Sen. Ted Stevens Introduces "Son of DOPA" 221
DJCacophony writes "Ted 'series of tubes' Stevens has introduced a bill, going by the interim name S.49, that aims to block access to interactive websites from schools and libraries. The wording of the bill is vague enough to apply to Wikipedia, MySpace (and other social networking sites), and potentially even to blogs. The bill is apparently so similar to the failed Deleting Online Predators Act of last year that it has been termed 'Son of DOPA' by some." Stevens introduced S.49, the text of which is not yet available, on the opening day of the legislative session.
Jeez... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Senator Stevens needs his tubes tied.
Re:Jeez... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Jeez... (Score:5, Insightful)
Alaska's pork should be reduced in 2007 (Score:5, Interesting)
1. Uncle Ted Stevens is a Republican, and the Dems have the majority in the Senate (49+1+1=51 vs. 49). Therefore, Uncle Ted isn't in the majority, and he can't use his majority status to ram things through appropriations.
2. The Senate has "eliminated" pork, known as earmarks, for this budget cycle (source [chicagotribune.com]). I'm sure it won't be a 100% freeze, but given that the amount of earmarked appropriations skyrocketed under the GOP-led Congress (60% increase in the past five years [bloomberg.com]), it's reasonable to expect that it will be reduced dramatically -- especially to states with two Republican Senators and a Republican Representative, such as Alaska.
So, with Uncle Ted presumably bringing in less pork for the foreseeable future, will Alaskans react by electing a Dem, or will they re-elect Uncle Ted in the hopes that the GOP recapture the senate and Stevens' seniority becomes valuable locally again?
Re:Alaska's pork should be reduced in 2007 (Score:5, Insightful)
That's probably true on "big" issues, but not appropriations. Also, keep in mind that the Democrats don't really have a majority right now, one of their members is out recovering, so it's 49 + Lieberman (50), vs. 49... and any ties go to the GOP... and it takes 60 votes to break a filibuster (but budgets can't be filibustered).
The Democratic party isn't REALLY in a position to bully Republican states... and you don't want them too. The last thing we want is to become like parliamentary countries, where parties in the opposition see their "perks" like education for schooling becoming part of coalition politics... look what happened in Israel in this year's budget re: national religious education... NRP is in the opposition, so their budget get walloped... that is NOT good government.
Not to dismiss the out of control corruption that the GOP brought in over the past 5 years (as a conservative, I was aghast), but I don't really believe that the Democrats freeze is real. Basically, the GOP didn't pass a budget, didn't during a lame duck session, and the Democrats choose to fund the year via continuing resolutions. This has messed up some agencies (NASA in particular), has given Bush an opportunity to crow about the budget (spending increases won't happen because no budget is being passed), and whatever earmarks were in there will stay.
The K-Street project got a lot of play, but it's important to realize that the Democrats controlled the House for 40 years before the 1994 change, and the Senate for the majority of those years. The Democrats (and most of the GOP) never considered the Republicans anything but an opposition party, and the first few years of the GOP, they still acted like the opposition (that's how silly things like the government shutdown happened). Basically, the Washington establishment had been a Democratic-only land because the growth in government (FDR-onward) had coincided with a nearly permanent Democratic government (in terms of Congress and therefore spending). While we hoped that the GOP would start dismantling the Democrat-built government, the alternative of feeding corruption to their people was the more likely scenario. And as corruption rarely shrinks, all the crap the Democrats built stayed while the GOP built their own.
I find it unlikely that the Democrats will try to take down GOP pork/corruption, because if they do and the GOP regains power, they will retaliate, and hard.
The unwritten rule of politics is to never attack your enemy's backers, especially when all they want is to feed at the public trough. Better to pay everyone with OPM than risk getting hurt when you are out of power.
Otherwise, you could never explain how the entertainment industry wasn't decimated by the 5 years of total GOP control, considering HOW left-wing and democratic the Hollywood/New York crowd is... it's not a bunch of liberal Democrats, this crew borders on the left wing extremist crowd... yet the GOP NEVER attacked them... just like the Democrats will never REALLY attack the Wall Street crowd... too risky... If the Democrats REALLY take shots (excess profits tax on oil, etc.... things that they harped about in opposition but would never do), they risk a GOP response of declaring war on the trial lawyers and entertainment industry... which would cut off their funds.
Re: (Score:2)
But that is exactly what some very vocal and ver
Re: (Score:2)
Every single person i've met and talked to about bush, in "the people's republic of bush" (georgia) mind you, wants the man strung up, tarred, feathered, disembowled, and paraded on foot like the olympic torch.
That's at least 20%... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
...and paranoid recluses who hate the idea of big government.
