Proposed Law Would Block Porn in South Carolina, Unless You Pay a $20 Fee

Spiceman80 said:
I think everyone should ban together and prevent this from happening. One the gov't gets a toe in the door, they will violate your entire house. It's going to start with some bs about pron, then before you know it it escalates to much more important stuff.

We can't allow them to put this kind of control on the internet.
Click to expand...

They can though, and already do. Ever heard of the Deep Web?
 
I like how they always slide things like this in a bill and then name the bill something really noble.

"The Human Trafficking Prevention Act" 
grin.gif
 
AEA18 said:
Censoring the internet
mean.gif


How would they be able to censor sites that aren't pron sites but have pron on them?

Example: Reddit, tumblr, instagram, twitter, deviantart, etc.
Click to expand...
Get rid of Tumblr and teenagers will riot
 
Relinquish da keys of da World Wide Web to the world?

I'm gonna need a translation.

And I must know what Obama was gonna do has anything to do with what I said. and how you already know that was gonna be way worse.
 
swendro88 said:
Relinquish da keys of da World Wide Web to the world?

I'm gonna need a translation.

And I must know what Obama was gonna do has anything to do with what I said. and how you already know that was gonna be way worse.
Click to expand...

Net-Neutrality Act. Obama was gonna let a global governing body control the internet for the world, which obviously includes America. So our internet would be controlled by a foreign entity. Who knows what they might do.
 
The whole concept is a joke. You could just buy said device online and have it mailed to you. This would only apply to the people too dumb to know how to sidestep it (probably the same people in favor of the law).

And yes, it is a First Amendment issue, and wouldn't stand up in court, besides the unsolvable problems to implement it.
Spiceman80 said:
I think everyone should ban together and prevent this from happening. One the gov't gets a toe in the door, they will violate your entire house. It's going to start with some bs about pron, then before you know it it escalates to much more important stuff.

We can't allow them to put this kind of control on the internet.
Click to expand...
You might not be prevented access from certain sites, but we are already watched:

"The National Security Agency’s mass surveillance has greatly expanded in the years since September 11, 2001. Recent disclosures  have shown that the government is regularly tracking the calls of hundreds of millions of Americans and spying on a vast but unknown number of Americans’ international calls, text messages, and emails."

https://www.aclu.org/issues/national-security/privacy-and-surveillance/nsa-surveillance

"...the government still has the authority to access the communications of users of popular Internet sites such as Facebook, Google, Microsoft and Yahoo. Section 702 of the law, which does not expire until 2017, gives the government the ability to collect the content of an Internet user’s actual communications — not just metadata."

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/a...heres-how-the-nsa-can-still-spy-on-americans/

Feds watchin 
nerd.gif
 
 
I dont mind financial fees, penalties, or taxes on dumb **** ( porn, cigarettes,etc..)
But I dont like state and government taking control of peoples legal liberties and I
dont like no one messing with my internet.
 
Last edited:
Rico x Hood said:
swendro88 said:
Relinquish da keys of da World Wide Web to the world?

I'm gonna need a translation.

And I must know what Obama was gonna do has anything to do with what I said. and how you already know that was gonna be way worse.
Click to expand...

Net-Neutrality Act. Obama was gonna let a global governing body control the internet for the world, which obviously includes America. So our internet would be controlled by a foreign entity. Who knows what they might do.
Click to expand...

Are you referring to something else?

Doesn't net neutrality refer to ISPs and data speeds?
 
WhatsComplex said:
I like how they always slide things like this in a bill and then name the bill something really noble.

"The Human Trafficking Prevention Act"  >D
Click to expand...

It is a slap in the face b/c they don't really give a damn about human trafficking. Money only goes to it if people pay the fee. So if I'm clever enough to go around it then what? No money for trafficking prevention now if enough of us avoid paying the fee?

Plus I don't see the correlation between pron done by consenting adults and human trafficking. Oranges and apples.




rollout said:
The whole concept is a joke. You could just buy said device online and have it mailed to you. This would only apply to the people too dumb to know how to sidestep it (probably the same people in favor of the law).

