, literally. He's done almost nothing, from a legislative standpoint. (Now, from a _diplomatic_ standpoint, on the other hand...)


----------



## samcambolt270 (Feb 26, 2018)

the_randomizer said:


> I'm not saying either candidate is perfect, people are never happy with who the POTUS is, it's always been this way. I didn't want Clinton to win based off of her policies including her support for the TPP (she "opposed it" but would have supported it), among likely being for sanctuary cities and funding them,


I'm not saying they are either. I couldnt care less about politics. I'm just sick of the constant baseless complaining.


----------



## MasterJ360 (Feb 26, 2018)

Maybe this will turn into an early April Fools joke


----------



## Termer (Feb 27, 2018)

Please, read this 8chan thread. it will explain how it affects websites, especially ones that advocate free speech. https://8ch.net/pol/res/11306512.html


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Feb 27, 2018)

Termer said:


> Please, read this 8chan thread. it will explain how it affects websites, especially ones that advocate free speech. https://8ch.net/pol/res/11306512.html


Ah yes, 8chan, the authority on... uh........... yeah


----------



## DarthDub (Feb 27, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> Ah yes, 8chan, the authority on... uh........... yeah


Maybe you should read before posting so you don't look like an arse?
This is one of the sources posted in that link.
https_:_//www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/1865


----------



## Termer (Feb 27, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> Ah yes, 8chan, the authority on... uh........... yeah


I know. 8ch, or any other chan for that matter, does not have any authority. It just happens to be where I first came across this, it was top of the nerve center. It's just a lot longer than the version here.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Feb 27, 2018)

DarthDub said:


> Maybe you should read before posting so you don't look like an arse?
> This is one of the sources posted in that link.
> https_:_//www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/1865


That's the text of the bill, yeah

Let's not pretend that 8chan isn't a source of a lot of right-wing trolling and content made in incredibly poor taste, alongside 4chan. It's not difficult to see why some members would potentially be paranoid about content relating to sexual assault/trafficking being "censored"


----------



## Termer (Feb 27, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> That's the text of the bill, yeah
> 
> Let's not pretend that 8chan isn't a source of a lot of right-wing trolling and content made in incredibly poor taste, alongside 4chan. It's not difficult to see why some members would potentially be paranoid about content relating to sexual assault/trafficking being "censored"


I agree. I don't use 4chan because it blocks Tor, and other such things, and is an overall worse place then fullchan. Fullchan is more like reddit, except with almost complete free speech, so I feel very safe there, being able to use Tor and not having the fear of being censored... yet.


----------



## Captain_N (Feb 27, 2018)

The Tor Network says sup bro. Just use the tor network. Simple. The only way they can successfully censor the internet is if its like North Koreas internet which is a big intranet. Only the government internet it connected to the outside world. Citizens are forced to run north Korea's custom linux OS.

So yeah Tor network says hi. All the exit nodes should not report to the site they are connecting to as a Tor node.
All outgoing connections should be 100% faked. I never saw the point of the Tor nodes identifying themselves. The normal internet server you connect to through tor should not know you are on the tor network. Your ISP should not even know your connecting to a tor node. its all encrypted.

If you dont want to use tor then use a good VPN.


----------



## Termer (Feb 27, 2018)

Captain_N said:


> The Tor Network says sup bro. Just use the tor network. Simple. The only way they can successfully censor the internet is if its like North Koreas internet which is a big intranet. Only the government internet it connected to the outside world. Citizens are forced to run north Korea's custom linux OS.
> 
> So yeah Tor network says hi. All the exit nodes should not report to the site they are connecting to as a Tor node.
> All outgoing connections should be 100% faked. I never saw the point of the Tor nodes identifying themselves. The normal internet server you connect to through tor should not know you are on the tor network. Your ISP should not even know your connecting to a tor node. its all encrypted.
> ...


