Internet Legislation: Great Intentions, Cute Names, And Bad Results
There are a lot of dumb-ass people in the world who don’t do their research but vote politicians that perfectly represent them into office. And that’s what the guv’ment counts on. They count on you not having enough time to read through all the shit they write. They count on you perpetuating their jobs because, well, “things weren’t so bad forme when he served a term.” Today, we’ll discuss the good, the bad, and the ugly of Internet-related legislation and how it affects your ability to continue looking at pictures of kittens without looking over your shoulder.
Special interests also count on legislators who have no fuckin’ idea that they’re supposed to actually read the damn legislation before they vote “Yay” on it. There’s even a movement trying to push a bill that will force Congressmen to read bills (ironic, I know) from now on.
Why do I bring this up? Because we’re in an era where the Internet will eventually be regulated. The Internet, our last safe haven from regulation where industries have thrived and people happily communicate ideas, is about to be smashed up and centrally controlled.
But here’s the thing: They’re proposing legislation, touting it has good intentions (like stopping pedophilia), and then giving it cute names (like “The Protecting Children from Internet Pornographers Act of 2011″ and the “Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act”).
On the flipside, there are politicians who have the bravery of proposing things that restrict government activities on individuals’ private digital lives. Guess what side of the political spectrum those guys are on.
If you want to know how government is trying to crap on you from a mile-high altitude (or how government is trying to protect you from itself), you can get all your information from Backgroundcheck.Org’s article.
Enjoy! Leave a comment below if you want to knock my teeth out with a baseball bat, as always.