And yes, it is a First Amendment issue, and wouldn't stand up in court, besides the unsolvable problems to implement it.
You might not be prevented access from certain sites, but we are already watched:

"The National Security Agency’s mass surveillance has greatly expanded in the years since September 11, 2001. Recent disclosures have shown that the government is regularly tracking the calls of hundreds of millions of Americans and spying on a vast but unknown number of Americans’ international calls, text messages, and emails."
https://www.aclu.org/issues/national-security/privacy-and-surveillance/nsa-surveillance

"...the government still has the authority to access the communications of users of popular Internet sites such as Facebook, Google, Microsoft and Yahoo. Section 702 of the law, which does not expire until 2017, gives the government the ability to collect the content of an Internet user’s actual communications — not just metadata."
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/a...heres-how-the-nsa-can-still-spy-on-americans/

Feds watchin :nerd:  
Click to expand...

This I am fully aware of. I've seen enough TV shows and movies to know that we are all under surveillance. Not to mention how easy we make it for Go'vt with social media. I put black tape on my web cam, but I lknow I'm still exposed via my cell phone camera. Plus they can always turn it into a hot mic whether it is on or off. We are too complacent with things like this. Some of us say well I don't have anything to hide, or I don't have anything they need so I don't mind as long as it is for the greater good [terrorism]. The rest are either fighting a losing battle, or not fighting at all. 9/11 was the gov't sticking their big toe in our front door saying we need to do "xyz" in order to prevent this from happening again. Once we let them in, they take full advantage of it.
 
Last edited:
Rico x Hood said:
swendro88 said:
Relinquish da keys of da World Wide Web to the world?

I'm gonna need a translation.

And I must know what Obama was gonna do has anything to do with what I said. and how you already know that was gonna be way worse.
Click to expand...

Net-Neutrality Act. Obama was gonna let a global governing body control the internet for the world, which obviously includes America. So our internet would be controlled by a foreign entity. Who knows what they might do.
Click to expand...

Does the Net Neutrality Act go by another name? Because, at least according to google search, there's no such thing as a Net-Neutrality Act.

I google "Obama Net Neutrality Act" and i just get results about how Obama's net neutrality FCC rules won in court. For example:

The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, in a 2-1 vote, affirmed the FCC's latest net neutrality rules, which consumer groups and President Barack Obama have backed as essential to prevent broadband providers from blocking or degrading internet traffic. The telecom industry and Republicans have heavily criticized the rules as burdensome and unnecessary regulation, with Texas Sen. Ted Cruz once labeling it “Obamacare for the Internet.
Click to expand...

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/court-upholds-obama-backed-net-neutrality-rules-224309


When I google "Obama was gonna let a global governing body control the internet for the world"

I get links to the San Diego Union Tribune, Breitbart, something called ammoland....at least on the first result page. Maybe the relevant links were on the 2nd page, idk. Didn't check.

There was this though from Politifact:

Ted Cruz incorrect about Obama giving control of internet to UN-like body
 (Lot of mumbo jumbo in the article, here's the cliff notes:smile:
Our ruling

Cruz said: "If Congress fails to act, the Obama administration intends to give away control of the internet to an international body akin to the United Nations."

As of October 2016, the U.S. government is set to no longer have a contract to oversee certain internet-related duties having to do with all of us finding websites. The tasks will continue to be handled through a California nonprofit that’s been in place since 1998.

Upshot: There’s no pending government handoff of control of the internet that we can see. Also, the member-countries of an advisory panel to the nonprofit’s board can only make a recommendation if every nation agrees; that’s not U.N.-like.

We rate this statement False.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

The ultimate sneaker enthusiast community.

NikeTalk was created as a way of giving back to both the sneaker enthusiast community and to the greater global community of which we are all a part.

NikeTalk is NOT affiliated with Nike Inc. in any way, shape, or form. All opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Nike, Inc.

© 1999-2024 NikeTalk.com

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom