Maybe they can reduce broadband prices then
😂
hahahahahahaahah
Can I still watch weird porn or no?
yes. In fact there will be mandatory minimums with stiff penalties for noncompliance, pun intended.
How stiff?
Depends on the porn, I guess 🤷
Yes, but now it’s going to be competitive multiplayer.
Gonna play ranked. Just hope I don’t get placed in bronze :/
I guess the policy of the Company I work for, that we don’t use any service hosted in the USA, is sticking around then.
The NSA couldn’t really work in the US before this, but they were free and encouraged to work in foreign countries. You should look up how the “five eyes” actually worked, and ECHELON before it: Your data stored overseas is fair game for the NSA. Inside the country they needed a secret warrant to nab it.
They collected everything from the US but pretended they could only search comms with at least one non-US party without a warrant (there were no technical barriers to this and Snowden even claimed it would be easy for a low level NSA agent to read the President’s emails). Foreigners may be easier to search without a warrant at the NSA, but using services outside the US gives a greater chance your data isn’t in their database to begin with.
Since these articles never seem to include the bill, this appears to be it: https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/7888
May I remind everyone of CALEA. Just in case your skim of the page makes you think it is only for phone/telecoms…
In the years since CALEA was passed it has been greatly expanded to include all VoIP and broadband Internet traffic.
Doesn’t the government already do this with our cellphones since they pass through the cell towers?
What was the vote for this in the House called? Looking up my Congressman’s votes but I see multiple FISA votes
Any downvoters care to comment on their vote?
The article is just really bad tabloid garbage
- Does not even show the section of this bill that it is talking about
- Source is just “Edward Snowden said a thing on twitter” (not shitting on Snowden, he’s done some great work. I’m shitting on the article)
Yeah, had to look up the bill, like with so many of these kinds of articles: https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/7888
FISA authorizes a specific court to authorize warrants, the FISC, however the article looks directly at the NSAs role who is not affiliated with or charged by FISC, but through warrants and direction of the FBI. The FBI is not very scary since people normally associate them with protection of national interests, so instead the article only mentions who the tasking authority and holder of the warrant actually is. The article uses key terms specifically to get a reaction from a small subset as click bait without even providing accurate information about the topic. It’s lazy and uninformative.
I just wanted to be part of a crowd
Hey that’s valid
