[Noisebridge-discuss] internet censorship: congress is giving you it for xmas
jjuran at gmail.com
Tue Nov 15 07:31:10 UTC 2011
On Nov 14, 2011, at 10:41 PM, Matt Thrailkill wrote:
> The first thing that springs to mind when I read about this and
> PROTECT-IP; can I just spam out bogus complaints about sites I don't
> like so they can be forced offline until someone has a chance to
> hand-process it? Will I be able to take CNN offline because someone
> in a comment thread quotes me without my permission? Or does a person
> have to be a huge corporation to do all the fun stuff?
Isn't it awesome how the question just answers itself?
> These laws are just begging to be abused..
No, X is just begging for Y when Y is an undesirable but likely
outcome of X that was *not* intended by X's creators. Sending
session tokens unencrypted, for example, was just begging for an
exploit like FireSheep -- the guilty parties just assumed that this
would never happen, or figured they'd wait to deal with it when it
did, or they were just oblivious. They certainly didn't mean to
enable session hijacking. On the other hand, I assert that SOPA was
created for the sole purpose of being abused. Hello Kafka, hello
More information about the Noisebridge-discuss