I'm not worried about Tor. I'm worried about some sites getting shut down. Sites such as 8chan, which would be heavily impacted by such things, even though you can access it through Tor. It can't run anonymously because the owner is known. And other sites would be under a lot of pressure, since they would be responsible for their users' actions.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Feb 27, 2018)

Termer said:


> I'm not worried about Tor. I'm worried about some sites getting shut down. Sites such as 8chan, which would be heavily impacted by such things, even though you can access it through Tor. It can't run anonymously because the owner is known. And other sites would be under a lot of pressure, since they would be responsible for their users' actions.


May I ask why people are so concerned about 8chan being taken down due to a bill that would target posts advertising/supporting human trafficking?


----------



## Termer (Feb 27, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> May I ask why people are so concerned about 8chan being taken down due to a bill that would target posts advertising/supporting human trafficking?


Because of people who want websites like that dead. People post things there all the time that could be interpreted as such activity, and get the site shut down quickly. Sites like this, not so much, but it could still happen if someone wanted the temp dead.


----------



## Captain_N (Feb 27, 2018)

Termer said:


> I'm not worried about Tor. I'm worried about some sites getting shut down. Sites such as 8chan, which would be heavily impacted by such things, even though you can access it through Tor. It can't run anonymously because the owner is known. And other sites would be under a lot of pressure, since they would be responsible for their users' actions.



I see what you mean. They will just have to host that shit in Russia. You think the US can get the Russians to shut down a server? nope. The Russian government was paying people to put up seed boxes to help pirate American content. The Russians also run large Direct Connect + (DC++) hubs. Servers sharing more then 50TB. one hub is sharing 2.1PB right now All HD rips of movies and Tv shows. They seemed to be all linked.


----------



## Termer (Feb 27, 2018)

Captain_N said:


> I see what you mean. They will just have to host that shit in Russia. You think the US can get the Russians to shut down a server? nope. The Russian government was paying people to put up seed boxes to help pirate American content. The Russians also run large Direct Connect + (DC++) hubs. Servers sharing more then 50TB. one hub is sharing 2.1PB right now All HD rips of movies and Tv shows. They seemed to be all linked.


That might be a good idea for some sites. I'm very worried, as I found this out very close to when I'm finishing my website's social/boards system. I don't know what I'll do if this passes.


----------



## the_randomizer (Feb 27, 2018)

Termer said:


> I agree. I don't use 4chan because it blocks Tor, and other such things, and is an overall worse place then fullchan. Fullchan is more like reddit, except with almost complete free speech, so I feel very safe there, being able to use Tor and not having the fear of being censored... yet.



Would it be such a bad thing to see 4chan shut down, given the kind of depraved garbage it spews daily?


----------



## Termer (Feb 27, 2018)

the_randomizer said:


> Would it be such a bad thing to see 4chan shut down, given the kind of depraved garbage it spews daily?


I don't quite want 4chan dead. Mostly because I have a soft spot for /g/, and the /x/ board does cool stuff. Other than that, yeah, I'd love to see that die.


----------



## the_randomizer (Feb 27, 2018)

Termer said:


> I don't quite want 4chan dead. Mostly because I have a soft spot for /g/, and the /x/ board does cool stuff. Other than that, yeah, I'd love to see that die.



I've had nothing but bad experience on there, among other issues I have with it. People hiding behind the cowardice of anonymity just to hurl insults and other horrible acts, but I digress.


----------



## Termer (Feb 27, 2018)

the_randomizer said:


> I've had nothing but bad experience on there, among other issues I have with it. People hiding behind the cowardice of anonymity just to hurl insults and other horrible acts, but I digress.


If anyone here owns a website, it would be appreciated if you add a link to the eff org article on the bill. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/02/fosta-would-be-disaster-online-communities I already added the link to my homepage.


----------



## the_randomizer (Feb 27, 2018)

Termer said:


> If anyone here owns a website, it would be appreciated if you add a link to the eff org article on the bill. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/02/fosta-would-be-disaster-online-communities I already added the link to my homepage.



I don't know of any website owners, currently.


----------



## slaphappygamer (Feb 27, 2018)

Wouldn’t having a VPN work?


----------



## Beerus (Feb 27, 2018)

im sure this law is here so they can stop furry's and lewding lolis


----------



## DarthDub (Feb 27, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> May I ask why people are so concerned about 8chan being taken down due to a bill that would target posts advertising/supporting human trafficking?