Being anti-big government does not a paranoid person require. Many of our founding fathers warned against the corruption that comes with big government. The more power you centralize, the less the individuals have. However, I do agree that the republicans no longer stand for conservatives. Yes, we as Alaskans hate taxes and love guns, but why shouldn't we? Guns keep an honest government honest, and taxes reduce productivity and success.
The problem isn't with Alaskans entirely, but with how far
Re: (Score:2)
A better method? (Score:2)
My personal feeling is that it should be via some sort of single combat, or perhaps trial by ordeal (first one to the other side of the Potomac gets Ways and Means!)
D'Hondt / Jefferson (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Don't assume that just because the majority of people vote differently than you do that they're all ignorant... That t
Re: (Score:3)
That's not necessarily a good thing. For example, as I understand, even the residents of Ketchikan don't want the "Bridge to Nowhere (disclaimer: I'm not from Ketchikan, nor have I discussed this with anyone who lives there, so I could be wrong--that's just what I've read in the ADN and other sources). Pork barrel politics are (sometimes) locally good, but (almost a
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Dammit Alaska, will y'all do something about that guy sometime soon?
It's not in their best interest. I mean, he's the king of pork (which means he has brought record breaking Federal dollars to the state), and he's on some important committees. He's been in Congress for a long time, has connections, and therefore Gets Things Done. Alaska has a very low population and therefore only 2 Senators and 1 Representative. But it is a very important state and there are a lot of issues which directly affect Alas
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Not Online? (Score:5, Informative)
Do the Slashdot editors not know how to find stuff on Al Gore's Tubes of Internets?
If only there were... (Score:3, Funny)
...some sort of mechanism to have a computer automatically read the contents of a page that was in the Tubes of the Intarweb, and then create indexes on the words contained therein, and then allow users to access those indexes via another page on the Interweb, and look for pages which contain those words.
I'll be back later, I need to go to the Patent Office.
Once again... (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Obligatory... (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You may laugh, but legislators in your country will probably using logic similar to that above to make law. The sad thing is my country (the UK) will probably follow suit at some point.
Think of the (poorly educated) children (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What have you learned from MySpace that has any value in an educational environment? Besides, this is only for schools and libraries. The case could be made that there is no valid reason for someone to be accessing MySpace from a library other than wasting time.
However, I am assumin
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Are you saying that MySpace is a right? These are public machines. No one is saying that they can't be used. The bill would limit these computers to what they are intended for.
Re: (Score:2)
which is what exactly?
Re: (Score:2)
which is what exactly?
Information and research. MySpace qualifies as entertainment and socialization.
Re:Think of the (poorly educated) children (Score:5, Insightful)
What have you learned from MySpace that has any value in an educational environment?
I learned:
Besides, this is only for schools and libraries.
Federal funding means responsibility to act constitutionally, including upholding free speech/expression for adults. The government judging that posting to MySpace is less valuable than posting to Slashdot, or some purely educational forum, is an unconstitutional act. The government should never be making these decisions, individuals should. It is called freedom, even if it is the freedom to waste an hour writing about how cute your poodle is and publishing it.
The case could be made that there is no valid reason for someone to be accessing MySpace from a library other than wasting time.
The case could be made that doing anything other than praying to Allah is a waste of time. The case could be made that reading literature instead of car repair manuals is a waste of time. The point is that it is not the government's responsibility or right to make that call, it is the right and responsibility of the individual.
However, I am assuming that by "schools", he is not including universities and colleges.
Public schools are one thing. The people there are children who are assigned by our society a subset of rights and responsibilities belonging to other people. In that case it is up to the parent's to decide, possibly through the democratic process of the government, subject to some limitations. In public libraries, however, there is no justification. If people actually went to said libraries and read the constitution as well as the essays of the founding fathers, maybe they'd understand why.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Upholding free speech does not mean facilitating it, as occurs in a library.
For an individual or private organization to facility on type of free expression is fine. For the government to facilitate one type of free expression while intentionally going out of their way to limit other forms, is something else entirely. Suppose, for example, the government decided to pass a law that says only materials approved by the Republican party can be carried in libraries. Assuming they had a large enough majority t
Re: (Score:2)
Should I demand a nVidia 8800 GTX be installed at the library so I can play World of Warcraft? It won't run with the crappy integrated video at my library's computers. Has the government limited my freedoms by not installing a good 3D card?
Re: (Score:2)
Anyone between the ages of 6 to 124, who is logged in to myspace from either a library or a school computer lab is almost certainly screwing around -- often while others, like myself, are made to wait.
What's the more important free speech from the perspective of a government funded program, your ability to create yet another academic program that does nothing but prove you can, or the person in front of you who is writing poetry and posting it to MySpace? Are you the next Reiser or are they the next Whit
Re: (Score:2)
Great Idea! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Great Idea! (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
That's right! (and heres another OT post) (Score:2)
Now, think back and wonder why that is. Give up? Because of SAC [wikipedia.org]. Back in the 60's, 70's, and 80's, the US Strategic Air Command operated in Omaha.
