March 2023 - cypherpunks - lists.cpunks.org

Cryptocurrency: Starves Out Corrupt Gensler's Pelosi's Soros's SBF's Clinton's
by grarpamp 16 May '23

16 May '23

SEC Chairman Gensler Scrubbed Evidence Of Clinton, Soros And Pelosi Meetings: FOIA Lawsuit https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-official-hid-info-meetings-george-so… https://fortune.com/crypto/2022/11/11/sbfs-disgrace-could-make-things-awkwa… https://www.foxnews.com/politics/judicial-watch-files-foia-suit-against-nat… https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/sec-to-float-mandatory-disclosure-of-c… https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/republicans-introduce-legislation-to-t… Sunlight is the best disinfectant - unless you're Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Chairman Gary Gensler - who scrubbed evidence of a meeting with former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton from his calendar, along with key details of a meeting with Billionaire leftist-operative George Soros. He also concealed September 21 meetings with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and former Bill Clinton White House official-turned-DC consultant, Minyon Moore. Gensler, a former Goldman Sachs executive, Obama administration official, Clinton's 2016 campaign CFO, and FTX associate, essentially had two calendars. His public calendar showed that on Aug. 7, 2021, he only had a staff meeting, while his private calendar lists a meeting with Hillary Clinton, Fox News reports. Thirteen days later on Aug. 20, 2021, Gensler's public calendar does list a meeting with Soros, but the agenda was hidden. His private calendar reveals that the meeting was held to discuss an upcoming WSJ op-ed Soros was planning to write in which he slammed BlackRock for launching investment products for Chinese customers, while also applauding the company's ESG policies. Gensler's private calendar revealing the discrepancies was obtained by the watchdog group Energy Policy Advocates and shared with Fox News Digital. The group was only able to obtain the internal records after filing a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the SEC. In recent days, around the time Fox News Digital contacted the SEC, the agency updated Gensler's public calendar to include his meeting with Clinton in August 2021. As recently as Wednesday the public calendar didn't include the meeting, and archived copies of the webpage from April also list just a meeting with staff. -Fox News When contacted for comment, the SEC initially lied - saying that the Clinton meeting was visible on Gensler's public calendar. When confronted with screenshots to the contrary, the spokesperson said that the agency updates calendars "from time to time" when inaccuracies are discovered (by watchdog groups?). Gensler also concealed several September 2021 meetings with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), and Minyon Moore - both of which have been now updated on Gensler's public calendar. "That even George Soros is calling out progressive darling BlackRock for craven blundering is striking — even if it did carry the requisite, tribal praise for BlackRock's truly damaging 'ESG' (environmental, social and governance) campaigning to impose their shared 'climate' agenda on the U.S., an agenda also much to China's delight," said Chris Horner, a lawyer representing Energy Policy Advocates. "That it appears Soros received counsel from Gary Gensler on the mega-donor's call for more SEC powers as a result is truly astonishing." "This gives further credence to the widespread concern that Gensler is deeply politicizing a supposedly independent commission," he continued. "He may have been Hillary Clinton's ‘Progressive Beacon’ not long ago, but Gary Gensler is now the SEC chairman, and his calendar indicates he knew the purpose of the meeting. It seems important to know whose idea this was, why, what was said arranging it and through what channel." According to the SEC spokesperson, Gensler has never asked anyone to 'draft or submit' an op-ed, but declined to comment on the meeting with Soros. Gensler has faced heavy criticism from business groups and Republican lawmakers for pushing progressive policies, including a climate disclosure rule that would require publicly traded companies to share carbon emissions data and other climate information. Reps. Bill Huizenga, R-Mich., and Andy Barr, R-Ky., two top GOP members on the House Financial Services Committee, introduced legislation this month that would limit the SEC's ability to require such climate disclosures. -Fox News "That this and Gensler's consultation with Hillary were scrubbed from the public version of his calendar is frankly the least surprising aspect of this," Horner continued. "The SEC first told Energy Policy Advocates that the publicly posted calendars were all they would get." "Energy Policy Advocates challenged that, pointing out that these sanitized versions, typically posted months after the fact, were certainly not produced from memory and the group wanted the originals. Here you see the reason for the scrubbing these internal versions receive."

1 1

Re: [OpenRecords] Request FOIL-2022-056-01966 Acknowledged
by Gunnar Larson 14 May '23

14 May '23

Dear NYPD FOIL Records: On February 10 2022, a records request was filed with expected delivery date of August 3, 2022. I have followed up several times, and a year later no response from the NYPD has been provided. We are concerned of NYPD obstruction, intimidation and tampering and demand access to logs described by Unit States District Jude Hon. Jesse M. Furman's court ordered admistrative guide: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-MmZfVmdQ07e8FpHrSFlUHG2c6wykLxJ/view?usp=… . APPENDIX “A” ADMINISTRATIVE GUIDE RE: LONG RANGE ACOUSTIC DEVICE ADMINISTRATIVE GUIDE Section: TBD Procedure No.: TBD *** PURPOSE To Establish criteria for determining when and how to use the Long Range Accoustic Device (“LRAD”), so as to facilitate effective communications at details, pre-planned events, and other events requiring the dissemination of information effectively over large distances and/or over ambient noise.1 EQUIPMENT Long Range Acoustic Device Model 100X (LRAD 100X) - Hand-held portable sound amplification system, pre-recorded messages, and a microphone for use in supplementing and delivering public addresses and information. Long Range Acoustic Device (LRAD) Model 500X (LRAD 500X)- Vehicle mounted sound amplification system, pre-recorded messages, and a microphone for use in supplementing and delivering public addresses and information. PROCEDURE: - Who May Authorize LRAD Use: o Commanding Officer of the NYPD’s Disorder Control Unit o All NYPD Supervisors o NYPD Legal Bureau Attorneys - Who May Use the LRAD: o Any UMOS who has successfully completed the LRAD operator course - Additional LRAD Operations Considerations: o Power Settings: LRADs shall be used within the manufacturer’s safe operation guidelines as well as the requirements of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (“OSHA”), as set forth in the LRAD Operator Training; o Minimum Safe Distances: As set forth in the LRAD Operator Training, UMOS must make reasonable efforts to maintain minimum safe distances between the LRAD and all persons within its cone of sound; o Alert Tone: the LRAD alert tone shall NOT be used. FORMS AND REPORTS: If the LRAD is used, the operating UMOS must note such use in his or her electronic Daily Activity Log and MUST include the following: - The term “LRAD;” - Which model of LRAD was used; - Time, Place, and Occurrence of LRAD use; ADDITIONAL DATA: 1 Nothing in this Administrative Guide shall impact the operations of the NYPD Harbor Unit UMOS with any questions as to LRAD use, purpose, or operation are encouraged to reach out to the NYPD Legal Bureau at (646) 610-5400; - Failure to comply with the provisions of this procedure will subject UMOS to discipline for violation of this provision, as well as violation of P.G. § 203-10; - Misuse of any LRAD in a manner that is likely to result in injury to other UMOS, MOS, or non-NYPD personnel may be subject to such further discipline as deemed appropriate. On Thu, Feb 10, 2022, 2:46 PM <donotreply(a)records.nyc.gov> wrote: > The New York City Police Department (NYPD) has *acknowledged* your FOIL > request FOIL-2022-056-01966 > <https://a860-openrecords.nyc.gov/request/view/FOIL-2022-056-01966>. > > You can expect a response on or about Wednesday, August 3, 2022. > Additional Information: > > Your request has been assigned to Police Officer Covo (646-610-6458). > > *Note: Due to issues caused by the COVID-19 pandemic there may be > extensive delays, lasting up to one year, in determining your request.* > > > Please visit FOIL-2022-056-01966 > <https://a860-openrecords.nyc.gov/request/view/FOIL-2022-056-01966> to > view additional information and take any necessary action. >

1 1

1984: USA Launches Disinfo Ministry of Truth
by grarpamp 13 May '23

13 May '23

The USA Democrat Left just deployed 1984 to continue control the narrative, and program your mind... DHS Disinformation' Unit Headed by Woman Who Said Hunter Biden Laptop Story Was Disinformation https://summit.news/2022/04/28/dhs-disinformation-unit-headed-by-woman-who-… Houston, we have a problem. The Department of Homeland Security's new `disinformation' unit will be headed by a woman who says free speech makes her `shudder' and who falsely labeled the Hunter Biden laptop story disinformation. Oh dear. Just two days after it was revealed that Elon Musk had reached an agreement to buy Twitter, DHS chief Alejandro Mayorkas announced the creation of a "disinformation governance board." The new board will focus primarily on "misinformation related to homeland security, focused specifically on irregular migration and Russia." The board will be headed by Nina Jankowicz, a former advisor to the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry who oversaw related issued at the National Democratic Institute lobby group. "Cat’s out of the bag," Jankowicz tweeted. "Here's what I've been up to the past two months, and why I’ve been a bit quiet on here." Cat's out of the bag: here's what I've been up to the past two months, and why I've been a bit quiet on here. Honored to be serving in the Biden Administration [45]@DHSgov and helping shape our counter-disinformation efforts. [46]https://t.co/uN20vl7qqV [47]pic.twitter.com/JEn4FqLdck -- Nina Jankowicz <U+1F1FA><U+1F1E6><U+1F1FA><U+1F1F8> (@wiczipedia) [48]April 27, 2022 Jankowicz's view of free speech is particularly odious. Free speech apparently makes her physically shudder. "I shudder to think about if free speech absolutists were taking over more platforms, what that would look like for the marginalized communities, which are already shouldering disproportionate amounts of this abuse," she tweeted in response to Musk's Twitter takeover. NEWS: DHS is officially launching its own Ministry of Truth, or the so-called "Disinformation Governance Board." Nina Jankowicz will head the board as executive director. "Free speech absolutists" make her "shudder," so everything should be fine. [49]pic.twitter.com/wVc7hEBX11 -- Young Americans for Liberty (@YALiberty) [50]April 27, 2022 Jankowicz previously called Musk an "online abuser," while arguing for more censorship when she asserted, "The ‘free speech vs censorship’ framing is a false dichotomy." But crucially, the woman handed the role of deciding what constitutes "disinformation," previously labeled a completely truthful story "disinformation" because it was seen to be harmful to Joe Biden's presidential chances. Jankowicz promoted the actual disinformation that the New York Post Hunter Biden laptop story was a "Russian influence op." Back on the "laptop from hell," apparently- Biden notes 50 former natsec officials and 5 former CIA heads that believe the laptop is a Russian influence op. Trump says "Russia, Russia, Russia." -- Nina Jankowicz <U+1F1FA><U+1F1E6><U+1F1FA><U+1F1F8> (@wiczipedia) [51]October 23, 2020 She also wrongly asserted that it was a "Trump campaign product," while also claiming Trump supporters would show up at the polls with weapons to intimidate voters. Jankowicz's appointment once again underscores how moral panics about `disinformation' and `misinformation' are contrived frauds designed to bury legitimate information harmful to the regime's narrative. Both the Hunter Biden laptop scandal and the lab leak theory, two of the biggest news stories of 2020, were truthful yet branded "disinformation" so they could be buried by social media algorithms to prevent their viral spread. Along with `fact checkers', the new DHS disinformation unit is just another branch of the Ministry of Truth, which as in Orwell's 1984, serves a primary purpose of hiding and eliminating the truth.

1 13

Leaks: US Supreme Court Staffer Leaks Roe v Wade... WitchHunt Protests Police Ensue
by grarpamp 13 May '23

13 May '23

Batten down the hatches... https://www.politico.com/news/2022/05/02/supreme-court-abortion-draft-opini… https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000180-874f-dd36-a38c-c74f98520000 Who Leaked The Supreme Court Opinion? https://summit.news/2022/05/03/who-leaked-the-supreme-court-opinion/ https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/05/02/leaked-supreme-court-opinion-… After a draft Supreme Court opinion overruling Roe v. Wade was leaked to the press, speculation turned to who was responsible, with calls for them to be arrested. The majority of the court has decided to vote 5-4 to overturn federal constitutional protection of abortion rights, with Justice Samuel Alito writing, “Roe was egregiously wrong from the start,” in addition to asserting, “We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled.” In an unprecedented move, the opinion was leaked to Politico, presumably in an attempt to create massive social unrest that would lead to one or more of the justices being intimidated into changing their mind. “But it is not a binding decision of the court unless at least five justices sign it, and this looks like a transparent and unprecedented betrayal by one of the 45 or so people with access to a draft Supreme Court opinion to prevent this decision from becoming law by scaring off moderate justices and attempting to whip the political left into a frenzy,” reports Breitbart. Experts say the Supreme Court will lose the trust of a generation of Americans if the decision is walked back due to political pressure, but that didn’t stop whichever irate leftist leaked the document metaphorically pulling the pin on the grenade in an attempt to interfere in democracy. “The American people’s belief in the rule of law would be shaken if they lost respect for this Court as an institution that decides important cases based on principle, not ‘social and political pressures’,” states the leaked document itself. “But we cannot exceed the scope of our authority under the Constitution, and we cannot allow our decisions to be affected by the extraneous influences such as concern about the public’s reaction to our work,” Alito responds. Leaking a draft SCOTUS ruling is worse than January 6th. The Court was the one institution where conservatives and liberals lived in peace and trust. You disagreed but the trust was sacred. This completely destroys the Court’s inner workings. Totally in shock right now. — Cernovich (@Cernovich) May 3, 2022 The only people with access to the original document were the nine justices and their 36 law clerks, meaning it’s almost certain that one of the 36 law clerks leaked the document. When you consider that each justice has four clerks working for them, that probably narrows it down to one of 16 clerks working for the four Democrat-appointed justices. “The fact that some are praising this leak shows how utterly craven we have become in our politics,” tweeted attorney Jonathan Turley. “There appears no ethical rule or institutional interest that can withstand this age of rage.” The fact that some are praising this leak shows how utterly craven we have become in our politics. There appears no ethical rule or institutional interest that can withstand this age of rage. — Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) May 3, 2022 Other respondents highlighted how the leak is designed to intimidate the justices, via sparking potential mass civil unrest, into changing their mind. The perpetrator, who is already being lionized as a hero by the left, should face immediate arrest. Interference in a Supreme Court decision is a blow to democracy - like, say, stopping an electoral vote The conspirators must be rounded up and arrested and placed next to the J6 detainees — Jack Posobiec ☦️ (@JackPosobiec) May 3, 2022 Probably the greatest violation of unwritten "norms" in the history of the Supreme Court. And I absolutely guarantee you the leaker spent years railing against President Trump's undermining of norms. https://t.co/XSa9LaGb66 — Josh Hammer (@josh_hammer) May 3, 2022 This is why they leaked: "Justices can and sometimes do change their votes as draft opinions circulate and major decisions can be subject to multiple drafts and vote-trading...The court’s holding will not be final until it is published, likely in the next two months." (Politico) https://t.co/9k0JfLfYZd — Andrew "Leaked Majority Opinion" Kolvet (@AndrewKsay) May 3, 2022 Democrats are now expected to launch an attempt at court packing before they lose Congress in November, although the 5-4 decision should be rubber stamped before then. The leaking of the opinion is brazenly an attempt to subvert that process, create more chaos and violence in America, and derail the constitutional functioning of the Supreme Court. But that won’t matter at all to leftists, who think their moral right to kill babies supersedes all other concerns. 'Betrayal': Supreme Court Slams Leaked Roe Opinion, Says Does Not Represent "Final Decision" The Supreme Court issued a rare rebuttal to Monday's leaked Politico report on a draft opinion overturning abortion rights in the US. Yesterday, a news organization published a copy of a draft opinion in a pending case. Justices circulate draft opinions internally as a routine and essential part of the Court’s confidential deliberative work. Although the document described in yesterday’s reports is authentic, it does not represent a decision by the Court or the final position of any member on the issues in the case. Chief Justice John G. Roberts. Jr., provided the following statement: To the extent this betrayal of the confidences of the Court was intended to undermine the integrity of our operations, it will not succeed. The work of the Court will not be affected in any way. We at the Court are blessed to have a workforce - permanent employees and law clerks alike - intensely loyal to the institution and dedicated to the rule of law. Court employees have an exemplary and important tradition of respecting the confidentiality of the judicial process and upholding the trust of the Court. This was a singular and egregious breach of that trust that is an affront to the Court and the community of public servants who work here. I have directed the Marshal of the Court to launch an investigation into the source of the leak. Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) said on Tuesday that the leaked draft ruling by the Supreme Court overturning Roe was "completely inconsistent" with what Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh told her in private during confirmation hearings when they were Supreme Court nominees. "If this leaked draft opinion is the final decision and this reporting is accurate, it would be completely inconsistent with what Justice Gorsuch and Justice Kavanaugh said in their hearings and in our meetings in my office," said Collins. "Obviously, we won’t know each Justice’s decision and reasoning until the Supreme Court officially announces its opinion in this case." Collins defended her vote for Kavanaugh in 2018, stating that she didn't believe he would vote to overturn Roe. "I do not believe Brett Kavanaugh will overturn Roe v. Wade," she said at the time. "He noted that Roe had been reaffirmed 19 years later by Planned Parenthood vs. Casey. And that it was precedent on precedent. He said it should be extremely rare that it should be overturned." Meanwhile, the Supreme Court says yesterday's leaked report is authentic. Protests erupted outside the US Supreme Court overnight after a draft majority opinion overturning Roe v. Wade leaked to Politico. Photo: Alex Brandon / AP Barriers were erected outside the courthouse as hundreds gathered outside to protest the news, the Washington Post reports. A smaller group of pro-life protesters also showed up, chanting "Pro-choice, that’s a lie. Babies never choose to die," while the larger group of pro-abortion protesters shouted "When abortion rights are under attack, what do we do? Stand up, fight back!" Breaking: Protests are beginning to form outside the Supreme Court. This is just the beginning. #GOPHandmaidsTale pic.twitter.com/8OYnmRxZyN — MeidasTouch.com (@MeidasTouch) May 3, 2022 A couple hundred people, most in their 20s and 30s, are now outside SCOTUS. There’s still not yet any organized protest or chanting, just folks standing around talking. Guy just whipped out a can of White Claw. pic.twitter.com/PCrXisy0Ys — Natalie Allison (@natalie_allison) May 3, 2022 Really rich hearing the Left trot out this old chant after the past 2 years of them cheering on vaccine mandates. pic.twitter.com/6yhay9YWaw — The Columbia Bugle 🇺🇸 (@ColumbiaBugle) May 3, 2022 A scuffle broke out shortly after midnight, as several 'masked protesters' tried to force the pro-life protesters to clear out. Neither group budged according to the report. 2nd clip from the scuffle, looks like someone in a suit gets clocked. pic.twitter.com/BATtQmE7Ms — Doge (@IntelDoge) May 3, 2022 "The first line in the draft is that this is a moral issue. If it’s a moral issue, you shouldn’t be depriving us of our choice," said Annie McDonnell, a student at George Washington University. President Joe Biden responded to the report with a statement he undoubtedly had zero involvement crafting, saying: "We do not know whether this draft is genuine, or whether it reflects the final decision of the Court." The statement adds that Roe is based on a "long line of precedent recognizing ‘the Fourteenth Amendments concept of personal liberty... against government interference with intensely personal decisions," adding that he believes a woman's right to choose is 'fundamental,' and that Roe has been the 'law of the land for almost fifty years, and basic fairness and the stability of our law' demand that it not be overturned." Biden then said that the White House's "Gender Policy Council" has prepared options to respond to "the continued attack on abortion and reproductive rights, under a variety of possible outcomes in the cases pending before the Supreme Court. Supreme Court Set To Overturn Roe v Wade, Leaked Draft Opinion Shows A leaked draft of a US Supreme Court decision reveals that the majority of the court has decided to overturn Roe v. Wade by a vote of 5-4, according to Politico, which calls it a "full-throated, unflinching repudiation of the 1973 decision which guaranteed federal constitutional protections of abortion rights and a subsequent 1992 decision – Planned Parenthood v. Casey – that largely maintained the right." "Roe was egregiously wrong from the start," wrote Justice Samuel Alito in the draft which was circulated inside the court before someone leaked it to the news outlet. "We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled." “No draft decision in the modern history of the court has been disclosed publicly while a case was still pending. The unprecedented revelation is bound to intensify the debate over what was already the most controversial case on the docket this term.” https://t.co/2os0uJWyUr — Eamon Javers (@EamonJavers) May 3, 2022 Politico highlighted these 10 passages from the draft opinion: “We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled. The Constitution makes no reference to abortion, and no such right is implicitly protected by any constitutional provision....” “Roe was egregiously wrong from the start. Its reasoning was exceptionally weak, and the decision has had damaging consequences. And far from bringing about a national settlement of the abortion issue, Roe and Casey have enflamed debate and deepened division. It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives.” “In the years prior to [Roe v. Wade], about a third of the States had liberalized their laws, but Roe abruptly ended that political process. It imposed the same highly restrictive regime on the entire Nation, and it effectively struck down the abortion laws of every single State. … [I]t represented the ‘exercise of raw judicial power’… and it sparked a national controversy that has embittered our political culture for a half-century.” “The inescapable conclusion is that a right to abortion is not deeply rooted in the Nation’s history and traditions. On the contrary, an unbroken tradition of prohibiting abortion on pain of criminal punishment persisted from the earliest days of the common law until 1973.” “In some States, voters may believe that the abortion right should be more even more [sic] extensive than the right Casey and Roe recognized. Voters in other States may wish to impose tight restrictions based on their belief that abortion destroys an ‘unborn human being.’ ... Our nation’s historical understanding of ordered liberty does not prevent the people’s elected representatives from deciding how abortion should be regulated.” “We have long recognized, however, that stare decisis is ‘not an inexorable command,’ and it ‘is at its weakest when we interpret the Constitution.’ It has been said that it is sometimes more important that an issue ‘be settled than that it be settled right.’ But when it comes to the interpretation of the Constitution — the ‘great charter of our liberties,’ which was meant ‘to endure through a long lapse of ages,’ we place a high value on having the matter ‘settled right.’” “On many other occasions, this Court has overruled important constitutional decisions. … Without these decisions, American constitutional law as we know it would be unrecognizable, and this would be a different country.” ”Casey described itself as calling both sides of the national controversy to resolve their debate, but in doing so, Casey necessarily declared a winning side. … The Court short-circuited the democratic process by closing it to the large number of Americans who dissented in any respect from Roe. … Together, Roe and Casey represent an error that cannot be allowed to stand.” “Roe certainly did not succeed in ending division on the issue of abortion. On the contrary, Roe ‘inflamed’ a national issue that has remained bitterly divisive for the past half-century....This Court’s inability to end debate on the issue should not have been surprising. This Court cannot bring about the permanent resolution of a rancorous national controversy simply by dictating a settlement and telling the people to move on. Whatever influence the Court may have on public attitudes must stem from the strength of our opinions, not an attempt to exercise ‘raw judicial power.’” “We do not pretend to know how our political system or society will respond to today’s decision overruling Roe and Casey. And even if we could foresee what will happen, we would have no authority to let that knowledge influence our decision. We can only do our job, which is to interpret the law, apply longstanding principles of stare decisis, and decide this case accordingly. We therefore hold that the Constitution does not confer a right to abortion. Roe and Casey must be overruled, and the authority to regulate abortion must be returned to the people and their elected representatives.” Sorry one last thing for those wondering about Court procedure: After oral argument the Justices take a tentative vote. This would have happened in December. The senior most justice in the majority gets to assign the opinion. That might have been Roberts, but doubtful since... — Neal Katyal (@neal_katyal) May 3, 2022 So there is the possibility an opinion can flip after oral argument and the tentative vote, so it's theoretically powerful the Alito opinion won't be the vote of the Court. But it would require a Justice BESIDES Chief Justice Roberts to flip. — Neal Katyal (@neal_katyal) May 3, 2022 The magnitude of this report is so serious that Politico included this editor's note vouching for the authenticity of the draft decision. Via Ben Mullin The leak has completely wiped the headlines and Twitter is exploding with hot takes. Leaking a draft SCOTUS ruling is worse than January 6th. The Court was the one institution where conservatives and liberals lived in peace and trust. You disagreed but the trust was sacred. This completely destroys the Court’s inner workings. Totally in shock right now. — Cernovich (@Cernovich) May 3, 2022 The fact that some are praising this leak shows how utterly craven we have become in our politics. There appears no ethical rule or institutional interest that can withstand this age of rage. — Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) May 3, 2022 FWIW, there’s not much the GOP wants less than Roe to actually be overturned. If the Politico scoop is correct, the GOP is now the dog who caught the car. Roe was always a shiny thing to campaign on (much like repealing Obamacare) but never something they actually wanted to do. — Angry Staffer 🌻 (@Angry_Staffer) May 3, 2022 This is why they leaked: "Justices can and sometimes do change their votes as draft opinions circulate and major decisions can be subject to multiple drafts and vote-trading...The court’s holding will not be final until it is published, likely in the next two months." (Politico) https://t.co/9k0JfLfYZd — Andrew Kolvet (@AndrewKsay) May 3, 2022 Probably the greatest violation of unwritten "norms" in the history of the Supreme Court. And I absolutely guarantee you the leaker spent years railing against President Trump's undermining of norms. https://t.co/XSa9LaGb66 — Josh Hammer (@josh_hammer) May 3, 2022 Interference in a Supreme Court decision is a blow to democracy - like, say, stopping an electoral vote The conspirators must be rounded up and arrested and placed next to the J6 detainees — Jack Posobiec 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) May 3, 2022 and. here. we. go. pic.twitter.com/5I9Ngxiz3U — Siraj Hashmi (@SirajAHashmi) May 3, 2022

1 17

Notice of Publication for U.S. Patent Application No. 17/232,016; Jim Bell
by jim bell 12 May '23

12 May '23

This includes the notification of the publication of the patent application for the isotopic hafnium dielectric patent. Instead of using ordinary hafnium in the dielectric under the gates of MOSFET transistors, Hf-177 or Hf-179 isotope hafnium can be used, to increase its dielectric constant. This will enable the thickening of the dielectric layer from 1.2 nanometers, yet maintain sufficient gate authority. This will enable the continuing shrinkage of feature sizes in cutting-edge IC's. See:. https://daltonium.com/ F Jim Bell's new patent application. ----- Forwarded Message ----- From: "Daltonium Isotopics" <daltoniumisotopics(a)gmail.com> To: "jdb10987(a)yahoo.com" <jdb10987(a)yahoo.com> Cc: Sent: Tue, Nov 9, 2021 at 1:56 PM Subject: Fwd: Notice of Publication for U.S. Patent Application No. 17/232,016; Our Ref. DAL21301 ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: (snip) Date: Mon, Nov 8, 2021, 3:36 PM Subject: Notice of Publication for U.S. Patent Application No. 17/232,016; Our Ref. DAL21301 To: daltoniumisotopics(a)gmail.com (Snip) | Re: | U.S. Utility Patent Application No. 17/232,016 Title: ISOTOPE-MODIFIED HAFNIUM AND SEMICONDUCTOR DIELECTRICS Our Ref.DAL21301 | Good afternoon, The Notice of Publication of Application has been received from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, informing us that the above-identified patent application was published on October 28, 2021, under Publication Number US-2021-0336027-A1. Copies of the Notice of Publication and the published application are attached for your records. We will be separately sending you our invoice for services rendered. Please contact us(or Doug Wells, directly at 503-866-2749) if you have any questions or if we may be of further assistance. Best regards, Chloe Mike | On Behalf of McCoy Russell LLP Legal Assistant 1410 (Snip)

5 4

[ot][crazy] task models
by Undescribed Horrific Abuse, One Victim & Survivor of Many 30 Apr '23

30 Apr '23

for some reason i poke at machine learning models now. if i keep doing this, here’s a thread for recent resources. 3D Shape Generation (for 3d printing): code + pretrained weights: https://github.com/yccyenchicheng/AutoSDF/ (size is under 1GB, on google drive. code is in ipython notebooks. have not tried it.) newer paper with code not yet released: https://yccyenchicheng.github.io/SDFusion/

1 1

Adrienne Harris Is Crypto’s Most Powerful Regulator
by Gunnar Larson 28 Apr '23

28 Apr '23

THE MONEY GAME MAR. 30, 2022 Crypto’s Most Powerful Regulator Is Here Adrienne Harris, New York’s financial watchdog, has enormous sway over the industry’s future. By Kevin T. Dugan, staff writer at Intelligencer, who covers money and business Photo: Victor Llorente Thirteen years after the birth of cryptocurrency, it was supposed to be time for Washington to rein it in. Instead, the White House punted, and the Securities and Exchange Commission is still hashing out how it’s going to oversee the $2 trillion industry. State watchdogs have filled that vacuum, making Adrienne Harris, the head of the New York State Department of Financial Services, by default the most powerful crypto regulator in the country. While states such as Florida and Wyoming have adopted a laissez-faire approach to regulation, attracting a sizable chunk of the booming industry, more money and jobs are still flowing into New York than any other city, making it the de facto crypto capital of the U.S. “There’s a misconception that having rigorous regulation turns off innovative companies,” Harris tells me during an hour-long interview at her office looking out onto the Statue of Liberty last month. “That hasn’t been our experience here.” Sign up for Dinner Party A lively evening newsletter about everything that just happened. SIGN UP Harris was tapped as the first Black woman to lead DFS last year. She came into her position after a turn working in Silicon Valley and representing Wall Street banks, a résumé that critics have used to paint her as too close to the industries she is regulating. She’s eager to dispel any criticism that she’s soft as a regulator, especially when it comes to crypto. Harris says she’s looking to expand the agency’s remit, hire new regulators, and possibly watch over lending and asset management in decentralized finance, a.k.a. DeFi, one of the fastest-growing crypto industries, which has been prone to very large hacks. The agency’s power over the industry lies mostly with the BitLicense, a required if unloved permit for crypto exchanges to operate within state lines. When it was first introduced in 2014, it was meant to be a model for the country, but the crypto industry has attacked the license for being too strict, limiting what people can trade, and requiring expensive anti-money-laundering operations, which, it should be noted, most traditional financial institutions are required to maintain. For Harris, the problem isn’t that it’s too restrictive — it’s that the process of getting one, which has stretched years for some companies, is too slow. “If you think about the companies that are BitLicensees, and even the companies in the queue, having the imprimatur of ‘Have you passed regulatory muster with a stringent regulatory regime?’ — I think the good actors see that as a good thing,” she says. Created in 2011, DFS has been a regulator feared more than any of its counterparts in other states for the power it has over banks, insurance companies, and a host of other financial institutions. It brought ambitious money-laundering cases against banks like BNP Paribas (a settlement that resulted in several bankers losing their jobs), fined Deutsche Bank for its relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, and levied a $2.5 million fine on the National Rifle Association for selling its so-called murder insurance in the state. “DFS has a lot of teeth, and the sky’s the limit if the agency is exercised properly,” says state Sen. John Liu of Queens, a member of the state finance committee. “DFS compelled multinational banks to cough up $15 billion. We were able to build a couple bridges with that money. We still have much infrastructure in the state of New York that might benefit from DFS’s vigorous functions.” But part of DFS’s mandate is to keep the state’s economy healthy, a balancing act when it means protecting consumers from predatory, but also lucrative, companies. “For me, it’s an opportunity to bring my lived experience as a woman of color,” Harris says. So far, she has established the agency’s first climate division, frozen fees for check-cashing businesses that target the poor, and looked into non-bank lenders for evidence of redlining. “It’s important to me that those voices are at the table and being heard,” she says. “I bring a sort of pragmatism. It’s one thing to sit in our offices with nice views and make policy, but it’s another thing, in my mind, to really run the water through the pipes.” In 2008, Harris joined Sullivan & Cromwell, a law firm so close with Goldman Sachs that it has long sent its lawyers to work in-house at the investment bank. It was there that she worked for H. Rodgin “Rodge” Cohen, then the law firm’s chairman and the so-called trauma surgeon of Wall Street. Cohen remembers Harris working late into the night writing near-flawless memorandums so they’d be ready on his desk in the morning. “She just brought what I’d call a penetrating intelligence to the problems that were at hand,” Cohen tells me. “Many of the problems we get, you cannot just look up the answer in a book. It’s a question of judgment and trying to apply rules written often for other circumstances.” Still, it was clear that corporate law wasn’t for her. “Her heart was really in public service,” he says. From there, she went on to work for the Treasury Department, then the Obama White House, where she focused on policies around the then-upstart fintech industry. After the administration turned over, Harris took a spin through the revolving door between government and business. Her New York financial-disclosure forms show a superabundance of work with the tech and finance industries: She sat on the boards of six companies and nonprofits, including LendingClub, which had recently settled with the Federal Trade Commission over claims it had misled users on fees. She also advised 11 companies, owned two, and invested in or on behalf of two others. “I just thought, well, if you’re going to make policy about it, you should do the thing — run the company, build the company,” she says. “At the time, I felt very comfortable going to a start-up because I thought, well, coming out of government, you’re not making a ton of money. And if this start-up blows up, I’ll probably be no worse off, financially speaking.” It seems Harris did well enough. One real-estate tech company at which she worked went public last summer, and Harris appears to have cashed out. Since the disclosures were for 2020, they didn’t include her stake in Forethought, a private A.I.-based customer-service company that announced in December that it had attracted such investors as Harris, Ashton Kutcher, and Gwenyth Paltrow. When I asked her about Forethought, Harris said her investment in the company predated her time at DFS, that all her investments are now in a blind trust, and that she would recuse herself from any dealings with companies she has conflicts with. So when Hochul appointed Harris to lead DFS, she was attacked by the left. Zephyr Teachout and Cynthia Nixon both criticized Harris as being insufficiently independent, thanks to her connections in tech and finance. The American Prospect dug up a speech in which she characterized regulators as looking for “no-nos” and “icky things.” Harris has also advised the cash-advance companies Earnin, Brigit, and SmartWage (based in South Africa), according to her disclosures. In 2019, DFS led a multi-state investigation into the cash-advance industry over whether they created debt traps and state banking and anti-usury laws, since equivalent interest rates for the fees they charged would reach as high as 469 percent. A person directly familiar with the investigation told me that Harris’s predecessor was presented with multiple options for furthering the investigation, including reaching a settlement, but ultimately never made a decision. DFS wouldn’t comment. So, of all the companies to work for, why them? “My role, when I was working with those companies, was not to dictate price pricing or business model. It was more to say: Here’s how regulators would view this. Here’s why you should engage with them. Let me help you engage with them and figure out these issues and how you can also serve customers. Less pricing and business model, but, as an adviser who’s not in the day-to-day, helping to sort of guide a culture and mentality,” she says. Did she disagree with those arguing that these companies created debt traps for consumers? “I think it’s hard to paint with a broad brush,” she says. “I think we should always always be careful with any new products and services, that they are affordable and non-predatory, not creating debt traps, and that they’re solving a real problem for consumers. And I think some do that and some don’t.” Last summer, after Andrew Cuomo resigned as governor, many of his appointees went with him, including then-superintendent of DFS, Linda Lacewell. Soon Harris’s old boss, Cohen, had recommended her to Kathryn Wylde, the president and CEO of the Partnership for New York, a business-advocacy group that has advised DFS. “The folks at Sullivan & Cromwell thought that Adrienne would be a terrific candidate to field for that job given her eight years of experience in the Obama administration and the fact that she was somebody who understood industry,” Wylde says. “On the theory that a regulator should know something about the industries they’re regulating — which may be a novel concept but struck me as a valid one — I thought she sounded like a terrific candidate.” Harris sailed through her confirmation, with 63 senators voting for her and nine against. “When the regulated are complaining that the regulator is being too aggressive, that generally means the regulator is doing their job.” said Michael Gianaris, the state senator from Queens who voted against Harris’s nomination and, in 2019, tanked Amazon’s proposed HQ2 in New York. “Cuomo was a prick, and the people he appointed tended to share his bare-knuckles approach to the world. In some cases, that’s actually not a bad thing.” While the crypto industry doesn’t appear to be getting the reprieve it had been hoping for, other industries will surely lobby Harris to make similar gestures toward the business community. For instance, Wylde says that insurance companies are hoping that Harris will lower the reserves they are required to have on hold, which they claim are higher than what’s required by other states. “There are some long-standing issues that the industry has that they feel that they’ve got a fresh start on with Adrienne’s leadership,” she says. Still, crypto is going to play a major part in how Harris’s tenure is defined. “It’s clear that New York is doing well now and the companies that came and started here five to ten years ago are doing well,” says Matt Homer, a former deputy superintendent at DFS and the current executive-in-residence at the venture-capital fund NYCA Partners. “It’s not totally clear what the future will look like five to ten years from now.” New York is the home base for major exchanges such as Coinbase and Gemini, and it’s also home to shady NFT front-running scandals and alleged rapping billionaire money launderers. That such a volatile industry could implode and damage New York’s economy is apparent. “I understand that other states may have gone the opposite way of the BitLicense, but there are things we can do here in New York that will hopefully inform the federal regulators as they continue to think about this space,” Harris said. “It’s a new world with crypto, with DeFi, with NFTs.” SIGN UP FOR THE INTELLIGENCER NEWSLETTER Daily news about the politics, business, and technology shaping our world. Email SIGN UP TAGS: THE MONEY GAME CRYPTOCURRENCY LEAVE A COMMENT 12/12/2022 CRIME Sam Bankman-Fried Has Been Arrested in the Bahamas By Kevin T. Dugan The disgraced FTX founder is facing charges from both the Justice Department and the S.E.C. 12/12/2022 POLITICS Twitter’s Former Safety Head Forced From Home After Being Smeared by Elon Musk By Chas Danner Former Twitter executive Yoel Roth and his family have reportedly faced a torrent of harassment and threats after Elon Musk’s false claims. 12/12/2022 WHAT WE KNOW How Big Is the U.S. Fusion Breakthrough? By Chas Danner The Department of Energy’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory has reportedly achieved a historic milestone in nuclear fusion. MOST POPULAR The ‘Twitter Files’ Is What It Claims to Expose By ERIC LEVITZ Twitter’s Former Safety Head Forced From Home After Being Smeared by Elon Musk By CHAS DANNER How Big Is the U.S. Fusion Breakthrough? By CHAS DANNER Red-Pilled Elon Musk Still Loves the Chinese Communist Party By JONATHAN CHAIT Elon Musk Gets Loudly Booed at Chappelle Comedy Show By BENJAMIN HART 12/12/2022 EARLY AND OFTEN Here Come the Trump 2024 Alternatives By Ed Kilgore A crop of presidential hopefuls represent Republican fantasies of something better for them than a Trump-Biden rematch. 12/12/2022 POLITICS Scott Stringer Files Defamation Suit Against Harassment Accuser By Nia Prater The former comptroller is suing lobbyist Jean Kim, alleging that her accusations against him were defamatory. 12/12/2022 LOS ANGELES L.A. Councilman Calls Guy He Fought Last Week ‘Hostile Individual’ By Matt Stieb Kevin de León, who was caught making racist remarks on a recording earlier this year, did not apologize after a scuffle with a protester on Friday. 12/12/2022 THE MONEY GAME Now That FTX Is Toast, Is Binance Too Big To Fail? By Kevin T. Dugan The Justice Department is weighing criminal charges against the world’s biggest crypto exchange. 12/12/2022 THE NATIONAL INTEREST Red-Pilled Elon Musk Still Loves the Chinese Communist Party By Jonathan Chait The Twitter owner may hate the left, but he does admire Leninism. 12/12/2022 ELON MUSK Elon Musk Gets Loudly Booed at Chappelle Comedy Show By Benjamin Hart “It sounds like some of the people you fired are in the audience.” 12/12/2022 POLITICS Jay Jacobs Has Few Regrets and No Apologies By Nia Prater Despite a bruising midterm, the Democratic boss isn’t going anywhere, to the frustration of critics. 12/10/2022 THE MEDIA The ‘Twitter Files’ Is What It Claims to Expose By Eric Levitz The purported exposé of Twitter’s political bias is itself an attempt to weaponize control of Twitter for political purposes. 12/9/2022 BRITTNEY GRINER What’s Next for Viktor Bout, According to His Lawyer By Amos Barshad Steve Zissou predicts the notorious arms dealer will now lead a “quiet existence.” 12/9/2022 WORLD CUP The Best Team in the World Is Out of the World Cup By Benjamin Hart Another devastating quarterfinals defeat for Brazil. 12/9/2022 POLITICS What Happens to Paul Whelan Now? By Nia Prater President Biden said his administration is not giving up on securing the former marine’s release from Russia. 12/9/2022 JUST ASKING QUESTIONS A Crisis-PR Veteran on Sam Bankman-Fried’s Odd Media Strategy By Benjamin Hart Eric Dezenhall thinks the explanation for SBF’s behavior is pretty straightforward. 12/9/2022 WORLD CUP Goalkeepers Gone Wild By David Gendelman At the World Cup, netminders are increasingly going on offense. The consequences can be miraculous or disastrous. 12/9/2022 THE NATIONAL INTEREST Kyrsten Sinema Is Playing Chicken By Jonathan Chait Declaring herself an independent is a way to force the Democratic Party into embracing her. 12/9/2022 FINDINGS Why Spending Time With Kids Might Actually Help Protect You From COVID By David Zweig Two studies find an immunological downside for adults who stay away from children. 12/9/2022 FIRST PERSON I Lost My Brother Twice By Alex Brook Lynn First to schizophrenia, then forever to the city. 12/8/2022 SPORTS Brittney Griner Is Coming Home From a Russian Prison By Margaret Hartmann And Nia Prater The WNBA star is headed home after being released in a prisoner swap for the notorious international arms dealer. 12/8/2022 STOP THE PRESSES Just What Did the Times Walkout Change? By Shawn McCreesh Some employees have said they are ready to vote on a strike authorization as soon as tomorrow. Others worry this has all gone too far. 12/8/2022 TREMENDOUS CONTENT Do the Trumps Want to Crop Kimberly Guilfoyle Out of the Family? By Margaret Hartmann Eric Trump felt compelled to announce that, despite the rumors, he doesn’t hate his brother’s fiancée. Ivanka Trump’s silence may say more. 12/8/2022 SAM BANKMAN-FRIED Sam Bankman-Fried’s Parents Are No Longer Teaching Law at Stanford By Kevin T. Dugan His mother says her sudden decision to retire now has “nothing to do with anything else going on.” 12/8/2022 TREMENDOUS CONTENT Donald Trump Cost Lara Trump Her Fox News Gig By Margaret Hartmann Nepotism giveth, and nepotism taketh away. 12/8/2022 And now the House 258-169-1, House passes bill to protect same sex marriages. 39 Rs vote for it. Bill heads to Biden —@mkraju 12/8/2022 BRITTNEY GRINER The 7 Craziest Facts About Arms Trafficker Viktor Bout’s Career By Matt Stieb Getting to know the “merchant of death” the U.S. just sent to Russia in a prisoner swap for basketball star Brittney Griner. SIGN IN TO COMMENT Like Us Follow Us ABOUT INTELLIGENCER ABOUT NEW YORK MAGAZINE NEWSLETTERS HELP CONTACT PRESS MEDIA KIT WE’RE HIRING PRIVACY TERMS AD CHOICES DO NOT SELL MY INFO ACCESSIBILITY INTELLIGENCER IS A VOX MEDIA NETWORK. © 2022 VOX MEDIA, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Holiday Sale: Save up to 70% and get two exclusive gifts with any annual plan. SUBSCRIBE NOW " https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/03/adrienne-harris-is-cryptos-most-pow…

1 2

Re: Follow Up: Applying for Loans & Grants for NYC Small Businesses| GJDC | 01/31
by Gunnar Larson 25 Apr '23

25 Apr '23

Dear Vivi Acosta: 38 days ago, I kindly submitted an inquiry about Kiva.org's relationship with the NYC Small Business Opportunity Fund. Any information you can provide would be greatly appreciated. Thank you, Gunnar Larson On Wed, Feb 1, 2023, 3:05 PM Gunnar Larson <g(a)xny.io> wrote: > Hey there: > > Yesterday when I was submitting the pre-application for the NYC Small > Business Opportunity Fund I was matched with the NDC Loan Team. > > Additionally, I saw a group of other potential services such as Kiva.org. > > Can you kindly advise the relationship the NYC Department of Small > Business Services has with Kiva.org? > > Thank you, > > Gunnar Larson > > On Wed, Feb 1, 2023, 2:57 PM BSG <bsg(a)gjdc.org> wrote: > >> Message from NYC Department of Small Business Services: >> >> >> >> Thank you for attending Applying for Loans & Grants for NYC Small >> Businesses| GJDC | 01/31. We hope you enjoyed our event. Attached is the >> presentation and to access SBS Connect to view all other services, >> please use this link: https://sbsconnect.nyc.gov/ >> Home · SBS Connect <https://sbsconnect.nyc.gov/> >> This will end your session with SBS Connect, but you will still be logged >> in on other NYC.gov sites. Be sure to log out of those sites as well or >> close your browser window if you want to end your session. >> sbsconnect.nyc.gov >> >> >> Please submit any questions or comments to: bsg(a)gjdc.org. >> >> >> >> Thank you and best of luck! >> >> >> *Vivi Acosta* >> >> Deputy Director of Business Services and Special Events >> >> >> *E-mail:* vacosta(a)gjdc.org <jantoine(a)gjdc.org> >> >> --- >> >> 90-04 161st Street >> >> Jamaica, NY 11432 >> >> www.gjdc.org >> >> >> *Follow us on* *Twitter* <https://twitter.com/gjdcprez>* |* *Facebook* >> <https://www.facebook.com/gjdcprez/> *| **LinkedIn* >> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/gjdc> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>

1 2

Leaks: 280MB Criminal Corrupt Joe Biden Laptop Report Published
by grarpamp 19 Apr '23

19 Apr '23

https://bidenlaptopreport.marcopolousa.org/Report.pdf https://bidenlaptopemails.com/ Full copy of laptop disk images are available on internet...