Because this is just SOPA disguised as something else right now. If you really wanted to stop human trafficking, then start reporting stuff on the Deep Web.


----------



## osaka35 (Feb 27, 2018)

Logic isn't something congress is good with, so who knows what kind of implications this would have. A website being liable for what users share is worrisome, though it already happens with warez and whatnot sharing. They're pretty good at removing links to illegal stuff on this forum anyway.

Edit:
Though thinking about it, the difference is with warez, you're linking to actual data. An actual thing. This law would make them liable for the content of their speech, not copyrighted code. That's a pretty important distinction.


----------



## Xzi (Feb 27, 2018)

FYI guys your ISP knows when you're using a VPN.  With Net Neutrality gone, expect extra costs associated with VPNs in the not-too-distant future.


----------



## dAVID_ (Feb 28, 2018)

I hope 8chan is just pulling a well made troll, then we'll make a thread about how we were all bamboozled.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Feb 28, 2018)

http://flip.it/9Vy80x

Looks like it passed, and that's not a bad thing


----------



## DRAGONBALLVINTAGE (Feb 28, 2018)

If this bill passes.....


----------



## dAVID_ (Feb 28, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> http://flip.it/9Vy80x
> 
> Looks like it passed, and that's not a bad thing


Clickbait.
_Similar legislation is still pending in the Senate, where it has substantial support. After Senate passage, it will still need to be signed into law by President Donald Trump._


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Feb 28, 2018)

dAVID_ said:


> Clickbait.
> _Similar legislation is still pending in the Senate, where it has substantial support. After Senate passage, it will still need to be signed into law by President Donald Trump._


Ah, I see now, I should've read that more carefully

It has passed in the House, however


----------



## Termer (Feb 28, 2018)

Xzi said:


> FYI guys your ISP knows when you're using a VPN.  With Net Neutrality gone, expect extra costs associated with VPNs in the not-too-distant future.


This has nothing to do with net neutrality. It has nothing to do with the way you access the net, and more to do with what you can say, and how services handle content by users on their sites.


----------



## Xzi (Mar 1, 2018)

Termer said:


> This has nothing to do with net neutrality. It has nothing to do with the way you access the net, and more to do with what you can say, and how services handle content by users on their sites.


Net Neutrality prevented fast lanes and extra surcharges from your ISP associated with "premium" internet services.  With it gone, ISPs can charge however much they want for whatever they want.  With Comcast and Time Warner being the two big providers, expect all sorts of shitty behavior.  If they're charging more for "fast lanes," they're not going to let you circumvent that with your "slow lane" subscription and a VPN for no cost.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Mar 1, 2018)

Xzi said:


> Net Neutrality prevented fast lanes and extra surcharges from your ISP associated with "premium" internet services.  With it gone, ISPs can charge however much they want for whatever they want.  With Comcast and Time Warner being the two big providers, expect all sorts of shitty behavior.  If they're charging more for "fast lanes," they're not going to let you circumvent that with your "slow lane" subscription and a VPN for no cost.


No he's referring to this bill, not the VPN thing


----------



## Xzi (Mar 1, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> No he's referring to this bill, not the VPN thing


Oh I gotcha.  Well it's all bullshit.  Bunch of people older than my grandparents trying to dictate how the internet should work without knowing the first thing about it.


----------



## Termer (Mar 2, 2018)

Xzi said:


> Net Neutrality prevented fast lanes and extra surcharges from your ISP associated with "premium" internet services.  With it gone, ISPs can charge however much they want for whatever they want.  With Comcast and Time Warner being the two big providers, expect all sorts of shitty behavior.  If they're charging more for "fast lanes," they're not going to let you circumvent that with your "slow lane" subscription and a VPN for no cost.


kek, if that sort of throttling ever happens, you'd better bet I'm gonna pull some tricky shadowsocks proxy voodoo.


