Yana Usdi

I know you meant in general, I was a bit defensive at first for reasons that had a lot to do with why I quit activism. Some things just started pushing buttons when they shouldn't have and that's on me rather than anyone else.

Most of the time we won't have time to think? When is that? Global warming has been discussed off and on since the 50s or 60s, computer security is an issue that's been developing for decades as well, most of them are. We just don't pay attention until something blows up in our faces then we panic and grab the first impulse that strikes us, and we stick to it. People have generally been trying to talk to us about these things for years and if we slowed down slightly and looked for options we might find some.

Remember when we got pushed into the Patriot act? It was because we were faced with a false dilemma, either jump behind this patriotic sounding act whole hog and without time to properly read and review it or you're against the idea of national security. There were real problems which helped to allow 9/11 but by being forced into a false dilemma to fix them we got as much bad as good in that bill. That's the same type of choice we're allowing ourselves to be pushed into here. Yes it's a real problem and yes we do need to do something but I doubt if this current revision of the bill is it. That doesn't mean we need to kill the idea, but to fix it. We need a real national discussion about it at least among the professionals in the field.

Where I would stand right now is that we're still in the early stages of even discussing this and we need more info. As an article linked through the other thread in the current events forum stated in part ""I think the redraft, while improved, remains troubling due to its vagueness".

For the most part the internet seems to be self correcting as long as systems have been set up to regulate it, it's the weirdest thing. Like an invisible army of geeks that pop up and fix things when they need it then disappear back into what they were doing before. High security isn't their thing but they do deal with things such as hostile IP hijackings and other events of the sort including into corporate security which is one concern the bill covers. There was a video I liked about that here.

That obviously wouldn't work for something high security but something similar to that might, control in the hands of self correcting groups with oversight rather than individuals, we just need to design a new system. The National Academy of Science is the best and brightest in the nation with branches in other nations as well which would help for designing something on an international system such as the internet. Here at least they serve pro bono (free) as advisers to the nation on related issues. They do work with computer science issues as well as others and if they need more funding for the issue we should give it to them. Why isn't the answer for this coming from them or other groups of the sort instead of from the politicians? I'd trust a community of computer science professionals to safeguard their own interests and standards better than I would some politician in Washington.

Take that idea to the Capitol and hold hearings with involved parties, see if it could work. If we can get them to monitor the system or set up a means to do so which we've had some time to discuss lots of us might be more comfortable with it.

__________________
"Give a man a fish, and he will eat for a day. Teach him to fish, and he will sit in a boat and drink beer all day." -Dan Moon

Always be kind to animals, Morning, noon and night: For animals have feelings too, And furthermore, they bite. - John Gardner