Nowadays, since SAC is shutdown, a lot of that infratructure is part of Level 3's network. To this day, they still have several fiber rings running around Omaha.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm an Alaskan, you insensitive clod!
Re: (Score:2)
Good, then you can vote out the asshole who keeps coming up with this stuff!
Priority (Score:2)
Yes, because it's just that important. There really is no other crisis or issue which needs legislative attention before this. At least someone is thinking of the children. *rolls eyes*
Look on the bright side (Score:5, Interesting)
Wait...my local library has an interactive catalog. Would they have to block themselves? They probably should already turn themselves in. They have a subscription to Playboy and I'm sure there are countless books that have "porn" in them teaching kids about sex.
Re: (Score:2)
We seriously don't need to teach them anything on the subject, I'm sure some of these kids no more than a lot of adults from a generation ago...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I was trying to imply that some other twisted view of sexuality (from porn or similar) wasn't going to be 'damaging' them anymore than they were already damaged.
I'm all for open discussion on sex and sexuality, but so many law makers aren't because we have to many warped people who think sex==bad.
They Want to Take Away the Power to Publish... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:They Want to Take Away the Power to Publish... (Score:4, Insightful)
We get web censorship by explaining that we are protecting our children from the evils of pornography, and in their defense, no measure can be too extreme, so we'll ban sites at the schools and the libraries, and leave the potential open for banning them in homes.
You balk at this idea? What are you, some kind of pervert who wants kids to have open and free access to porn?
We get personal tracking by explaining that we are protecting our children from the dangers of child molesters, and to prevent that, no measure can be too extreme, so we'll put GPS collars on convicted child molesters and other sex offenders, and leave the option available for putting them on everyone.
What? You don't like this? Why are you standing up for perverts, anyway?
We are good. Un-we, then, are un-good. Mini-love will see they become un-persons. This is plus good.
<irony=0%> (Oh, for crying out loud, did I forget the <irony=100%> tag again?)
Re: (Score:2)
I haven't read the bill yet, and if anyone has specific objections I am very interested in them. But all I have read so far is objections to the general idea of limiting children's access to information. That's as extreme a position as saying that any American, regardless of psychiatric or criminal history, should be able to ow
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Expect later this year from Ted "tubes" Stevens (Score:4, Funny)
Nice to see the feds aren't immune to the same bullshit stunts Illinois and Georgia tried to pull.
You know it's an election year... (Score:5, Interesting)
I just wonder why there's so much support for laws restricting freedom in the land of the free. Or was that rewritten and nobody told me?
Re:You know it's an election year... (Score:5, Insightful)
It got rewritten and nobody told you.
Republicans are the party of Big Daddy Government: their platform is to put cameras in your bedroom to make sure you're not having sex the wrong way, because pornography is a national epidemic.
Democrats are the party of Big Mommy Government: their platform is to put cameras in your kitchen to make sure you're not eating the wrong kinds of food, because obesity is a national epidemic.
Once upon a time, Americans valued "freedom to" over "freedom from". The past 40 years of "every life is precious" and "you are a unique and valuable snowflake" rhetoric has changed that; as a nation, we've pretty much decided we'd rather be safe than free. Kinda sucks for us oldthinkers who unbellyfeel amsoc, but that's our problem, not New America's.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No, I believe he's talking about the opposite. The "you are a unique and wonderful snowflake" analogy works great... for snowflakes. However, the problem is that the crowd we speak of also subscribes to such ideas as placing more emphasis on self-esteem in education than actually making sure kids learn and can perform what they learn correctly. It's the "all opinions are equally valid" crowd, where we have to make sure not to offend anyone because we all need to get along in HappyFunLand.
This crowd enco
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:You know it's an election year... (Score:4, Insightful)
You know it's an election year... when politicians come up with laws restricting... well, anything.
When do politicians ever come up with laws that don't restrict things? When was the last time a politician ran on the platform of repealing all our stupid, useless, counterproductive laws? Americans do not value freedom very much anymore. It is no longer an important cultural value. Most people see the government and laws as a battleground where they try to force other people to conform to doing things their way rather than the way the other party wants. Very few people want to take a stand in favor of personal choice.
Ever talk to a die hard "pro choice" advocate? They say it is every woman's right to make choices for herself, not have them forced upon her by others. I agree. My opinion might be that abortion is unethical, but it is not up to me to make that choice and force others to agree with me; it is up to each individual to choose. The problem is most of the people I talk to are a lot less in favor of the right to own a firearm or the right to hunt some non-endangered animal, or in some cases the right to eat meat. It is sick and sad that someone can have a "pro choice" bumper sticker, but not even think about the fact that they don't advocate personal freedom to choose in general, just personal freedom to make one particular choice, while they advocate taking other choices away from people. Is it any wonder so many children these days don't even think freedom of speech is an important right?