----------



## osaka35 (Apr 1, 2018)

anti-consumer clap-trap is what this is. which means it'll pass, it won't affect day-to-day so people will go "whew" and forget about it. and 5-10 years down the line it implodes the way we want to use the internet and people go "how did this happen?!? must be the [insert opposite political party/leaning]!". 

slow changesare the most insidious.


----------



## the_randomizer (Apr 1, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> I'm confused as to how this is "censorship." From what I can tell, this only applies to postings related to sex trafficking...



And you don't think for a second that this could be easily abused and the could pass anything off they don't like as offensive?

Congress can eat a bag of dicks.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Apr 1, 2018)

the_randomizer said:


> And you don't think for a second that this could be easily abused and the could pass anything off they don't like as offensive?
> 
> Congress can eat a bag of dicks.


While there is definitely the danger of people in positions of power abusing their authority, I fail to see why that should prevent lawmakers from writing laws designed specifically to protect people, even if they may be misused in a small percentage of cases


----------



## kuwanger (Apr 1, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> I fail to see why that should prevent lawmakers from writing laws designed specifically to protect people, even if they may be misused in a small percentage of cases



Because "trafficking" has been abused to mean "all prostitution" and all "sex ads" have been abused to mean "prostitution"?  So, yeah, if you're willing to get into a government sanctioned* relationship for sex, that's okay.  If you're explicitly looking for one-night stands** and a website caters to that crowd, this law can be used to shut it down by taking all real examples of prostitution slipping through as a basis.

* Now said with no irony.

** I don't think that's healthy, but "two consenting adults".  A one-night stand is a massive moral step up from all the government sanctioned killing in other countries.  And it's not like the right is really against it.  They just don't want it to be public knowledge and ruin the facade of sexual morality.


----------



## WeedZ (Apr 1, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> While there is definitely the danger of people in positions of power abusing their authority, I fail to see why that should prevent lawmakers from writing laws designed specifically to protect people, even if they may be misused in a small percentage of cases


You give them an inch they take a mile, TI.


----------



## osaka35 (Apr 1, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> While there is definitely the danger of people in positions of power abusing their authority, I fail to see why that should prevent lawmakers from writing laws designed specifically to protect people, even if they may be misused in a small percentage of cases


The thing is the law could have been written to be far more specific to help those particular situations you have in mind. The vague and general wording gives wide-sweeping and overwhelming power. While it may not be used poorly right away, it allows for really shitty scenarios in a legal and less-than-stellar way.


----------



## the_randomizer (Apr 1, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> While there is definitely the danger of people in positions of power abusing their authority, I fail to see why that should prevent lawmakers from writing laws designed specifically to protect people, even if they may be misused in a small percentage of cases



So why should people trust lawmakers and politicians instead of people being responsible for themselves.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Apr 2, 2018)

the_randomizer said:


> So why should people trust lawmakers and politicians instead of people being responsible for themselves.


I suppose you'd be fine without a penalty for murder or theft, then?...

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



osaka35 said:


> The thing is the law could have been written to be far more specific to help those particular situations you have in mind. The vague and general wording gives wide-sweeping and overwhelming power. While it may not be used poorly right away, it allows for really shitty scenarios in a legal and less-than-stellar way.


Ok THIS I can agree with


----------



## firephoenixdxd (Apr 2, 2018)

i am once again grateful for living in europe


----------



## Dominator211 (Apr 2, 2018)

Bangs laptop chassis* This is gonna suck... I'm doing everything in my power to help. It gonna kill the temp, chary and any other American based mods might get arrested. We as a website must stand up and get others to join us too. I will not be silenced!!! THIS IS INSANE #savethetemp #savethefirstamendement #savethenet

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



SkittleDash said:


> Remember when the internet was fun? Good times.


good old late 80's to about 2009

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

THIS COULD BE AN APRIL FOOLS JOKE


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Apr 2, 2018)

Dominator211 said:


> Bangs laptop chassis* This is gonna suck... I'm doing everything in my power to help. It gonna kill the temp, chary and any other American based mods might get arrested. We as a website must stand up and get others to join us too. I will not be silenced!!! THIS IS INSANE #savethetemp #savethefirstamendement #savethenet
> 
> --------------------- MERGED ---------------------------
> 
> ...


Christ dude calm down


----------



## the_randomizer (Apr 2, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> I suppose you'd be fine without a penalty for murder or theft, then?...
> 
> --------------------- MERGED ---------------------------
> 
> ...



Did I say that? No, I'm just saying, I don't trust the government in regulating what's offensive, what needs censoring, etc. It's bad enough they took away net neutrality, now this BS?


----------



## Navonod (Apr 2, 2018)

Oh your god. Better get your tin foil hat to.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Apr 2, 2018)

the_randomizer said:


> Did I say that? No, I'm just saying, I don't trust the government in regulating what's offensive, what needs censoring, etc. It's bad enough they took away net neutrality, now this BS?


You specifically said that you'd rather trust personal responsibility, rather than making more laws. I'm saying that that can't always be the case, nor should it, really


----------



## the_randomizer (Apr 2, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> You specifically said that you'd rather trust personal responsibility, rather than making more laws. I'm saying that that can't always be the case, nor should it, really



So people aren't worried that this will be a slippery slope for pusillanimous and unnecessary censorship? I'm just saying, someone could say an innocuous word and some butthurt punk will report is as "sexual" when it's not. This will totally be abused.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Apr 2, 2018)

the_randomizer said:


> So people aren't worried that this will be a slippery slope for pusillanimous and unnecessary censorship? I'm just saying, someone could say an innocuous word and some butthurt punk will report is as "sexual" when it's not. This will totally be abused.


There's a pretty bold line between something being "sexual" and something being "sexually exploitive". I'd like to think that we'd have some form of fair judge on the other end of the process, but that might just be me being optimistic to a fault


----------



## the_randomizer (Apr 2, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> There's a pretty bold line between something being "sexual" and something being "sexually exploitive". I'd like to think that we'd have some form of fair judge on the other end of the process, but that might just be me being optimistic to a fault



I'm not holding my breath to see any real good coming out of this.


----------



## osaka35 (Apr 2, 2018)

Think of how functional youtube is with its flagging system. Now imagine your video could get flagged for people's comments on your video. Now imagine the entire internet is like this, but add jail time as a possible consequence. This is the potential people are worried about.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Apr 2, 2018)

osaka35 said:


> Think of how functional youtube is with its flagging system. Now imagine your video could get flagged for people's comments on your video. Now imagine the entire internet is like this, but add jail time as a possible consequence. This is the potential people are worried about.


Except imagine that the FBI was in charge of issuing flags rather than sites, and the sites are given a short window of time to take the content down after it's been flagged


----------



## osaka35 (Apr 2, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> Except imagine that the FBI was in charge of issuing flags rather than sites, and the sites are given a short window of time to take the content down after it's been flagged


how short of a window? and how many flags before they stop giving you chances? Will they use that as a way to bring litigation ("thousands of flags within a month" as justification)

Are they going to hire loads of agents to just police the internet, though? I suspect they'll have bots do the work with maybe a person reviewing it at some point once it's passed a certain threshold.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Apr 2, 2018)

osaka35 said:


> Are they going to hire loads of agents to just police the internet, though? I suspect they'll have bots do the work with maybe a person reviewing it at some point.


You do understand that they _already_ have loads of agents "just" to police the internet, right?

Edit: For that matter, they actually even have a division specifically for policing child sex trafficking via the internet in place currently, but that division is currently chasing down leads, rather than being allowed to act in a preventative manner


----------



## kuwanger (Apr 2, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> Except imagine that the FBI was in charge of issuing flags rather than sites, and the sites are given a short window of time to take the content down after it's been flagged



Yep, the good old FBI.  They're really good at issuing flags appropriately.  Never let shooters through.  Never issue out NSL with indefinitely spans allowing warrantless searches that amount to nothing.  Yep, I totally trust the FBI.

Meanwhile, back in reality, if there's actual sex trafficking going on, I don't want a website pulled offline.  I wanted subpoena and/or warrants issued, those being trafficked rescued, and those doing the trafficking put in prison.  I want most* websites to be functional honeypots, where people are investigated legally (without censorship laws), and then the ads just silently disappear because they're no longer relevant.  Goodness, what was stopping the FBI from doing the above up until this point?  A lack of resources?