Freedom in the US died as a cultural value and is dying in our legislature as well. People don't even see it as an issue or concern. They just want to tell other people how to live at gunpoint, whether that is "worship Jeebus" or "don't shoot bunny rabbits."
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
It's sick and sad when people make straw-man arguments to defend a weak position about generalization of rights and what is a "right".
Are you sure you understand what a straw man argument is?
I'm pro-choice, pro-gun, pro-red-meat. (Bet that hurts your head.) But I don't claim my one anecdotal position defines every pro-choice person.
I'm sorry, would you mind copying the part of my original post where I claimed this example defines every person who is pro-choice? Oh, I didn't say that? Now you know wha
Re: (Score:2)
No t-shirt (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
States Rights Trashed Again (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
There. Fixed that for you.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
People Dont read (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:People Dont read (Score:5, Insightful)
The federal government collects this money from all the working members of society, then they withold it from anyone who won't accept rules that they are not actually supposed to be able to make. That's generally considered extortion.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Predators? Well, in that case.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Goddamn Mongolians! Get away from my shitty wall!
(your idea was explored humorously in a South Park episode)
Re: (Score:2)
And free candy?
Are we going to get rid of them, too?
Halfway there (Score:3, Interesting)
Poison Placebo (Score:4, Interesting)
All they do is damage everyone. Delete Stevens and his technocrat cronies.
Job Corps (Score:3, Informative)
States rights (Score:2)
News sites are interactive. (Score:2, Interesting)
block Ted (Score:2, Insightful)
Define an "Interactive Site" (Score:2)
Does emailing blog entries to WordPress count? Reading RSS feeds of interactive content? Google groups? Google answers (may it rest in peace)? Experts-Exchange? Fedora Forums?
This is infeasible to implement, really. They'd have to start by, uh, I dunno.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
`(J) COMMERCIAL SOCIAL NETWORKING WEBSITES; CHAT ROOMS- Within 120 days after the date of enactment of the Deleting Online Predators Act of 2006, the Commission shall by rule define the terms `social networking website' and `chat room' for purposes of this subsection. In determining the definition of a social networking website, the Commission shall take into consideration the extent to which a website--
Better Name (Score:2)
DESESE (Score:3, Interesting)
Already in effect (Score:2, Informative)
Is it me, or are our tubes a lot stricter than others'?
Going Nowhere (Score:2)
And due to the political power of blogs I suspect most members of congress are now smart enough and motivated enough to see right through this and kill it in short order.
Alaska (Score:2)
I miss Alaska. It's the best state in the union, and deserves better than Stevens and Murkowski (father and daughter).
Re: (Score:2)
If one argues that that hyperlinks are interactive, that would effetively be what this bill does.
Re: (Score:2)
And where do the feds get the money that they will be using to coerce the libraries with? Now tell me again that they can do anything they want with "their" money and if we don't like it we don't have to take their money.
How many libraries are funded like yours? (Score:2)
Why do I get the feeling that you are just tooting your own horn here and don't really give a rat's ass about the real issue at hand? After all, not every libra
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
adults have full rights and therefore this law would be unconstitutional
Not really. Libraries may be public but they are still owned and operated by the government. That means it's their call as to what goes on there. It's not violating your rights because you can still access whatever you want anywhere else.
Even if they somehow blocked a website for everyone it still wouldn't be a violation of your rights but rather the rights of the person running the website being blocked. Even that would be questionable because they aren't actually stopping you from saying something(freedom of speech intact) but they may as well be.
Dunno what universe you live in, but here in the US, "Owned and operated by the government" MEANS "public."
And it's called censorship when the government decides what someone can and cannot read/hear/view.
A private company (like your employer) is well within their rights to block any and all Internet traffic it deems inappropriate, in much the same way they can say, "No porno mags in the bathroom." No, this is not censorship, as it's not the government doing this.
Of course this leads right into the Ne
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Instead, these kids will need to learn how to deal with the world of 2007+, a world neck deep in networked computers.
As for your anti-Wikipedia bias, that's what it is... a bias, and not a rational one. I use Wikipedia regularly for technical subjects, and have no problems at all with bogus data.
Sure, there is definitely a problem with kids googling an assload of data, and not knowing how to knit it into a coherent who
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In fact, how many elementary schools even have computers that allow "un directed" Internet access?
MySpace is primarily a highschool thing.... and in highschools, where there are open computer terminals to use, this is the target.
How many elementary schools allow 7 year olds to wander around and sit down at a random computer terminal and type a random URL today? I would wager not too many, and even if they did, how many actually get used that wa