Yep, the solution then is to give the FBI unilateral power to take down ads/web pages/web sites or...risk a punishment they can't be bothered/aren't capable of administrating?  I guess they can leverage Google, Microsoft, or whoever to block the websites when they can't afford to do it or risk some sort of punishment...which they could probably have threatened before due to being some sort of co-conspirator and the general negative publicity of being associated with sex trafficking.  Of course, this gives them a bigger threat club and the gray area is a lot bigger to swing it into, so double plus good for them.

* If you find a website that's explicitly** encouraging sex trafficking and/or makes no effort to block it but does block other content, there by making it pretty implicitly clearly they support sex trafficking, then yea, get them as co-conspirators.

** Not merely gray areas stuff will people conflate "Asian" with "must be human trafficking", "young" with "must be underage", or go by a list of "code words" that a lot of people don't know and wouldn't know to mean whatever the FBI says they mean.  Sure, notify the people that you believe that's what's going on, but don't just presume everyone knows that "potato" means something special.  Also, I really hope potato doesn't mean anything.


----------



## raystriker (Apr 2, 2018)

A dystopian future isn't too unimaginable now, is it? So much for freedom, 'murica.


----------



## osaka35 (Apr 2, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> You do understand that they _already_ have loads of agents "just" to police the internet, right?
> 
> Edit: For that matter, they actually even have a division specifically for policing child sex trafficking via the internet in place currently, but that division is currently chasing down leads, rather than being allowed to act in a preventative manner


There's a bit more work involved, though. It's not just like they're adding an extra click in their workload. And how is taking down a website preventative? I mean, why shut it down when you could exploit it to actually help people? Or, rather, just whatever Kuwanger said lol. 

If they had actual science or data that supported this position as somehow better than what they're legally capable of at the moment, then maybe...but I suspect they'd rather just like the power to do what they want rather than actually being more effective at helping people.


----------



## TotalInsanity4 (Apr 2, 2018)

osaka35 said:


> There's a bit more work involved, though. It's not just like they're adding an extra click in their workload. And how is taking down a website preventative? I mean, why shut it down when you could exploit it to actually help people? Or, rather, just whatever Kuwanger said lol.
> 
> If they had actual science or data that supported this position as somehow better than what they're legally capable of at the moment, then maybe...but I suspect they'd rather just like the power to do what they want rather than actually being more effective at helping people.


It's not the taking down of the the site, it's the threat of action if content isn't pulled. If we're being honest, I'd rather that the action take the form of a fine equal to a percentage of daily revenue per day (or a fixed minimum, if it's a non-profit site), but this is at least a start


----------



## Transdude1996 (Apr 3, 2018)

TotalInsanity4 said:


> and the sites are given a short window of time to take the content down after it's been flagged





> _If you live in the United States and you ever took even a high-school level civics class, you probably ran across the concept of an ex post facto law. This refers to a situation where, if I’m in government and you do something legal that I don’t like, I make a law against it, I make that law retroactive, and then I use it to prosecute you for what you already did. That’s not how law works, and it’s not allowed.
> But FOSTA contains this little tidbit:
> *(b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by this section shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act, and the amendment made by subsection (a) shall apply regardless of whether the conduct alleged occurred, or is alleged to have occurred, before, on, or after such date of enactment.*
> Whoops. I guess Mrs. Mimi Walters of California (the author of the text above) skipped civics class. To be fair to Mrs. Walters, the US Constitution is very vague on this point, and the language is convoluted and hard to follow. (“No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.” – Article 1, Section 9)_
> ...


----------



## the_randomizer (Apr 3, 2018)

Yeah, this law totally won't be abused at all


----------



## kuwanger (Apr 6, 2018)

Sex ads website Backpage.com seized by U.S. authorities: posting

<sarcasm>Never saw this coming</sarcasm>

Edit:  Oh, apparently SESTA isn't even law yet.  So, why did we need SESTA again?


----------