1 1

Cryptocurrency: Action - Shutdown The US RESTRICT Act
by grarpamp 10 Apr '23

10 Apr '23

https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/686/text?s=1&r=15 " The New RESTRICT Act needs all of our attention I’ve seen this bill being tossed around on some of the new “TIK TOK could be banned” headlines and wanted to share it with you. It’s far worse than I thought it could be and if passed it will affect us all. For those wondering this is essentially the PATRIOT Act, but for the internet. It gives the government any reason that it deems as national security an avenue to access your data, your procedures, and to enforce these measure harshly. Can I use a VPN? No. This Bill’s wording is so incredibly broad, meaning if it connects in any way that they see fit, it’ll stretch to every reach with the penalties being OH SHIT kind of penalties. I tried to find specifically the wording of VPN as was mentioned in several other subs but couldn’t find it myself. See Section (11) under subsection (c) for penalties on these matters. (c) Criminal Penalties.— (1) IN GENERAL.—A person who willfully commits, willfully attempts to commit, or willfully conspires to commit, or aids or abets in the commission of an unlawful act described in subsection (a) shall, upon conviction, be fined not more than $1,000,000, or if a natural person, may be imprisoned for not more than 20 years, or both. But you’re just paranoid like all r/cc users! Mmm maybe but perhaps not. Currency in and of itself is incredibly important to the US government. There’s a lot of language in this bill that’s too broad for me to accept as anything over than government overreach, here’s an example from the same Section (11): (F) No person may engage in any transaction or take any other action with intent to evade the provisions of this Act, or any regulation, order, direction, mitigation measure, prohibition, or other authorization or directive issued thereunder. THIS BILL IS NOT TO BAN TIK TOK, IT IS TO PUT A COLLAR ON THE INTERNET. IF THIS PASSES, WIDESPREAD ADOPTION IS NOT ONLY GONE FOREVER FOR THE US BUT IT’LL CONSTRICT GENERATIONS TO COME FROM BREAKING THROUGH THE GOVERNMENT’S FASCISTIC WAY OF DISCERNING WHO AMONG US ARE CRIMINALS BY OUR DATA. Please read this bill, please let me know if I’m missing something. It’s important we all stay educated as this might be our first existential threat to crypto currencies. If they ban VPN with such a heavy penalty, who knows what’s next? 20 Years in jail for a emulating a game? EDIT TO ADD BILL: https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/686/text?s=1&r=15 2nd EDIT: Data bills should always be something to look in to. I had a comment earlier where I said “They could just write a bill on outsourcing data to foreign servers.” Sounds easy? Well crypto could be seen as that data. If we want to preserve what we’ve all built here, I’d hope you, like me, are going to keep a close eye on data bills going forward. 3rd EDIT: There are those who are assuring me it won’t affect crypto so here’s another passage: Section (3) (a) (1) poses an undue or unacceptable risk of— (B) catastrophic effects on the security or resilience of the critical infrastructure or digital economy of the United States; 4th and Last Edit: Of course this bill only targets foreign entities with malice. I’m not here to misrepresent the bill or help criminals and adversaries take advantage of Americans. My concern is that these measures can be applied past, present, and future tense and that it could be abused in the future by adding a country out of favor with a party or removing a country who paid enough into politics. My concern is that our political system in the states has not been reliable and I’m concerned a bad actor could use this as a weapon. Please read it all, it’s not that bad past the definition sections, but I want to reiterate my intent with the post was simply to discuss what I still see as a worrisome bill that can be amended for generations to come. " [–]tamaleA19Platinum | QC: CC 749 | KIN 5 241 points 18 hours ago It’s an outrageous overreach. They may claim it’s for privacy and security but will just be used as a tool for censorship and control permalink embed save report reply [–]NathhfhTin | 3 months old 105 points 17 hours ago What scares me is that we all know why they are doing this. We know this playbook. Its been used by oppressive regimens multiple times before. Yet there isnt any strong public backlash or even any repercussion from the legislature for proposing such things. We are either too busy keeping our family alive or too numb to protest all this crap permalink embed save parent report reply [–]tamaleA19Platinum | QC: CC 749 | KIN 5 35 points 17 hours ago Exactly and they get away with by making sure we’re too numb or busy trying to keep our family alive permalink embed save parent report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 27 points 16 hours ago Apathy runs strong these days. Cheers to the people still learning permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Wonderful_Bad6531 2 points 12 hours ago yey cheers for us! permalink embed save parent report reply [–]coinsRus-2021Silver | QC: CC 52 | ADA 222 | TraderSubs 11 16 points 16 hours ago Too many boot lickers willfully ready to comply permalink embed save parent report reply [–]BountyBard 9 points 11 hours ago This is deeply concerning. If this bill passes, it'll not only affect the crypto world but also the basic privacy and freedom of every internet user in the US. We need to stand together and raise awareness to stop this from happening. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Hawke64Platinum | QC: CC 199 7 points 15 hours ago And divide us when we start to complain. See Occupy Wall Street movement permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Jeff5704Tin | 5 months old 3 points 12 hours ago You know it! permalink embed save parent report reply [–]7101334Platinum | QC: CC 62 7 points 14 hours ago Longer than that man. See COINTELPRO. Dividing and conquering their own population is official US policy. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]coinsRus-2021Silver | QC: CC 52 | ADA 222 | TraderSubs 11 10 points 16 hours ago Screw these overreaching clowns Pay attention This shit they pull impacts us all, gravely permalink embed save parent report reply [–]BountyBard 2 points 11 hours ago The implications of this bill go far beyond just cryptocurrencies. It's a matter of personal freedom and privacy. We can't sit idly by while our rights are stripped away. Let's unite as a community and fight back against this legislation! permalink embed save parent report reply [–]coinsRus-2021Silver | QC: CC 52 | ADA 222 | TraderSubs 11 1 point 11 hours ago Where’s the petitions I’ll sign permalink embed save parent report reply [–]zUdioBronze | r/CMS 7 | Economics 262 6 points 16 hours ago It’s so egregious that really someone should be finding out who put these words onto a page. They need justice. You can’t put these words on a page in a modern era and not receive justice... permalink embed save parent report reply [–]goofytigreShitcoin Connoisseur 2 points 14 hours ago They are using TikTok to push this forward because TikTok as a platform is very polarizing. Mostly divided along generational lines, people either love it or hate it (younger Millennials down to Gen Alpha love TikTok, elder Millennials and older hate it). Most of the money donated to Congress comes from older folks. Congress will do just about anything their money tells them to do, and Congress knows how to manipulate those donors to support trash legislation. They give a trash bill a catchy acronym/name, get everyone emotionally charged by saying it is in regards to TikTok, add China into the mix for a little fear/propaganda/patriotism. Now they have a bill supported by their donors, ready to steal more privacy from the proletariat all in the name of protecting our data from TikTok/China. This is a playbook they use often. We need to stop falling for their bullshit. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]IgnisVitae- 1 point 16 hours ago isn't it always been like this, make citizens either go against each other or be too busy to even care while they sneakily do their owns shit permalink embed save parent report reply [–]UDP7Tin 1 point 15 hours ago The reason there is no protest is because you need mainstream media reporting these details and the mainstream media is run by the government so they're not going to let that happen. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]DATY4944Platinum | QC: CC 21 | ADA 12 | Investing 17 1 point 15 hours ago They've managed to keep people dumb, weak, and financially powerless, but just enough to not piss anyone off. And anyone who gets pissed off is dumb enough to believe it's the left or the right at fault, not the ruling class in general. So instead of having a real enemy to band together against, half the country can't connect with the other half, and you have the perfect distraction from any action. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]kwanijmlPlatinum | QC: BTC 50, CC 28, BCH 27 | Economics 41 1 point 12 hours ago* There isn't a strong backlash because most people worship the state like they're in a cult. They can't help but separate in their minds, the nirvana fallacy of what governments should or could do, from how governments actually behave in the real world. They can't fathom that governments inevitably head towards harming people more than they protect people from being harmed. Doesn't matter how many people have been slaughtered or wars initiated, or millions thrown in prison for victimless crimes, or economies destroyed, or trillions of the currency unit printed and hyper-inflated, or how many workers unions busted, or rent-seekers enriched.... No, it's never the nation-state itself which might be a bad idea...its just that other sect over there. It's always okay to wage holy war against the other sect of the religion...but one can never question the state God itself, or think that maybe, just maybe, law and governance might make a little more sense decentralized to match actual communities with shared values. That would be crazy talk to think that life could ever possibly be worth living without the privilege of fighting this Sisyphean battle against the nation-state trying to subvert every human right at every turn. So stupid! Without one government over entire continents- Who would build the roads? Who would provide police for no-knock raids? Who would beat war drums against brown children in middle eastern countries and create the threat of global nuclear annihilation with other nuclear armed dictatorships? In the face of the masses who literally think this way, what hope did cryptocurrency advocates ever think there was of staying in the good graces of the state, and the masses who believe that life would end suddenly if the FBI doesn't have dragnet access to everyone's finances and communications? [gasp] they might catch one fewer (non-state) terrorist or (non-state-sanctioned) money-launderer or someone might do drugs. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]The_Chorizo_BanditSilver | QC: CC 846, XRP 41 | TRX 28 1 point 11 hours ago If you protest you often get shot or arrested, so there is that… permalink embed save parent report reply [–]dopef123Silver | QC: SOL 139, CC 109, ETH 61 | CAKE 41 | TraderSubs 56 1 point 9 hours ago We need some group like the ACLU building the resistance against this. Unfortunately the ACLU became some hyper woke group that doesn't really care about free speech. How do we organize ourselves to fight this? permalink embed save parent report reply [–]JustBreatheBelieveTin | Politics 32 1 point 6 hours ago Yet there isn't any strong public backlash or even any repercussion from the legislature for proposing such things. We are either too busy keeping our family alive or too numb to protest all this crap. Additionally, the majority of people don't know how bad the effects could be or they think it won't affect them so they don't care. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]InsaneMcFriesPlatinum | QC: CC 256 21 points 16 hours ago This time it’s even in the name. RESTRICT act, compared to PATRIOT act? Come on people, shut this shit down wherever you can. Reach out to your representatives, spread the message. I thought these dystopian bills were over but they are back once again and something tells me we haven’t seen the last of the them either. 😞 permalink embed save parent report reply [–]kwanijmlPlatinum | QC: BTC 50, CC 28, BCH 27 | Economics 41 7 points 12 hours ago I don't understand why it's acceptable, even preferable to most people, to have to live this way...in this constant Sisyphean battle against a frankly malevolent state. When are people going to understand that you can't rationally, centrally govern a country of 350 million people (let alone a billion or 1.5 billion) without getting authoritarian and more autocratic, and dysfunctional and captured and corrupted? It was never going to work. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]sakata32Platinum | QC: CC 742 5 points 14 hours ago Dystopian bills will never be over. People in power will always try to abuse it as much as they can permalink embed save parent report reply [–]SimbaTheWeaselBronze | QC: ALGO 18 1 point 14 hours ago This is correct. Dystopian is the ultimate goal for those in power. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]tamaleA19Platinum | QC: CC 749 | KIN 5 2 points 10 hours ago They’re not even trying to hide it anymore behind flowery names permalink embed save parent report reply [–]dopef123Silver | QC: SOL 139, CC 109, ETH 61 | CAKE 41 | TraderSubs 56 2 points 9 hours ago Next thing you'll say the Be a Great Person Act has wording that allows them to grind the homeless into a fertilizer. How could that be when the name is so nice? permalink embed save parent report reply [–]coinsRus-2021Silver | QC: CC 52 | ADA 222 | TraderSubs 11 12 points 16 hours ago I absolutely hate the government and how they operate Both parties btw permalink embed save parent report reply [–]kwanijmlPlatinum | QC: BTC 50, CC 28, BCH 27 | Economics 41 6 points 12 hours ago THIS COMMENT IS NOT REDDIT-APPROVED. PLEASE REPORT FOR REPROGRAMMING UNTIL YOU BELIEVE THAT THE OTHER TEAM IS WORSE AND THAT IF WE JUST GET THE RIGHT PEOPLE IN POWER, THINGS WILL BE UTOPIC permalink embed save parent report reply [–]coinsRus-2021Silver | QC: CC 52 | ADA 222 | TraderSubs 11 5 points 11 hours ago Lol 😂 permalink embed save parent report reply [–]feeblemind69 6 points 16 hours ago This is some bs we can't accept this permalink embed save parent report reply [–]digitFIREPlatinum | QC: CC 257 4 points 17 hours ago Indeed. Unfortunately using privacy and security as a justification has no end. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]ThomasTheTrai 3 points 16 hours ago history has been repeating itself permalink embed save parent report reply [–]LongUntilWSBShowsUp1 - 2 years account age. 35 - 100 comment karma. 1 point 16 hours ago Meet the new boss,same as the old. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]BringerofsalvationPlatinum | QC: CC 96 1 point 15 hours ago All the actions taken by them don’t suggest anything else. They won’t settle for anything less than complete control of our lives at this point. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]mistressbitcoinPlatinum | QC: CC 241 | DayTrading 8 | Fin.Indep. 314 1 point 15 hours ago Just like all the covid restrictions permalink embed save parent report reply [–]SpaceFaceMistake 1 point 15 hours ago The Illuminati is real. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Don_Frika_Del_PrimaFTM 1 point 14 hours ago Meanwhile in other news: https://www.trustnodes.com/2023/03/28/us-gov-becomes-top-holder-of-bitcoin 1% of all the bitcoin is in hands of the US government. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]giddyup281Platinum | QC: CC 1135 | r/CMS 6 | Technology 12 1 point 12 hours ago "But, but, Patriot act is for protection against terrorist threats." /s YES, this will be used to oppress civil liberties. Write to your congress person. NOW permalink embed save parent report reply [–]SuccumbedToReddit 1 point 10 hours ago Why would politicians want this? Like, who are they targeting with it? I can't believe it is crypto. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]dopef123Silver | QC: SOL 139, CC 109, ETH 61 | CAKE 41 | TraderSubs 56 1 point 9 hours ago Yeah, this is pretty nuts. If this bill came up under Trump people would be shouting from the hills about how he's trying to create an authoritarian environment online. Any bill that takes away our freedoms needs to be stopped. We can rarely get them back. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]ShotCryptographer523Platinum | QC: CC 237 | VET 9 1 point 6 hours ago I lived in China previously and their laws concerning VPN use are strict, but not that strict. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]jewpandaSilver | QC: CC 15 | r/Technology 24 1 point 5 hours ago It was a good ride. We're all fucked. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]evoxyseahPlatinum | QC: CC 206, BTC 22, LW 18 | ADA 19 1 point 3 hours ago This is so disgusting. We need to wake up and fight against the bad actors. Our comfort zone is going to boil us alive. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]k3surfacermy coin is better than your coin 55 points 18 hours ago* shall, upon conviction, be fined not more than $1,000,000, or if a natural person, may be imprisoned for not more than 20 years, or both. So got a VPN? You get "Very Personally Nuked" . permalink embed save report reply [–]NathhfhTin | 3 months old 40 points 17 hours ago Want to watch Netflix UK? Nuked Want to access geolocked services of your hoke country while traveling abroad? Also nuked Want to keep your children safe from predators online? Believe it or not - Nuked permalink embed save parent report reply [–]IgnisVitae- 11 points 16 hours ago Want to keep your children safe from predators online? US: DENIED! We'll even lower marry-able age! permalink embed save parent report reply [–]deathbyfish13Free Range Moon Farmer 2 points 12 hours ago "You want your kids safe? Well too bad were making them less safe instead" permalink embed save parent report reply [–]MasterLogic 1 point 16 hours ago Netflix already blocks most vpns now, and has been doing it for years. It's illegal for them to distribute movies to different counties, always has been. As is with other locked websites. This isn't a new thing. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]k3surfacermy coin is better than your coin 1 point 13 hours ago So to protest, people need only to ask "please don't nuke us". Sound reasonable. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]OneThatNoseOnePlatinum | QC: CC 40 1 point 8 hours ago Doesn't even make sense on so many levels permalink embed save parent report reply [–]tamaleA19Platinum | QC: CC 749 | KIN 5 24 points 18 hours ago VPN will easily be construed as an attempt to evade permalink embed save parent report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 26 points 18 hours ago This is what I’ve come to understand. Evasion is such tricky wording but even Crypto itself could be seen as evasion as it has been seen before. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]tamaleA19Platinum | QC: CC 749 | KIN 5 17 points 18 hours ago They’ll definitely count any interaction with privacy coins like Monero in that too permalink embed save parent report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 10 points 16 hours ago Well and they can get transaction data from any entity operating in the US, like exchanges. It’d be awful hard to imagine a coin succeeding when it must be traded in the darkest of alleys with the penalty of 20 years looming. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]BountyBard 1 point 11 hours ago The RESTRICT Act is a perfect example of government overreach. Crypto has always been about financial freedom, and this bill poses a serious threat to our community. Let's spread the word!! permalink embed save parent report reply [–]zUdioBronze | r/CMS 7 | Economics 262 5 points 16 hours ago Evasion is something you do when you’re kidnapped and are trying to get away. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Meltsomeice 1 point 7 hours ago We may just say we were watching the Super Bowl. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]giddyup281Platinum | QC: CC 1135 | r/CMS 6 | Technology 12 8 points 12 hours ago Collapsing the working class? $100k fine. Torrenting a documentary through VPN? (in my best Dr Evil voice) ONE MILLION DOLLARS! permalink embed save parent report reply [–]fatfk69 2 points 12 hours ago Literal manifestation of "gnna end this person's whole career" permalink embed save parent report reply [–]dopef123Silver | QC: SOL 139, CC 109, ETH 61 | CAKE 41 | TraderSubs 56 1 point 9 hours ago I have to imagine they will not enforce this until they have someone they randomly want to bring the hammer down onto. This wording is way too general and the bill is not useful. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]PMme10dolarSteamCardGold | QC: CC 63 83 points 18 hours ago Sounds like they hate freedom permalink embed save report reply [–]marekt14Platinum | QC: CC 81 | LRC 5 | r/WSB 22 40 points 17 hours ago US rebranding: Land of the [Redacted] permalink embed save parent report reply [–]WoowoodyydoowoowSilver | QC: CC 353 | LRC 31 13 points 17 hours ago I think that [Redacted]. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]deathbyfish13Free Range Moon Farmer 6 points 12 hours ago Holy shit, looks like this guy just got [Redacted] because [Redacted] permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Trevor792221 2 points 48 minutes ago [Redacted] permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Hawke64Platinum | QC: CC 199 9 points 15 hours ago There is no war in Ba Sing Se permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Dieselpump510Silver | QC: CC 71, ETH 60, CCMemes 21 | ADA 18 | TraderSubs 57 8 points 16 hours ago More that they love control permalink embed save parent report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 7 points 16 hours ago The banks spoiled them. They can’t lose their “projection power.” permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Wonderful_Bad6531 1 point 12 hours ago true, some things just can't be controlled permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Hawke64Platinum | QC: CC 199 23 points 18 hours ago Ironically US really loves spreading freedom with their attack carrier group permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Ben_Dover1234Bronze | QC: CC 18 17 points 18 hours ago Freedom is not optional permalink embed save parent report reply [–]bannybanana 1 point 16 hours ago But the US is also not the one who decides if you’re free permalink embed save parent report reply [–]y90210Platinum | QC: BTC 47 | Stocks 99 12 points 18 hours ago Bankers were great at taking over the anti banking movement from 2009 and turning it into the sjw movement. Same hippies who used to protest wars now call you a Nazi for wanting peace talks between Russia and Ukraine. Divide and conquer works well when your country is filled with morons. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Diamondangel82Bronze | QC: CC 20 | ModeratePolitics 77 6 points 16 hours ago Someone who gets it... permalink embed save parent report reply [–]ValsinatsKrrtBronze | 5 months old 2 points 16 hours ago Shit man, be careful with your truth on this site lol Thank god /cc is saner than most of reddit, I almost can’t bother post anywhere else but here permalink embed save parent report reply [–]crownpuff -2 points 14 hours ago* Unironically using the term sjw. Yeah we all know who you voted for in 2020. https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/capitol-breach-cases permalink embed save parent report reply [–]DEEPFIELDSTAR 1 point 7 hours ago Way to prove his point. Open your eyes. permalink embed save parent report reply [+]Mysterious_Comb9550 2 points 17 hours ago (0 children) [–]unitys2011Platinum | QC: CC 35 2 points 17 hours ago Sounds like they hate everything they can’t control permalink embed save parent report reply [–]DukiOn_Chit0Mus0lini 0 points 16 hours ago A lot of GOP on this type of bill as expected! Feels like a remix of the Patriot Act. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 6 points 16 hours ago Written by a democrat last I checked. The republicans have no qualms about passing this as well, but it’s surprising how many on both sides of the aisle would like to see this through. The left, for the banks and the right, for the access. permalink embed save parent report reply [+]Feisty-Ice-8427 4 points 16 hours ago (2 children) [–]InsaneMcFriesPlatinum | QC: CC 256 4 points 15 hours ago* We, the people, have been segregated into a pointless political division between two parties, and attack each other as if fighting over sports teams. We need to band together and fight upwards and take our control back from the grips of the 1%. No doubt Democrats and Republicans have very different views of the world, but the fact of the matter is that the two parties are still very centrist in the big picture, and these giant issues that become a two-sided debate most of the time is absolutely a joke. Something’s gotta give and I will feel so sorry for the American people if the return of these power grab bills actually makes it through this time. It’s an outrage. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 2 points 15 hours ago Agreed. I’ve been an independent my whole adult life. I’ve had a few disagree with my take on this bill but I wasn’t offered passages yet showing me where I have a misconception. I hope the voting public starts caring more about the information than premise. It’s important if we intend to avoid overreach. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]IamKingBeaglePlatinum | QC: CC 94 | Politics 19 2 points 13 hours ago Ranked choice voting in USA please. We need to get rid of the extremes on both sides. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Fair_Raccoon9333 1 point 14 hours ago I can't find any evidence VPN is included in this bill or how it relates to individuals not associated with foreign adversaries. Is it possible you are being chicken little? This bill requires federal actions to identify and mitigate foreign threats to information and communications technology (ICT) products and services. It also establishes civil and criminal penalties for violations under the bill. Specifically, the Department of Commerce must identify, deter, disrupt, prevent, prohibit, investigate, and mitigate transactions involving ICT products and services (1) in which any foreign adversary has any interest, and (2) that pose an undue or unacceptable risk to U.S. national security or the safety of U.S. persons. Additionally, Commerce must identify and refer to the President any covered holding (e.g., stock or security) that poses an undue or unacceptable risk to U.S. national security or the security and safety of U.S. persons. If the President determines that the holding poses such a risk, the President may compel divestment of or otherwise mitigate the risk associated with the holding. Commerce may (1) designate any foreign government or regime as a foreign adversary upon a determination that the foreign government or regime is engaged in a long-term pattern or serious instances of conduct significantly adverse to U.S. national security or the security and safety of U.S. persons, and (2) remove such a designation. Commerce must notify Congress before making or removing a designation; these actions are subject to congressional disapproval. The bill outlines (1) enforcement mechanisms, including actions by the Department of Justice; and (2) civil and criminal penalties for violations. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]BountyBard 1 point 11 hours ago No matter the colors, we must be vigilant and stay informed on such potential threats to our freedom and privacy. The RESTRICT Act is a wolf in sheep's clothing. It's time to put aside our differences and join forces against this legislation. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]DukiOn_Chit0Mus0lini 1 point 11 hours ago That's funny Republican Baby Bush signed it, his problem. Guess the GOP loves that authoritarian communism it loves to preach! permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Right-Shopping9589 1 point 17 hours ago But they love fighting for it permalink embed save parent report reply [–]red_beeredPlatinum | QC: CC 122, r/CCs. 16 | Politics 137 1 point 16 hours ago They know the empire is on the decline, and stuff like this is their way of slowing that decline so they can keep the status quo going long enough while they're alive. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]sarfianTin | ADA 8 1 point 16 hours ago Sounds not good from a government that promotes freedom permalink embed save parent report reply [–]BrocoliAssassinSilver | QC: BTC 218, CC 105 | CelsiusNet. 25 1 point 16 hours ago It’s not that they hate freedom, they love it for themselves, but just not for you. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]MetikMasBronze | QC: CC 17 1 point 13 hours ago Their idea of freedom is really just comfort. Corporate slaves aren’t free but they push the idea that you are “free” to be a part of the machine in whatever position you choose but only if you work hard and generate more money for them. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]giddyup281Platinum | QC: CC 1135 | r/CMS 6 | Technology 12 1 point 12 hours ago It's like they found oil on the Internet permalink embed save parent report reply [–]dopef123Silver | QC: SOL 139, CC 109, ETH 61 | CAKE 41 | TraderSubs 56 1 point 9 hours ago You need to give up your guns and crypto because people are getting hurt!!! Freedoms come at a price. The question is how much are we willing to pay for them. It really is a tough question. But the ability to transact freely is worth all the scams and shadiness imo. Others may not agree. Bankless has some good episodes on how important the ability to transact is. Especially in the modern world. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]CheesebaronPlatinum | QC: XMR 76, BTC 46, CC 20 | r/AMD 126 56 points 18 hours ago Sounds like the RESTRICT act is restricting freedom. We should restrict politicians instead. permalink embed save report reply [–]Towryaalai 13 points 17 hours ago I think we should RESTRICT age in politicians. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Hawke64Platinum | QC: CC 199 6 points 15 hours ago The senate needs some fresh young opinions of 60 year-olds permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Right-Shopping9589 3 points 17 hours ago Yeah those fvcking old pervert deserve to be restricted permalink embed save parent report reply [–]RemingtonSnatchTin | ModeratePolitics 55 -4 points 16 hours ago Plenty of stupidity across the age board. *cough*AOC *cough* permalink embed save parent report reply [–]franky_reboot 0 points 13 hours ago AOC is a blessing compared to dinosaurs like Biden, Pelosi or even Elizabeth Warren permalink embed save parent report reply [–]RemingtonSnatchTin | ModeratePolitics 55 0 points 12 hours ago LOL. She is the same as them (especially Warren), just with a lower IQ. Her legislative record would fit on a fortune cookie slip, and her ideas are every bit as bad. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]franky_reboot 1 point 9 hours ago I see it otherwise, frankly. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]RemingtonSnatchTin | ModeratePolitics 55 1 point 9 hours ago* Any examples of legislation that she authored that you approve of? Should note that she has never sponsored anything that got passed either chamber. She is objectively ineffective. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]franky_reboot 1 point 9 hours ago Any examples of leglislation that she authored that you approve of? I totally dig the Green New Deal and the Loan Shark Prevention Act, to name only two. Whether they pass or not is irrelevant. These are important issues I can side with permalink embed save parent report reply [–]franky_reboot 1 point 13 hours ago This. Politician is a dirty job. Someone's gotta do it anyways. Age is one significant factor that makes it so terrible. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]NathhfhTin | 3 months old 5 points 17 hours ago RESTRICT act is restricting freedom With that name, who would have guessed permalink embed save parent report reply [–]InsaneMcFriesPlatinum | QC: CC 256 1 point 15 hours ago It is right there in the name. That is an obvious red flag and honestly I don’t even bloody know why they put it through with it like that. Fuck this shit people, they must think we are a laughing stock to not stand against this, unlike the PATRIOT act which was a masqueraded attempt. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Ben_Dover1234Bronze | QC: CC 18 6 points 18 hours ago Physically? permalink embed save parent report reply [–]roamingandyPlatinum | QC: CC 15 | IOTA 5 | Futurology 14 1 point 16 hours ago* I recon ChatGPT5 could do a better and fairer job. I say we give it a go. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]OneOverNeverTin 1 point 12 hours ago To think Hayek already spoke about this in the 80s, wrote a whole book! "The Fatal Conceit".... permalink embed save parent report reply [–]JocoguiBronze | 6 months old | QC: CC 15 102 points 18 hours ago Recently US Politisaurus and Legislasaurus went out of control. we don't understand -> we ban US in risk of erasing its "land of the free" motto. permalink embed save report reply [–]NathhfhTin | 3 months old 54 points 17 hours ago we don't understand -> we ban I wish they were this innocent. They understand exactly what crypto is about. Thats WHY they wana ban it. They are afraid of what it will do to their cushy lives when they cant game the financial system any more permalink embed save parent report reply [–]HadMatter217Platinum | QC: CC 49 | PoliticalHumor 168 4 points 16 hours ago If anything, crypto is much, much easier to game than traditional finance. Half of crypto is scams anyway. You're kidding yourself if you think the rich can't use it to fuck poor people. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]coinsRus-2021Silver | QC: CC 52 | ADA 222 | TraderSubs 11 7 points 16 hours ago What? You're kidding right? Have you seen penny stocks? thousands upon thousands of them. Stock market is full of complete trash and fraud. Our banks are full of fraud. How on earth do you look at our current financial system and say the rich aren't already using it to screw poor people. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]HadMatter217Platinum | QC: CC 49 | PoliticalHumor 168 2 points 16 hours ago Crypto is literally just all of those things plus multiple layers of tech that people don't understand. Even on this sub, how many people actually understand how bridges work? You can post on stock trading subs all day and get no DM's but you post on crypto subs a few times and you get dozens. You know why that is? It works. On top of that, pumping and dumping in crypto is easy as fuck if you hold any kind of capital, and this has been pretty well known forever. There are definitely bad stocks out there, but there are literally less than 5 crypto tokens that are even as good as the worse of them. On top of that, crypto happens mostly on unregulated exchanges where bad behavior goes unpunished 100% of the time, and no authority has jurisdiction to do anything about it, so the rich get to do whatever they want. At the end of the day, every capitalist loves an unregulated market. permalink embed save parent report reply [+]coinsRus-2021 comment score below threshold (7 children) [–]UrbanWoodyTin 1 point 16 hours ago* Why would they change their modus operandi, when the current one is working perfectly? permalink embed save parent report reply [–]HadMatter217Platinum | QC: CC 49 | PoliticalHumor 168 1 point 15 hours ago Just because a hammer is doing the job now doesn't mean you won't eventually want a screwdriver. It's just another tool in their toolbox. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]coinsRus-2021Silver | QC: CC 52 | ADA 222 | TraderSubs 11 1 point 16 hours ago Makes my blood boil... permalink embed save parent report reply [–]excubitor15379WARNING: 4 - 5 years account age. 0 - 32 comment karma. 1 point 16 hours ago Crypto is guerilla and they fighting vilagers rendering help to them. Does US turn into CHR? permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Hawke64Platinum | QC: CC 199 18 points 18 hours ago Land of the free™ permalink embed save parent report reply [–]DamnumGaudium 4 points 17 hours ago Shit, you mean I can't use that phrase freely anymore for mocking US? permalink embed save parent report reply [–]bannybanana 4 points 16 hours ago Land of the free but only for the rich and powerful permalink embed save parent report reply [–]coinsRus-2021Silver | QC: CC 52 | ADA 222 | TraderSubs 11 1 point 16 hours ago Yeah except the ruling party is bought out by a communist regime and won't be touched by a finger - you choose, fascist or communist. Those are the choices anymore, here. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]lukekibsTin 1 point 16 hours ago Land of the ex-free and cryptoless people! permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Right-Shopping9589 6 points 17 hours ago Land of the free💀 permalink embed save parent report reply [–]HadMatter217Platinum | QC: CC 49 | PoliticalHumor 168 16 points 16 hours ago Wait.. the country that was founded on the genocide of indigenous people and built on the backs of slaves from Africa was ever considered the "land of the free"? Laughable. The "land of the free" that wouldn't even let women or black people vote for a century? The "land of the free" that only allowed land owners to vote? The "land of the free" that has performed experiments on their own people, installed dictators all over the world, and remains completely under corporate control? There's no risk in erasing anything. What you're talking about never existed except in propaganda. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]EpicMichaelFreemanSilver | QC: CC 136, BNB 18 | ADA 473 | NVIDIA 58 2 points 14 hours ago OK how about Land of the Fee? Can we get that at least??? permalink embed save parent report reply [+]EpicHasAIDS comment score below threshold (12 children) [–]feeblemind69 2 points 16 hours ago They understand that crypto could undermine their power and control so they will try to get rid of it permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Towryaalai 1 point 17 hours ago "Land of the free (but for those who give us money)" permalink embed save parent report reply [–]roamingandyPlatinum | QC: CC 15 | IOTA 5 | Futurology 14 1 point 16 hours ago "No not that kind. Only our own kind of money" permalink embed save parent report reply [–]MindTheMindForMind 1 point 17 hours ago Every government that doesn’t understand something is going to ban this thing… It’s easy for them, instead of be a critical thinker and do the right things for everybody. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]sgtlarkSilver | QC: CC 36 | SHIB 14 1 point 14 hours ago In risk? Where have you been for the past 110 years? The US have not been a constitutional republic for a long time. Heavy regulation (and legitimized intervention) in places where the state should not even come close, centralization of power in the hands of federal government, subservient governors, restrictions of personal freedoms, not to talk about what happened since the end of the WWII in the whole military first then intelligence and law enforcement sectors. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]franky_reboot 1 point 13 hours ago Many argue they have erased its meaning decades ago. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]SoNElgenSilver | QC: CC 140, LTC 111, BTC 107 | VET 764 | TraderSubs 212 1 point 13 hours ago When was it ever a land of the free? Last western country to abolish slavery and segregation. They still have natives living on reservations like second tier citizens. At it's inception, you could be gunned down by people who disliked your religion/nationality/whatever. Hell, people are still not FREE to choose their own destinies. It's a nation of modern day slaves. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]giddyup281Platinum | QC: CC 1135 | r/CMS 6 | Technology 12 1 point 12 hours ago Still not sure why people that were alive when the Sun was created have any say in what we do on the Internet. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]JocoguiBronze | 6 months old | QC: CC 15 1 point 12 hours ago When you say internet they understand witchery. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]kwanijmlPlatinum | QC: BTC 50, CC 28, BCH 27 | Economics 41 1 point 11 hours ago risk? Sweet summer child... permalink embed save parent report reply [–]FldLima 17 points 17 hours ago As a crypto lover, I completely agree that the New RESTRICT Act needs our attention. This bill, if passed, would not only give the government unprecedented access to our data and procedures but would also severely limit our ability to use VPNs and other tools to protect our privacy. Hope it flops hard permalink embed save report reply [–]szertedTin 9 points 10 hours ago Imagine banning VPN before assault weapons permalink embed save parent report reply [–]LetsJustFuck321Tin 5 points 7 hours ago What blows my mind is that RESTRICT is literally a duplicate of an assault weapons ban, but for data and the internet. Even in it's original use, "assault weapon" was extremely vague, and even back during the Clinton admin it dealt almost entirely on how a weapon looked. Some definitions of "assault weapon" have since included things like (and I wish I was making this up) "anything that bears resemblance an actual assault rifle, despite its function". The term has since (partially) ditched the "ban things that look scary" and has evolved to mean different things on different days depending on the mood of the person using it, especially politicians. It now includes ~95% of all firearms, including some bolt action rifles and pump shotguns. People allow all this because they don't like guns, despite this setting an extremely dangerous legal precedent. Don't like the RESTRICT Act? Wait until bureaucratic agencies are allowed to simply change the definitions of things in order to start totally bending laws into the favor of power, without any Congressional oversight or involvement from the Legislative Branch at all. This has already been happening with the BATFE under both the Biden and Trump admins, and also FASB Statement 56 which makes about 90% of the government's spending to be allowed into the black budget by simply rationalizing "national security". It's as if there's a pattern here somewhere, hmm... permalink embed save parent report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 7 points 17 hours ago It will as long as it doesn’t silently pass while we’re all sleeping. Being loud shouldn’t be hard for us haha permalink embed save parent report reply [–]mixing_sawsTin | GMEJungle 17 | Superstonk 23 1 point 13 hours ago America is really going to shit. Good thing i dont live there. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Probably_notabotTin | CC critic 17 points 18 hours ago Sounds like USA isn’t interested in free speech anymore. Patriot act was the first step against it. permalink embed save report reply [–]frozengrandmatetrisPlatinum | QC: BCH 160, XMR 53, CC 35 | IOTA 9 | Privacy 13 6 points 8 hours ago look around on this website. so many people here hate free speech with a passion. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]InsaneMcFriesPlatinum | QC: CC 256 3 points 15 hours ago They see an exploitable sense of ignorance and divide in the people and it’s going to be abused. The people need to come together and fight up, not across the battle lines that have been drawn for us. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]BountyBard 6 points 11 hours ago This is a wake-up call for all of us, not only for the people in the USA. If we don't stand up against the RESTRICT Act, we're paving the way for further government intrusion into our lives. It's not just about protecting crypto, it's about preserving our rights in the digital age. Don't let this bill pass without a fight! permalink embed save parent report reply [–]JeffWest01 42 points 17 hours ago Get involved, write your Senators and Representatives. Here is a site to easily email them: https://democracy.io/#!/ Here is a sample email from ChatGPT: Subject: Vote NO on the RESTRICT Act Dear [Representative’s Name], I am writing to urge you to vote NO on the proposed RESTRICT Act. As your constituent, I believe that this bill is harmful to our freedom of speech, limits the Internet, and hinders economic growth. While I agree that there are valid concerns with the security of certain apps, a blanket ban is not the solution. TikTok has proven to be a valuable platform for many people to share their talents, creativity, and opinions. Moreover, this bill goes too far in restricting our freedom of speech. It would not only limit access to social media apps but also create a dangerous precedent for the government to control what citizens can and cannot say on the internet. It would have a chilling effect on free expression, and I believe that it is unconstitutional. Lastly, this bill would severely limit the Internet and hinder economic growth. The Internet is an essential tool for innovation, entrepreneurship, and commerce. The RESTRICT Act would impede access to information, limit competition, and stifle innovation, making it harder for small businesses and entrepreneurs to thrive. In conclusion, I urge you to vote NO on the RESTRICT Act. While security concerns are legitimate, a blanket ban on social media apps is not the solution. We should not sacrifice our freedom of speech and economic growth for the sake of an overly restrictive bill. Thank you for your attention to this important matter. Sincerely, [Your Name] permalink embed save report reply [–]elitesenseTin | Stocks 15 6 points 14 hours ago Do not mention TikTok in a message like this!!! permalink embed save parent report reply [–]TlMB0Tin 20 points 17 hours ago Take out the shit about TikTok being good, and this would be a solid email. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]franky_reboot 5 points 13 hours ago Tiktok is a shady piece of hot garbage. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]JeffWest01 11 points 17 hours ago Totally agree. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]SimbaTheWeaselBronze | QC: ALGO 18 4 points 13 hours ago Oh, Imma steal this. Thank you friend. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]szertedTin 5 points 10 hours ago Not from US myself, but good stuff. Many won't bother to do anything but it's for sure would be easier for some after your comment 💚 permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Hawke64Platinum | QC: CC 199 1 point 15 hours ago Sirs do the needful and contact your local president helper guy 🙏 permalink embed save parent report reply [–]ahabrakenI am non-fungible 9 points 18 hours ago I think as a non-US resident I cant do anything, can I? permalink embed save report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 12 points 18 hours ago You can spread awareness when you see people discussing it without including all these extra passages. In r/technology and r/politics it’s being talked about but it’s only recently people discovered how far reaching it could be. The best you can do right now is educate the ones who can participate in the political realm. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]pnamepname 9 points 17 hours ago /r/politics is a lost cause, it got taken over by political groups in 2016 and turned into a shillfest, I'd be very surprised if opposition to this bill gained any traction there. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 3 points 16 hours ago It actually has. I think this is one of those bills that if people knew what was in it, there’d truly be no support. Hopefully it gets tossed around more permalink embed save parent report reply [–]pnamepname 1 point 5 hours ago I can't see it there unfortunately, it's just full of the usual delusional stuff - 'Donald Trump is promising the apocalypse' etc. /r/technology is lacking too, I don't know why it's not being jumped on. You'd expect such a thing to be pinned and a big push against it like SOPA and whatever else, permalink embed save parent report reply [–]DukiOn_Chit0Mus0lini 5 points 16 hours ago Bribe the Democrat super PACs with money. Citizen's United lets foreigners and foreign countries bribe our politicians.A suited whore, $4 million mysterious generated income. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]ahabrakenI am non-fungible 4 points 16 hours ago So....if I dont have money there is nothing I can do, got it! permalink embed save parent report reply [+]Al-Sadder comment score below threshold (0 children) [–]StrangelyBeigePlatinum | QC: CC 370, ATOM 17 | TraderSubs 12 9 points 18 hours ago Is this just another avenue to get money to stave the inflation crisis? That’s ultimately the goal right? I mean most of this is victimless crime so who are they really protecting? permalink embed save report reply [–]imbarrydylan 30 points 18 hours ago* This is just all the same shit. This is to protect the rich and make the poor poorer. The middle class really is doomed on the long term. permalink embed save report reply [–]peazleyTin 9 points 18 hours ago The middle class doesn’t exist. It’s the Uber rich vs the rest of us plebs. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Hawke64Platinum | QC: CC 199 6 points 18 hours ago Classic divide and conquer move permalink embed save parent report reply [–]samzi87Bronze | QC: CC 19 6 points 18 hours ago It is and it's not just an US phenomena, this shit is happening worldwide and we should fight it. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]kikilegends 1 point 15 hours ago Where else in the world is this happening? And how's it similar/different to here? permalink embed save parent report reply [–]ApostleOfGoreTin | CC critic 5 points 18 hours ago It’s a shame because tiktok is incredibly dangerous and should be banned, but not like this permalink embed save parent report reply [–]sarfianTin | ADA 8 0 points 16 hours ago This is capitalism for you permalink embed save parent report reply [–]amendment64Platinum | QC: BTC 85, CC 23 | TraderSubs 90 2 points 11 hours ago This is the opposite of capitalism, this is literally the state telling you who can and cannot do certain business permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Calm-Cartographer677Cryptonaut 1 point 18 hours ago Reverse Robin Hood uno card permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Towryaalai 1 point 17 hours ago People wonder why the gap between the rich and poor just keeps widening. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Right-Shopping9589 1 point 17 hours ago They just want the poor to remain in the same circle permalink embed save parent report reply [–]ZyriaNova 1 point 15 hours ago The Matheus-effect as we know it. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Dannii_Divine 8 points 18 hours ago I can't really get involved as a non us citizen as I am not familiar with your other laws, legislation or legislation bodies and procedures. Having said that, anything like this that will likely have a knock on affect in other countries is worrying to say the least 😳 permalink embed save report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 6 points 18 hours ago We can educate! Feel free to copypasta any of it! permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Dannii_Divine 4 points 18 hours ago And you are, thankfully. Being new I struggle to get my head around most of crypto so shouldn't get too involved in things I know little about lol permalink embed save parent report reply [–]KappatalizablePlatinum | QC: CC 846 9 points 18 hours ago Yeah Land of the Free my ass permalink embed save report reply [–]eudezetPlatinum | QC: CC 27 | GMEJungle 6 | Superstonk 365 7 points 18 hours ago Land of the free - as long as you're a billionaire and/or a politician permalink embed save parent report reply [–]anotheralien22 7 points 18 hours ago The land of the Free gets a little bit less free every day. permalink embed save report reply [–]ForsoothPeople 9 points 17 hours ago Looks like the government is trying to go from "live, laugh, love" to "surveil, punish, control". permalink embed save report reply [–]InsaneMcFriesPlatinum | QC: CC 256 2 points 15 hours ago This is the American Dream now. A monstrous dystopian future is ready to burst at the seams. This is so fucking sad Welcome to the community lad 🙏 permalink embed save parent report reply [–]ForsoothPeople 3 points 15 hours ago Corrupt politicians hate competition. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]mdxgearTin | LRC 15 9 points 15 hours ago Here’s the tl;dr version: A new bill has been proposed in the US Senate, which is being compared to the PATRIOT Act for the internet. The bill would give the government broad powers to access people's data and procedures for national security purposes and enforce these measures harshly. The penalties for violating the law are severe, with fines up to $1,000,000 or imprisonment for up to 20 years. The bill's wording is so broad that using a VPN could also be considered a violation. Critics see this as an attack on privacy and a potential threat to cryptocurrencies. The bill's text is available on congress.gov, and people are being urged to stay informed and vigilant about data bills going forward. permalink embed save report reply [–]bigshooTer39Platinum | QC: CC 29 | CRO 18 | GME subs 22 4 points 14 hours ago Good bot permalink embed save parent report reply [–]arcalusPlatinum | QC: CC 182 15 points 18 hours ago If it was only tik tok being banned, no one could say it was bad. permalink embed save report reply [–]giggitygoo123Tin 4 points 14 hours ago Its being pushed as a tiktok ban since it means most people won't look further into it and just let it happen. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]arcalusPlatinum | QC: CC 182 1 point 14 hours ago It reminds me of net neutrality. Where at the surface level everyone would be for it, but when you read into it, it was actually horrible for everyone but ISPs. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 4 points 18 hours ago It couldn’t be that simple, it’s clearly not enough motive for politicians. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]roamingandyPlatinum | QC: CC 15 | IOTA 5 | Futurology 14 4 points 16 hours ago Every new bill is an opportunity to advance the agenda of their backers for politicians. That's literally what 'riders' are, they are normally totally unrelated to the subject of the original bill and every bill is mostly made up of them. How is that a sensible way to govern a nation? permalink embed save parent report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 3 points 16 hours ago It isn’t. There’s too much money in politics and it needs to be stopped. I don’t care what party, they both just want us as liquidity pools. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]lukekibsTin 1 point 16 hours ago It’s disgusting actually we’re nothing but meat sacks that make them money. Politicians and people in the government make way to much money and just sit on their asses all day. They really don’t make any real good changes for this country. Everything has been diluted generation after generation because people in power have ruined it for us all. The founding fathers would be enraged if they saw what this country has turned into permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Captain_HoytBronze 0 points 13 hours ago If it was only tik tok being banned, no one could say it was bad. Even that would be bad. Social media companies already have that data, and they sell it to whoever wants it and has the money, including the Chinese. This is a move by American social media companies to solidify their own market position, being sold to us as "protecting us from the Chinese". The Chinese already have this data. We need protection from American corporations who use our data. Ban it from government devices? Sure, knock yourselves out. But the rampant fear tactics are stupid (but we fall for it every time). permalink embed save parent report reply [–]arcalusPlatinum | QC: CC 182 0 points 12 hours ago I think you’re uneducated on the spying that the app does. Every minute of additional data is a risk to individuals and government. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Captain_HoytBronze 0 points 6 hours ago* I'm not saying it's good. I'm saying it does the same things that other social media platforms do. If the fear is about data getting into the 'wrong hands', our data is getting into those wrong hands every single day thanks to American companies -- who willingly sell it to the same people we're afraid of with TikTok. So we've established that it's all the same data, it all gets in the hands of the same people, whether it's TikTok or FB, or InstaGram, or whatever. Is the fear about propaganda? I'll give you a little challenge -- for every minute of Chinese propaganda you find on TikTok aimed at Americans, I'll bet you that I can find 100 minutes of American propaganda aimed at Americans on FB. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]arcalusPlatinum | QC: CC 182 0 points 5 hours ago No, it doesn’t do the same thing that other social media companies do. Other social media companies are absolutely horrible, don’t get me wrong, but they are doing a minuscule subset of privacy invasions compared to Tik Tok. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Captain_HoytBronze 0 points 5 hours ago Nonsense. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]arcalusPlatinum | QC: CC 182 0 points 5 hours ago Try babbling your TikTok shill to someone who isn’t a software engineer. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Captain_HoytBronze 0 points 5 hours ago Feel free to tell us all about what TikTok does, then. Tell us why FB and the others don't. Get to it. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]arcalusPlatinum | QC: CC 182 0 points 5 hours ago It’s your funeral, so to speak (or your countries software, I should probably say): https://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep26120.7?socuuid=22c1fbc8-66f1-4bc6-80ee-… permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Captain_HoytBronze 2 points 3 hours ago Well, I read what you sent, which 1) Supports nothing that you said 2) Does not show anything about what their software is doing that's so different from other social media platforms 3) Only expresses a fear that it could lead to China getting a hold of our data -- which, as mentioned before, they can get anyway, by simply purchasing the user data collected by the American companies. I expected to see something from you (being a software engineer, as you say) that would demonstrate what TikTok software is doing. No such response has materialized. So, as of this writing, my conclusion would be that you don't know what their software is actually doing, and that software engineers are just as likely to fall for propaganda as anyone else. permalink embed save parent report reply continue this thread [–]franky_reboot 1 point 13 hours ago So much this. The US doing its best about Tiktok - questionable about the rest though. Even ITSEC experts opposing the US government agree about Tiktok being shady. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]RestorativeMenagerie 8 points 18 hours ago Why do you need a vpn for crypto? I'm new here. permalink embed save report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 4 points 18 hours ago You don’t unless crypto is banned. It has been the long hailed trump card to governments banning crypto, came up a lot the last time the CCP banned crypto. They stated they could see who was using a VPN but not what they were doing, and I’m sure this worried US Legislators. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]InsaneMcFriesPlatinum | QC: CC 256 2 points 15 hours ago Open your vault friend. On mobile top right > Vault. Keep your seedphrase and password safe. Welcome to the community. 🙏 This bill is an atrocity. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]February_Forever 2 points 12 hours ago You should be using a VPN anyway as a basic network security practice. Think of if you just left a bowl of cash in front of your house. Most people would probably just walk by without noticing, but someone would take the money. However, if you put the bowl of money inside of your house, it would be MUCH less likely that someone would take the money. The VPN is the door. Sure, someone could still go through the door and find your bowl of money, but it is an extra layer of security that takes an extra amount of effort to access your internet activities. TL;DR - Use a VPN permalink embed save parent report reply [–]haunted-liver-1Tin | Privacy 19 2 points 12 hours ago In the US, you should use a VPN for everything. ISPs have the right to sell all your internet activity. You might not want all the hackers out there to know that you have crypto. Or for health insurance companies to know what sites you visit. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]frozengrandmatetrisPlatinum | QC: BCH 160, XMR 53, CC 35 | IOTA 9 | Privacy 13 2 points 8 hours ago people in the US can't interact with sideshift at all unless they use a VPN, and they can't interact with 1inch through the web frontend unless they use a VPN. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]iExtrapolate217Bronze | 4 months old | QC: ETH 16 7 points 14 hours ago $1,000,000 for using a VPN? Do these people know what a VPN is? permalink embed save report reply [–]BrocoliAssassinSilver | QC: BTC 218, CC 105 | CelsiusNet. 25 1 point 8 hours ago I'm guessing it's life in prison for using Tails OS. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]iExtrapolate217Bronze | 4 months old | QC: ETH 16 1 point 7 hours ago Definitely, they probably "this is spaaaarta" you into a giant pit permalink embed save parent report reply [–]BrocoliAssassinSilver | QC: BTC 218, CC 105 | CelsiusNet. 25 1 point 6 hours ago Encryption? Straight to jail. Tails? Straight to jail. VPN? 1,000,000 or jail, you pick. USA Government spying illegally on it's citizens? Black hole budget! And jail for as many people as humanly possible. These private prisons aren't going to make all the profit themselves! Then they can also get more people to enlist. Oh I see hear you might be looking at 5 years for PGP. We can make that go away if you just sign only 4 years of your life away. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]iExtrapolate217Bronze | 4 months old | QC: ETH 16 2 points 6 hours ago This is /r/cryptocurrency not /r/USD Straight to jail! permalink embed save parent report reply [–]BrocoliAssassinSilver | QC: BTC 218, CC 105 | CelsiusNet. 25 1 point 6 hours ago Talk about /r/cryptocurrency in /r/USD ? Entire family goes to jail! permalink embed save parent report reply [–]BringerofsalvationPlatinum | QC: CC 96 13 points 18 hours ago Damn , America doesn’t seem to be heading in a healthy direction with all this shit. permalink embed save report reply [–]gethereddoutSilver | QC: CC 119 | ADA 70 | Politics 70 9 points 15 hours ago We’re already in the bad place. The Patriot Act was awful- removed most of our basic civil rights anywhere near a border, which is most of the country. Our democracy is dead and the country is essentially run by a cartel permalink embed save parent report reply [–]NathhfhTin | 3 months old 7 points 17 hours ago Entering the emo Surveillance State phase permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Hawke64Platinum | QC: CC 199 3 points 15 hours ago America wasn't exactly in a healthy state to begin with permalink embed save parent report reply [–]SimbaTheWeaselBronze | QC: ALGO 18 1 point 13 hours ago America doesn't care about freedom. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]JayReydBronze | QC: CC 24 6 points 19 hours ago Legislation coming from all angles permalink embed save report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 14 points 19 hours ago This one is pure fascism. If it passes I’m out of this country. 20 year in jail for pirating an old unavailable Gamecube game could be argued under this bill. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]JayReydBronze | QC: CC 24 6 points 19 hours ago States are getting crazy permalink embed save parent report reply [–]lullaby876Bronze | QC: CC 15 | SHIB 177 6 points 16 hours ago I told people this would happen for years. They just told me 'the internet is too big to be governed' and scoffed at me. I believe the US will slowly turn into an authoritarian country under the guise of a democratic republic. A lot of citizens kept pushing for regulation on crypto, for social media, for everything.. and they got want they wanted. It's not a radical statement to say that too many of our people will not only do nothing to stop the betrayal of their liberty, but actively encourage it, because that is what they have been conditioned to do. Just think of how many people buy unquestioningly into the concept of the two-party system, never stopping to think of the atrocities committed by either side for the same goals. Leaders' desire to control is not 'for our own good', even if it started out that way. It's not a conspiracy theory anymore that all rights to liberty have a paper trail and trace back to money and power. The government WILL control your every action. They will imprison you for any reason whatsoever. And they are bigger than your little votes will ever dictate. Mark my words. permalink embed save report reply [–]SeisouhenPlatinum | QC: CC 57, BTC 52 6 points 16 hours ago They claim it's for our protection, but we all know that it's really for... permalink embed save report reply [–]Fritz1818 5 points 15 hours ago We're in China levels of overreach if this passes permalink embed save report reply [–]sjshady0169Platinum | QC: CC 35 | ModeratePolitics 21 14 points 17 hours ago The US is slowly morphing into China and most people don't even realize it. permalink embed save report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 6 points 16 hours ago It’s kind of wild how nationalism became a party-free arguing point. For so long the left touted it poorly yet here’s a democrat with this bill. Wish either side gave a fuck permalink embed save parent report reply [–]iExtrapolate217Bronze | 4 months old | QC: ETH 16 2 points 14 hours ago If China filters the TikTok feed for their own political gain, that would be no different than what the US was doing with Twitter permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Elie0_0 1 point 15 hours ago Every country's biggest fear, being like China lol permalink embed save parent report reply [–]JayFab6061Platinum | QC: CC 215, ETH 26, BTC 15 11 points 17 hours ago shakes my head in XMR permalink embed save report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 8 points 17 hours ago XMR could be seen as evasion permalink embed save parent report reply [–]giddyup281Platinum | QC: CC 1135 | r/CMS 6 | Technology 12 4 points 12 hours ago It IS seen as evasion. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]InsaneMcFriesPlatinum | QC: CC 256 3 points 15 hours ago We seem to have evaded our keys in a boating accident though, sorry! permalink embed save parent report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 6 points 15 hours ago How do you plan to sell it? Plus this would make that attempt at evasion much more costly if any fail. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]franky_reboot -1 points 13 hours ago I'm afraid nobody dares to touch a blockchain ecosystem riddled with botnets this much. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 6 points 18 hours ago EDIT: Made sure to add the giant bill so you could read it for yourselves. Information is power, Cryptofiends. permalink embed save report reply [–]mishaog 4 points 18 hours ago People are so stupid that their simple hate towards TikTok blinds them. South Park explain it pretty well during the Family Guys episodes, and believe me it's true. If they allow you to ban it one time then what's stopping them to do it again, what's stopping them to say that X should be banned, using their most beloved word "terrorism" and "Spy" two words Americans love to hear, they are easily convinced with those. Eventually they can throw it anywhere. I think they don't know but twitter was heavily censored, they censored "fake news" but those fake news are whatever they feel like, like the compromising info on Biden sons computer or more stupid shit. permalink embed save report reply [–]TittaDiGirolamoPlatinum | QC: CC 169 5 points 18 hours ago Once more I'm happy to live in Italy :) permalink embed save report reply [–]y90210Platinum | QC: BTC 47 | Stocks 99 4 points 18 hours ago Some other countries have far saner law making. They describe the law but also what the law is designed to target and fix. That way you can't misspply it against something it wasn't designed for. Also all laws have expiration dates, which forces them to renew it if it's still needed. You don't have to fight to clean up old laws permalink embed save report reply [–]InsaneMcFriesPlatinum | QC: CC 256 1 point 15 hours ago You planning on opening a vault mate? permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Antoine_K 5 points 17 hours ago Gonna wish you American lads some good luck here. Don't fall for the right vs left nonsense and voice your concerns to your politicians. permalink embed save report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 5 points 17 hours ago Thank you. As an Oklahoman I can say it’s just too normal to hate these days. Good luck to you and your own. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]redbullandranchTin 5 points 17 hours ago* It did have a lot of phrases that could possibly lead to crypto seizures. Like "Open source software" and "cloud computing" plus they keep mentioning "transactions" which im not totally sure what they are referring to. Make Tik-Tok the bad guy to get it passed and then require to hand over all your crypto. Just like they did with gold in the 70s Edit: Here's another: (I) A group, subgroup, or other association or organization whether or not organized for profit. (And it states above it either IN or out of the USA) permalink embed save report reply [–]VeludoVeludoPlatinum | QC: CC 118 6 points 17 hours ago The land of the non-free and the home of the easily spooked. permalink embed save report reply [–]salty-boisPlatinum | TraderSubs 12 5 points 17 hours ago We need to be very honest with ourselves and our investments in crypto - the possibility of crypto (CBDCs not included, of course) being regulated out of existence is real, maybe not entirely likely but possible. permalink embed save report reply [–]coinsRus-2021Silver | QC: CC 52 | ADA 222 | TraderSubs 11 4 points 16 hours ago Yo keep posting this stuff. This stuff needs spread. I can not stand the way our government operates and they'll take any moment they can to seize more power from us. This should make everyone's blood boil - unfortunately it does not permalink embed save report reply [–]coinsRus-2021Silver | QC: CC 52 | ADA 222 | TraderSubs 11 5 points 16 hours ago THIS BILL IS NOT TO BAN TIK TOK, IT IS TO PUT A COLLAR ON THE INTERNET. IF THIS PASSES, WIDESPREAD ADOPTION IS NOT ONLY GONE FOREVER FOR THE US BUT IT’LL CONSTRICT GENERATIONS TO COME FROM BREAKING THROUGH THE GOVERNMENT’S FASCISTIC WAY OF DISCERNING WHO AMONG US ARE CRIMINALS BY OUR DATA. Keep going - screw these clowns permalink embed save report reply [–]Thunder_WaspSilver | QC: CC 36 | CRO 185 | ExchSubs 186 4 points 16 hours ago I'll write my reps but unfortunately I live in a one party state so my representative/senators' assistants haven't even bothered responding to me in at least the last five years. Democracy is dead where I live. Hopefully in purple states they will give a shit. permalink embed save report reply [–]Choice-Season3378 3 points 8 hours ago Tell them you are not a member of their party but during the next primary elections you will join their party just to vote for their opponent if they vote to support the bill. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]J-96788-EUPlatinum | QC: CC 33 4 points 16 hours ago Is this only in the United States of America? permalink embed save report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 2 points 15 hours ago Other bills have been introduced in Baltic states but that’s all I’ve seen. It’s a broadly discussed topic since the exponential climb of ransomware attacks and data breaches happening for the last decade. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]EmicraniaTin 4 points 15 hours ago This is basically patriot act 2.0 backed by the looming inflation and FTX fiasco, that embarrassed some politician. permalink embed save report reply [–]Inbeforetheclose1234Tin | ADA 6 | Superstonk 58 3 points 14 hours ago I agree 100% with the op. However theres more than one argument to this story. There are bad and nefarious actors that that look to expolit and do harm onto others just look at the majority of crypto, 99% of it is a ponzi/scam. So no wonder they want to impose harsh rules/laws. FTX,Celcius, Luna, binance, money laundering, terrorism funding etc. permalink embed save report reply [–]WrathOfPaul84Tin 4 points 14 hours ago This has a good chance of getting struck down in the courts but who knows how long it would take to get to the SCOTUS if it were passed. You know it's bad when both Democrats and Republicans are sponsoring it. the one thing both sides can agree on is restricting our rights and freedoms. It's going to drive a lot of people into the dark web. permalink embed save report reply [–]lunar2solarPlatinum | QC: CC 327, ETH 56, XMR 39 | TraderSubs 39 5 points 3 hours ago This is the American empire in its truest form. They are an authoritarian state that has robbed and pillaged the third world for decades and now they're coming for you. permalink embed save report reply [–]linaustin5Platinum | QC: CC 16 | r/WSB 105 1 point 1 hour ago they don't want us to get airdrops those bastards permalink embed save parent report reply [–]EdgeLord19941 19 points 19 hours ago Every day I'm more glad I don't live in the US permalink embed save report reply [–]BonbuX 17 points 19 hours ago Still the US influences all the markets. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Ben_Dover1234Bronze | QC: CC 18 11 points 18 hours ago The US influences all of the markets but it doesn't have that much of an impact on foreign law making which I am grateful for. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Hawke64Platinum | QC: CC 199 9 points 18 hours ago* But the rest of the world can still use VPNs and do self custody permalink embed save parent report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 4 points 18 hours ago This bill would ban VPN with a 20 year penalty, please read it permalink embed save parent report reply [–]OoghaPlatinum | VET 11 7 points 17 hours ago It would still only effect Americans permalink embed save parent report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 1 point 17 hours ago I’m curious, how much of the crypto market cap is American? permalink embed save parent report reply [–]OoghaPlatinum | VET 11 3 points 17 hours ago Impossible to say really, probably one of the reasons they want to cut it off. The current crypto market cap is miniscule regardless. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 2 points 16 hours ago I wouldn’t say that. BTC is worth as much as major companies if not more than some of the biggest giants. Even so, this would affect them and their stock price as well. This would quell the entire world market and trust me that’s good for no one. Globalization may be hectic but it is far more profitable and beneficial for those that contribute to it. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]OoghaPlatinum | VET 11 0 points 14 hours ago Btc mcap is 500ish million, the fed just shit that much out last week in loans to banks. A LOT of crypto mcaps are extremely over inflated for what usage they provide. Or their tvl. A huge % of actual crypto market cap is simply due to speculation and hopium, my bags included. These big corps with 500 mil mcaps have those for a reason, they actually provide something. Don't get me wrong, I'm super pro crypto and I think/hope that it will become mainstream, but to think the government is worried about its size is kind of silly imo. They are worried about its potential, and it's ability to distrust tradfi. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]jesus0815Tin 2 points 12 hours ago Billions. permalink embed save parent report reply continue this thread [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 1 point 14 hours ago I agree with most of that but this bill affects more than crypto for sure. I’m more worried about their written in ability to continue amending this bill and it’s current language how they please and the effects that will inevitably ripple into the biggest companies in our nation, Tech Giants. If it’s not the infrastructural logistics that’ll cost, it’ll be the liability and innovation stifle. I just don’t get how this is anything but an embargo. This could seriously regress the internet and all of its best features. permalink embed save parent report reply continue this thread [–]UrektMazinoBronze 1 point 17 hours ago Quite a significant amount i would guess, but if such a thing would pass the most important actors would simply move abroad. Now i'm not American, but if i was a whale and such a thing would pass in my country you can bet i'll gladly take a plane for and get the fuck off, the one who will be forced out are the small fishes, still a good amount of market cap i would guess but as in fiat, the big fishes are the ones that control most of the market permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Doctor_FritzI have no idea what I'm doing 1 point 18 hours ago If they are going to start restricting internet use could be there will be no market left to manipulate in the end permalink embed save parent report reply [–]RemingtonSnatchTin | ModeratePolitics 55 1 point 16 hours ago Dunno where you live, but the US is hardly on the leading edge of regulatory overreach among its peers. If this were to pass, places like the Commonwealth countries and the EU would only be appalled that they got beat to the punch. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Legitimate_Suit_3431 3 points 18 hours ago Welcome to the club. Our country are working hard ofor full internett surveillance, while talking about how bad TikTok is for snooping around We have one 3 letter thingy having access to everything, but they want to expand This will end so good, having a huge server with all the information on every citizen can't go wrong.. right ? permalink embed save report reply [–]Odysseus_Lannister 3 points 17 hours ago Didn’t they already try to do this with net neutrality? permalink embed save report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 3 points 17 hours ago >From what I’ve gathered net neutrality was more of a proactive measure that lost steam. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]JayFab6061Platinum | QC: CC 215, ETH 26, BTC 15 3 points 17 hours ago Between this and the FEDNOW CBDC I’m so ready to move my family outta the US permalink embed save report reply [–]SeriousGainsSilver | QC: BTC 46, CC 19 | TRX 67[🍰] 3 points 17 hours ago They divert attention and make you focus on things that don’t affect you so you ignore the things that will, “oh hey look at that basketball player made a basket at the last second!”, “oh hey look that guy you hate is going to get arrested!”, “oh look at who this celebrity was seen holding hands with!” permalink embed save report reply [–]reagleshamBAN Fan 3 points 17 hours ago The US government continues to fly the flag of freedom while crushing its people under its boot. Disgraceful. permalink embed save report reply [–]AcademicMistake 3 points 16 hours ago Surely there is some computer engineering wizz who can create a alternate internet that isnt controlled by the elites... permalink embed save report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 2 points 16 hours ago There could theoretically be but it would have to entail a new network that could reroute. This could be Elon’s new selling point for Starlink. Only problem is starting from scratch would be incredibly difficult to maintain/continue building and I can imagine you’d be hunted forever by most every government. Even then they could develop tracking and enforce those using so, risky play in the environment of a bill like this. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]AcademicMistake 3 points 16 hours ago But what about something similar to Helium ? They just use devices to create a "network" or "Proof of coverage". Someone can build something similar im sure, it just takes time. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 2 points 15 hours ago Surely. The line exists and a shadow could emerge. My only problem is if they find you using this new network, would it be like the war on drugs? Where a single gram of weed gets your house stormed? I mean theoretically they could make a case like Tornado cash where if you use this network you’re basically a criminal. If so I’m sure they’d use other laws with this one to slap down people circumnavigating. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]AcademicMistake 3 points 15 hours ago I see your point but how would they know who owns them ? They arent going to knock on doors and inspect peoples houses permalink embed save parent report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 2 points 15 hours ago I’m assuming through node tracking. They’ve put feds on silk road, I’m sure this new network would have a couple agents participating if they heard the whispers. Is there a way to block tracking even if you’re one of those participating in consensus? permalink embed save parent report reply [–]AcademicMistake 1 point 13 hours ago Well it only works off a active internet connection(helium crypto) so technically yes you can track via ip address but im saying if a new device is made that utilises the power cables from house to house, im sure it could work to not include tracking etc permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Grilledcheesus96 3 points 15 hours ago* Legitimate question: What does this bill add that the Patriot Act didn’t already give them the power to do? The Patriot Act gave them access to all of your data to prosecute you already. permalink embed save report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 3 points 15 hours ago It allows them to enforce it online. That’s pretty much it. It gives way to use it less as a medium and more as national infrastructure when interacting with data. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]KnaeggebrottTin 3 points 15 hours ago I couldn't care less about Tiktok. permalink embed save report reply [–]djugglerTin 0 points 11 hours ago Do you care about an overly oppressive government? permalink embed save parent report reply [–]KnaeggebrottTin 2 points 11 hours ago are you talking about China or the USA? permalink embed save parent report reply [–]djugglerTin 1 point 4 hours ago China is not passing the RESTRICT Act permalink embed save parent report reply [–]LelouchViBriTin 3 points 14 hours ago Who are the architect's of thus monstrosity, and why aren't they being named and shamed 24/7 permalink embed save report reply [–]Roy_PlayzPlatinum | QC: CC 53 | CelsiusNet. 15 | MiningSubs 47 3 points 13 hours ago I think we should be honest here. Does the government probably already have departments that operate like this and act in an invasive nature? YES. This is just their way of covering their asses by letting you know: "Hey we're putting this into official legislation that dictates that we can do whatever the fuck we want and be as invasive as we want with your data". Is this wrong? 100% it is. But you cannot look at me with a straight face and tell me some dark agency or team in the NSA, FBI, Darpa don't already do this/ have the tech to do so. permalink embed save report reply [–]SwoopscooterPlatinum | QC: CC 23 | PoliticalHumor 48 3 points 11 hours ago The lawyer jargon is so thick that it's very difficult to read and comprehend. It's intentionally vaguely specific about what one person shall not do. permalink embed save report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 3 points 10 hours ago My concern is the ability to add to this bill later. Sure a lot of it target foreign entities but it makes clear that even economic efficiency could be a reason to invoke it. That’s just ridiculous to me permalink embed save parent report reply [–]timerac3r7Tin 3 points 6 hours ago Yo, guys. Your country is falling. Maybe you should do something about that, because it will have a rippling effect around the world. permalink embed save report reply [–]H__DresdenSilver | QC: CC 48 | Buttcoin 63 | JusticeServed 66 5 points 18 hours ago Tik Tok is a CCP spy tool. That app has never touched my phone or computer. Fuck the CCP! permalink embed save report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 1 point 18 hours ago Did you read it? permalink embed save parent report reply [–]H__DresdenSilver | QC: CC 48 | Buttcoin 63 | JusticeServed 66 2 points 18 hours ago Yeah. I don’t see that bill passing as is. Many revisions will be done and it still has to pass chambers and the Senate level along with President signing it. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 2 points 17 hours ago That’s what they say about every bill. As a guy who’s worked with vaping, one by one those bills are now in place. The only thing they’re missing is enforcement. Idk I used not worry about politics but after the last decade I’ve seen enough. I don’t think I can afford to be misinformed. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]H__DresdenSilver | QC: CC 48 | Buttcoin 63 | JusticeServed 66 3 points 17 hours ago Always good to stay informed. I contact my representatives when needed to relay my thoughts. I have been a voter for the last few decades. Representatives listen to party officials, political activists, and long term voters. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 2 points 16 hours ago Hell yeah! I had to learn it quick. They’re awfully good at being quiet at just the right times. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]ItsAllJustASickGameSilver | QC: CC 64 | LRC 16 | Superstonk 403 5 points 16 hours ago I wrote to my senator. Fuck this country, man. It makes me sick that people would even propose legislation like this. They're traitors if you ask me. permalink embed save report reply [–]Fantastic-Mango4799Tin | LRC 25 5 points 18 hours ago Isn't this just legalising the government access that was highlighted in the twitter files releases? The horse has already bolted on this one. permalink embed save report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 1 point 15 hours ago Can you educate me on that? I’m ignorant permalink embed save parent report reply [–]kirtash93The Ash Ketchum of Crypto | Gotta Catch 'Em All 3 points 18 hours ago Businesses live in US, not people. When you realize this, everything makes sense. permalink embed save report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 1 point 18 hours ago We should all just register our names as LLC and use them like VPNs. Maybe if we all used the loophole it’d finally close? permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Crash04639Tin 4 points 18 hours ago I'm all for banning TikTok, but this bill is not the way to do it. Of course, they're using TikTok as a cover for doing more nefarious things. permalink embed save report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 1 point 18 hours ago Yeah. TikTok is clearly a problem they think they can’t control through regulation without spearheading it with the full power of the US government. That’s just wrong. We could easily pass measures that restrict outsourcing of data to foreign servers, but that’s not what any of these bills say. Edit after further thought: This would be bad wording too. Technically crypto is data so any bill mentioning data will have my attention now. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]aleisate843 1 point 5 hours ago This bill includes gaming applications too. Anyone who loves their games, Riot is owned by Tenecent in China so watch that get restricted too. As well any communication apps such as WeChat for family members in the US who want to communicate over seas. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Comprehensive-Ad3963Tin | Unpop.Opin. 15 2 points 16 hours ago I just read an analysis of the bill: https://www.lawfareblog.com/two-new-bills-tiktok-and-beyond-data-act-and-re… While it may be poorly worded, it sounds like this bill basically just says “don’t let China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, etc. access personal data or information that is useful for harming the national security interests of the US.” The government wouldn’t care if you used a VPN as long as you’re not giving the US’s adversaries the information they want. permalink embed save report reply [–]monoimionomBronze | QC: CC 18 1 point 9 hours ago Thanks for another perspective! permalink embed save parent report reply [–]MasterLogic 3 points 16 hours ago Tik tok and all forms of social media being banned would probably make the world a better place. The 80s and 90s was such a fucking awesome time to be alive. Definitely gone down hill since the 2000s with everyone staring at a screen all day. Even children at kindergarten have a phone now. And the government have always had access to your data, vpns just make it harder to track you down. Criminals still get caught if they are big enough. Even reddit stores and sells your data, and now you have a vault they have access to your wallets that're linked to it, as well as what you visit on here. Even your 5 second snapchats are stored for ai to practice on. There's never been any privacy online, never. Vpns and downloading content has always been illegal, since the napstar days. You can get 20 years for downloading a game already, it's just not worth the legal cost to do it. This bill won't change that. They aren't going to come after you for downloading a snes rom from China. It's just a legal rewording of current laws. permalink embed save report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 1 point 15 hours ago I think it’s a regression which it sounds like you’d enjoy. I don’t mean it as insult, everyone’s different. I enjoy the online world as someone who’s grown up with and without it. For me in the midwest it was paramount to learning. I had good enough grades to let me do what I wanted, but the problem was the curriculum taught me bare minimums and the internet was my best teacher. What I’m getting to here is that I know this bill would target hostile governments seeking to destabilize America; however I’m concerned that the wording of data needs to be defined. Which data? Transaction data, government data, healthcare data, or personal data? Even these are too broad. If it’s too broad we could cut off participation for decades and I don’t believe this solves the real problem. For example, what’s to stop a foreign entity from just buying data service in the US from a currently marked “friendly country?” If it’s just data outflows that are limited, which is still concerning to me in reference to trade and education, then couldn’t they just come here and inflow data? It just seems naive and short sighted when the reality is if they want to target a hostile entity, do so. I’m sick and tired of our government passing sweeping bills using a boogeyman. If there’s a danger, fix it. If there’s a bad actor, find ways to discover them. I don’t see the benefit from passing a bill for every hostile country if it’s truly only mainly targeting one company. Example, Tarkov, a popular game my coworker plays would cease to exist. Unnecessary to say the least. If you have more info or passages to correct me please let me know. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]asmallman 3 points 10 hours ago Im posting this here because I read more than a few cherry picked things in the bill that tiktok (which is chinese owned and will be affected by this bill, IE lose money, so they are trying to stop it from passing) Gonna make another comment to summarize this bill since I have actually bothered reading it and going through the legal jargon. This prevents the current listed foreign adversaries to have controlling interests (IE ownership or a percentage of the company/product that allows them to make actual decisions in how the company/product does things) These adversaries are: The People's Republic of China, including the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (China); Republic of Cuba (Cuba); Islamic Republic of Iran (Iran); Democratic People's Republic of Korea (North Korea); Russian Federation (Russia); and Venezuelan politician Nicolás Maduro (Maduro Regime). This bill would prevent things that have already occured such as: TikTok overcollecting data, running unsigned code, and sending it to china, and also pushing... .questionable chinese propoganda. Huawei installing rigged 5G towers that have actual spy equipment on them to spy on US government installations. And also making phones with actual backdoors for the CCP on their international cell models. These things have happened. This bill is to legitimately try to stop this. This bill will only affect you if you WILLINGLY go against it, and try to communicate or use apps that are controlled by a foreign adversary listed here, and knowingly do so. IE you have INTENT to fuck with the US government. And it targets companies/large entities more so than the average general person. Looking at this bill, I dont see how it will affect me at all besides getting annoying spam from friends who use this TEMU app out of china that gives them free money (lmao, youre being paid for your data) and a large reduction in tiktok memes, and I dont even use the app because of what has been found out about it. The US is trying to stop active and current security breaches because of the shit china is pulling with UNITED STATES COMPANIES. (Such as blizzard, or riot games for exampl). So it will affect gamers but it deletes all of the chinese spyware out of your software. For example, remember how Tencent owns 10% of blizzard, and how that one guy from hong kong lost his prize money that he rightfully earned? Its because TENCENT got offended, and has controlling stake in blizzard and MADE them redact the money. This bill will stop china from having companies making decisions on chinas behalf. TL;DR this is a sanction essentially on the countries or people listed above from screwing with US companies or hardware to spy on people. And people who assist them in doing so knowingly will be in trouble. permalink embed save report reply [–]WhoJeeWhammer 2 points 5 hours ago IF that is the intent of the bill then it should be reworded to target those things more specifically, without including vague language that could be conveniently/accidentally misinterpreted by corrupt/incompetent govt officials. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]John_Terra 2 points 3 hours ago You just casually ignore the fact that an unelected official, Secretary of Commerce, can change the foreign adversary list as they see fit. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]monoimionomBronze | QC: CC 18 1 point 9 hours ago Thanks for an alternative perspective. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]hominidnumber9Tin 1 point 3 hours ago 🤦 permalink embed save parent report reply [–]content_enjoy3r 2 points 11 hours ago It'd be real cool if you quit spreading misinformation. VPN is not mentioned in the bill and the average VPN user is not interfering with elections or threatening national security so they have nothing to worry about. permalink embed save report reply [–]TOXICCARBYPlatinum | QC: CC 160 2 points 18 hours ago TikTok should be banned, but not through the passing of this bill permalink embed save report reply [–]Bizzle_worldwideBronze | QC: CC 20 | Buttcoin 13 | Politics 216 1 point 16 hours ago This is a bit disingenuous. All of the above things you’ve pointed out are only in effect if they’re owned by or under the direct or indirect control of a “Foreign Adversary”, specifically at this time, China, Russia, Cuba, Iran, Venezuela, and North Korea. They also only take effect if the service in question has more than 1 million American users. So your VPN example? Only applicable if it’s a Chinese VPN, and only if that Chinese VPN has over 1000000 American users. I for one would question why you’re using a Chinese VPN at all, and whether you think that’s a genuinely safe privacy mechanism. I’m not saying the bill is good. It’s still problematic for a few other reasons. But it’s currently more targeted than you’re describing, and more focused on preventing foreign non-ally ownership and economic benefits of systems that Americans might use. In effect, it’s a protectionism bill for IT services. permalink embed save report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 4 points 16 hours ago I admit openly at the end I’d love more info so I’m glad you commented. My concern is the peripheral of the bill. If I send crypto through a VPN to an exchange that’s no problem, but I worry about the scope of trade and network of crypto. China still runs nodes for BTC to this day, so at what point are they going to see that as data? I guess my biggest concerns are that I couldn’t find examples of clear definition of data and which specific circumstances that it could be favorably applied or enforced. They do seem targeted but so did the Patriot Act, and any attack on online freedoms I feel is regressive. I’d love to hear your thoughts on the technicalities if you’ve spotted wording that’ll help me. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Mand125Tin 2 points 16 hours ago You’re concerned about attacks on your freedoms from a bill that prevents you from using Chinese-owned infrastructure. You have bigger issues than this bill if you think this is such an unconscionable restriction on your freedom. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 2 points 15 hours ago This wouldn’t be the first time. FBI lending police forces surveillance tools that obviously violate the fourth amendment, suppression in protests, or as has been stated many times the Patriot Act. It’s not just China. I’ll use Tarkov, a popular game my coworker plays as an example. From what I understand those servers are in Russia. This would restrict that as just a casualty of broadly written passage too as well, right? permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Mand125Tin 2 points 14 hours ago Sure, shady crap has been done in the past, but none of that is in this bill. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Bizzle_worldwideBronze | QC: CC 20 | Buttcoin 13 | Politics 216 2 points 12 hours ago Nothing here restricts anything by default. Under the bill, Battlestate Games would qualify as a Covered Entity. So regardless of where their servers are located, the bill is applicable to their games if more than 1 million Americans play them in a given year. (I don’t know if that applied to Tarkov). However, the bill does nothing by default. What it lays out is that, if a service becomes a Covered Transaction, it lays out the mechanism by which the government can review it and bar its use, if it’s determined to be a national security concern. If all of that happens, then failure to abide by the ban has its penalties laid out as well. So, as with everything, you have to ask whether you think it’s realistic that a congressional committee will be formed to review Escape from Tarkov, a small online game with 400k global daily users, and decide that it poses a risk to national security. And if you do think that’s likely, why? What argument do you foresee being made to that effect? Is there any merit to those arguments? permalink embed save parent report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 2 points 12 hours ago I see it’s likely to be an issue for Crypto specifically because the wording even defines “security or reliability” so it’s broadly worded there. Also because of the regulatory actions so far have concerned me towards crypto. I’ve seen a president and a state misuse “eminent domain” laws, I’ve seen federal agencies and local PD abuse the patriot, and I’ve seen countless fraud abuse the COVID bills as well. Our government broadly describing offenses yet enforcing “applicably” has been historically a bad choice for legislation in my opinion. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Bizzle_worldwideBronze | QC: CC 20 | Buttcoin 13 | Politics 216 3 points 11 hours ago I mean, it will definitely be used against Crypto. But my question is why that’s a bad thing, I guess. If 1 million Americans are using a crypto exchange or service run by a Russian company that, upon review, someone wants to make an argument has national security concerns, should Americans really be using it? Why not use a similar non-Russian service? Or a similar service run by a company operating in a non-sanctioned country in general? permalink embed save parent report reply [–]KINK_KINGTin 1 point 16 hours ago Oh look, someone actually read the bill. Thank you for being the first adult in this thread. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 3 points 16 hours ago What wording have you found that protects crypto users from normal interactions? It’s technically data and if it’s hosted (through node consensus) in China, could that be technically enforced? My issue is regulating the VPN as well considering political allies and enemies are not so far apart. Who decides? Are Saudi’s allowed even with all the problems that has caused? I think it’s just naive of me to say it will be enforced fairly or that it won’t be false flagged into more controlling circumstances as the “Weapons of mass destruction” headline was used to justify being in every country that we were. It’s important to me that we scope the peripheral of this bill and its possible effects. If you have an passages that can educate me please let me know. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]wziyo dawg 3 points 12 hours ago* What wording have you found that protects crypto users from normal interactions? The entirety of §3.a. Like, did you even read the bill? Let's put on our thinking caps on and work through each subpoint: > (1) poses an undue or unacceptable risk of— > (A) sabotage or subversion of the design, integrity, manufacturing, production, distribution, installation, operation, or maintenance of information and communications technology products and services in the United States; Crypto does not sabotage the design, integrity, manufacturing et. al. of communications technology products. > (B) catastrophic effects on the security or resilience of the critical infrastructure or digital economy of the United States; Crypto does not affect the security or resilience of critical infrastructure. > (D) coercive or criminal activities by a foreign adversary that are designed to undermine democratic processes and institutions or steer policy and regulatory decisions in favor of the strategic objectives of a foreign adversary to the detriment of the national security of the United States, as determined in coordination with the Attorney General, the Director of National Intelligence, the Secretary of Treasury, and the Federal Election Commission; or Are you a foreign adversary seeking to undermine democratic processes or institutions or influence policy making? No. > (2) otherwise poses an undue or unacceptable risk to the national security of the United States or the safety of United States persons. This is the most broad subpoint in §3.a and if you're gong to get screwed it would be here. But the executive would have to prove that cryptocurrency itself poses an unacceptable risk to the national security of the U.S. and is controlled by a foreign adversary. That's basically impossible at this stage since crypto is already being regulated and treated as a commodity or security where control is decentralized. It's good to oppose this bill in order to get tighter language and better oversight but freaking people out that they are going to jail for using a VPN or crypto is not helpful and is counter-productive. It wastes our voice on "don't ban VPNs", something the bill doesn't do, instead of using our voice to say "we need greater Congressional oversight in this bill." Also, there is a large misunderstanding around the potential harm of TikTok. It isn't simply that American data is stored overseas and that we need to protect American privacy. That's a misconception on Reddit. The real concern is that TikTok itself could be weaponized against the U.S. For example, suppose there is a U.S.-China conflict over Taiwan. The CCP intervenes and TikTok begins recommending influencers who say we shouldn't aid Taiwan or that we shouldn't vote for a particular Presidential candidate. In other words, TikTok could be used by the CCP as a propaganda tool to influence and shape policy making within the U.S. That's the real danger. If TikTok were mostly owned by France or the UK no one would be concerned about it (see §2.8 definition of a foreign adversary). One of the downsides of democracy with (mostly) free speech and a (mostly) open society is that you're subject to foreign influence. This bill is intended to mitigate that. Personally I do think the bill should have more Congressional oversight. No offense OP but your post simply spreads fear and misinformation. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 2 points 12 hours ago Idk man I read a good bit but nowhere near the whole thing. Based on your summarization of (B) I think we just disagree fundamentally there on how risky that passage is for abuse. Digital economy being under threat is very broad wording and measures for just security is even more menial. The scope of this bill is massive. (2) is also concerning, missed that one. I oppose it simply because of its wording and how it could be applied. It seems too sweeping. If they are targeting bad actors, criminals, and foreign governments then be precise. A sweeping bill with language like this just holds too much power for my tastes. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]wziyo dawg 0 points 11 hours ago* > I think we just disagree fundamentally there on how risky that passage is for abuse Yes b/c one of us scanned the bill for the most alarming passages they could find and one of us scanned the bill to try and understand it's scope and the legislative intent. > Digital economy being under threat is very broad wording It's not broad wording. It's under threat from a foreign adversary. The following are designated foreign adversaries (see §2.8): China, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Russia, and Bolivia. Are you using a cryptocurrency controlled by Iran? Are you using a VPN from North Korea? > (2) is also concerning, missed that one. I oppose it simply because of its wording and how it could be applied. It seems too sweeping. It's not sweeping. It's national security risk from a foreign adversary. It's like you're just choosing to ignore everything in the bill that scopes and limits these passages. It's good to be cynical but if you're not going to read a bill enough to understand the basic scope and terminology please don't post about it and spread misinformation. EDIT: for the record, I do think it's good you're concerned about this and taking the next step to look at the bill text. However if you're going to read a bill try to read it like a lawyer and not like a layperson. This means you often need to do the leg work to figure out the meaning of things. In this case the "sweeping" provisions (§3) you are concerned about are scoped in the preamble in §3.a which reads, "... to address any risk arising from any covered transaction by any person, or with respect to any property, subject to the jurisdiction of the United States that the Secretary determines—" Looking at "covered transaction" (see §2.4) is how you get the scope of foreign adversaries which limits all the items in §3. When reading laws or legislation you simply cannot just take things in isolation. Now the "or with respect to any property" is read as "..to address any risk arising from any covered transaction with respect to any property". permalink embed save parent report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 1 point 10 hours ago You’re deliberately misrepresenting my point that this bill opens too many avenues for future implementation outside of the scope of hostile countries in terms of “online economy” risks from section (3) of my original post and using another subsection. You’re deliberately skipping the parts where I said I’d like to learn more, acting as if the intention this post was for anything other than discussion. I’m not a lawyer, just an investor and a worried one. Idk why you carry that condescending shit with you but I’m good on all that my guy. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]wziyo dawg 2 points 10 hours ago* You’re deliberately misrepresenting my point that this bill opens too many avenues for future implementation outside of the scope of hostile countries. Can you quote the part where I "misrepresent" you? I'm plainly arguing that your interpretation of the bill is incorrect and I've cited the relevant sections and terminology fairly and in good faith to make that argument. Instead of defending your interpretation or explaining why I'm wrong you're dodging the argument by claiming I'm mis-representing you. > You’re deliberately skipping the parts where I said I’d like to learn Really? This is the only reason I'm commenting in this much detail, deep in the thread, in the first place. I could have easily made a top level comment attacking your interpretation and been a total jerk about it. Instead I'm taking time to explain my reasoning and cite the relevant sections so that you understand. If you look at the comment I first replied to, you literally asked the question, "What wording have you found that protects crypto users from normal interactions?" and I tried to answer that for you. > ... acting as if the intention this post was for anything other than discussion. Where did I comment on the intention of your post? I said your post spreads misinformation. That's something falsifiable we can argue about. > I’m not a lawyer, just an investor and a worried one. Idk why you carry that condescending shit with you but I’m good on all that my guy. My intent wasn't to be condescending. I'm sorry that you feel this way. When I said you should read it like a lawyer I sincerely meant that. The idea I was trying to communicate is that you can't cherry-pick passages from a bill. This is obvious to a lawyer because many parts of a bill are often explicitly limited by language elsewhere in the bill. In this case the entirety section 3, all the things you cite in your post, are restricted to covered transactions i.e. foreign adversaries. Also, I could be simply wrong in some of my interpretations. However if you're not being critical then you won't be able to point that out. In short, "try to read it like a lawyer." permalink embed save parent report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 1 point 10 hours ago I added a fourth edit. I’m not trying to misrepresent the bill. Went back and read it per your advice. I saw the lengths they will have to go through to add or remove hostile entities on this list and I saw the scope. My concern about the abuse of a bill like this stands because I saw Trump hold military aide for Ukraine as leverage and I’ve seen plenty more examples where they use Iran for example to attack another region. I’m worried that it’ll be enforced poorly or abused because it is such a powerful bill and am still cautious about its implementation. If it works out like it’s supposed to, great, and I always love to be wrong in my concerns there. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]wziyo dawg 2 points 9 hours ago No worries! I totally understand where you're coming from and I understand you're not trying to misrepresent anything. You're concerned and frankly I'm concerned as well. Prior to this thread I hadn't even looked at the bill and if you hadn't specifically asked for wording that protects crypto users then I wouldn't have participated at all. So if your goal was discussion and education then you've succeeded. Honestly, there may be loopholes in the bill that could trap crypto users but I didn't see anything obvious. That said, I'm not a lawyer and I did only a superficial scan of what seemed to be the relevant sections. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]LankyTomatoPlatinum | QC: CC 106 | Politics 394 1 point 3 hours ago Gonna agree with you here. If they do a central bank currency they could say btc and other cryptos threaten that 'digital economy'. Btc isn't based in any of those 'adversarial nations ', but it's not really based anywhere. They could just make up some shit like china is mining btc to hurt the usa somehow. This bill could be interpreted in so many ways, and the worst could be a complete nightmare. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]SirLeeeroyJenkins 1 point 17 hours ago Yea. The US government is going to jail and fine teenagers for getting on a vpn and downloading tiktok....give me a break. infosec for 15 yrs. id LOVE to see them try. ive seen government run infosec - its a joke. permalink embed save report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 1 point 16 hours ago Could you imagine? Kids aren’t stupid. Half of them know completely how to use a computer at age 7. They use tablets in most schools now. I could imagine the amount of “future criminals” this bill creates with such menial things like emulators, crypto games, or eventually information. Even if they can’t enforce it regularly, it will be used with prejudice as was the Patriot Act. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]Impressive-HorsePlatinum | QC: BTC 103 1 point 13 hours ago It will only be enforced against political opponents. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]djugglerTin 1 point 11 hours ago How about AI run infosec? permalink embed save parent report reply [–]KINK_KINGTin 1 point 16 hours ago* Are you a foreign adversary, OP? Or do you do business with foreign adversaries? If not, you have nothing to worry about. But if you are a recipient of money from a foreign adversary, e.g., Russia, then you certainly should worry. permalink embed save report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 2 points 15 hours ago Plenty of games are based in Russia and China too. Is it possible to narrow focus a bit instead of sweeping bills? My issue is that this can selectively be enforced and the section I referenced says that wording and directives thereafter would have that applicable penalty as well. This means this is just the framework. They could apply this same rules to hundreds or thousands of rules with this wording. This could effectively kill innovation for the internet, even if properly enforced, out of the sheer liability if mishandled. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]franky_reboot 1 point 13 hours ago The problem is, though it's wildly unrelated to crypto, that, if you take a closer look, Tiktok was indeed shady and has been from the start. Even ITSEC experts, ones that are, for obvious reason, are heavily and extremely opposing most stance of the US government, said that it's just not reliable for it's data handling and privacy. And no, "Facebook is the same" is not an argument. It's tiring, ridiculous, and at its core is a whataboutism argument. So, however painful it may be, I have to side with the US government, at the very least in its opposition to Tiktok. They are protecting their own political interests, rationally so. And honestly, it's an unpopular opinion, but the interests of the rich and us, can overlap. permalink embed save report reply [–]TipToeTurrency -1 points 18 hours ago TikTok should be banned permalink embed save report reply [–]Wizard_of_the_lakeTin 3 points 17 hours ago but not with a general law that applies to anything they want to. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]djugglerTin -1 points 11 hours ago Why? permalink embed save parent report reply [+][deleted] 18 hours ago (1 child) [–]SufficientNet9227Tin 0 points 17 hours ago us IS TURNING INTO COMMUNISM permalink embed save report reply [–]_k182Tin 0 points 15 hours ago Doesnt apply to me im American permalink embed save report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 1 point 15 hours ago This is an American bill permalink embed save parent report reply [–]_k182Tin 1 point 9 hours ago U dont get it permalink embed save parent report reply [–]No-Setting9690Bronze 0 points 15 hours ago I would definitely consider it paranoia, but yes, it could be used in that manner. Not really needed as they could run you through the Patriot act. Would you agree our gov't should have some ability to identify and block national security threats? Always conflicted on these. Most can be abused, but most are necessary. How do we have our cake and eat it too? permalink embed save report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 4 points 15 hours ago My concern is, if it’s an actual threat to us then why don’t we just kick them out? We had no problem doing that with Chinese cellphones yet with Tik Tok we suddenly have to pass this broad sweeping and future proof bill of control. Check the second passage, it allows future enforcement that is undetermined. My concern is what should be a targeted approach is instead opening Pandora’s box. If I’ve misinterpreted the wording please show me examples from the bill. I’m always willing to learn permalink embed save parent report reply [–]No-Setting9690Bronze 2 points 14 hours ago I understand 100%. I'm not sure there's a simple solution for either side. I think with banning Chinese cell phones over Tik Tok was a lot easier. Hardware is always easier to stop than software. That's one of the main reasons Terminator movies keep being made, Skynet is software. I think it's simply to target the Chinese. IF we really cared about access to our data, then gov't would do so much more for breaches. Look at credit bureaus. At this point, nothing left to breach it's all been stolen. Yet, American data is still available everywhere for purchase by bad actors. I would have way more questions than answers on this. Why now? Why not all the other security issues we have never address? Why after decades have we not worked towards a better something, whatever it may be? permalink embed save parent report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 1 point 14 hours ago Truly but it’s the broad scope that worries me. I added a 3rd edit, it quotes where they can deem an unacceptable risk to digital economy and enforce this act. If it’s to target Tik Tok, fine, but an embargo masquerading as a security act is not cool with me. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]No-Setting9690Bronze 1 point 14 hours ago Its the ability to be abused, which we all agree is always a problem. We don't really need an act for them to go all authoritarian over crypto. All they have to do is state crypto is a national security threat to our economy. Ban it that way. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]DDDUnit2990Platinum | QC: CC 766, ETH 312, ATOM 48 | TraderSubs 312 -1 points 18 hours ago TikTok is being banned because it is Chinese spyware. They have to sell to a non-Chinese entity and they can stay. permalink embed save report reply [–]gingerthingyPlatinum | QC: ALGO 101, CC 100[S] 4 points 18 hours ago Yeah but Tik Tok will be 2% of the problem if this bill passes. Depending on who is in office your data could get sold by a politician instead, not just Tik Tok. permalink embed save parent report reply [–]AllCreditsBronze | QC: CC 16 | LRC 7 | Superstonk 407 6 points 18 hours ago This bill has practically nothing to do with TikTok and gives the government to ban any app or “transaction” they see fit permalink embed save parent report reply [–]endless_ness 2 points 18 hours ago It’s just 2 weeks of the power to ban . To stop the spread permalink embed save parent report reply [–]djugglerTin -1 points 11 hours ago TikTok is being banned because it is Chinese spyware. You've been played by Zuckerberg permalink embed save parent report reply [+]Tipyapha -1 points 16 hours ago (0 children) [–]ShippuuXPlatinum | QC: CC 83 | BANANO 6 1 point 17 hours ago That’s really concerning. Lately there’s so much shit thrown around in the whole world by lawmakers. permalink embed save report reply [–]BeingMe007Tin 1 point 17 hours ago So called freedom permalink embed save report reply [–]RiceRare1 - 2 years account age. -15 - 35 comment karma. 1 point 17 hours ago Good luck Americans! Seems like your leaders are trying to destroy their people. permalink embed save report reply [+]ZeroZelath 1 point 17 hours ago (0 children) [–]Whole_Visible 1 point 17 hours ago For a company to actually be compliant with this bill would require a huge level of data access for the government. It has pretty high potential to be used to expand surveillance and neuter the internet from whatever the government at the time decides is dangerous permalink embed save report reply [–]Knotley-Hunt-Brick 1 point 16 hours ago Exhale and inhale "For our citizen Freedommmmm ". permalink embed save report reply [–]sarfianTin | ADA 8 1 point 16 hours ago Welcome to the land of the free, or isn’t that US motto anymore ? permalink embed save report reply [–]Connect-Ad-1088Tin 1 point 16 hours ago the patriot rat permalink embed save report reply [–]42069qwertz42069Flair? 1 point 16 hours ago Glad i‘m not an US citizen?! permalink embed save report reply [–]Dazzling_Marzipan474Platinum | QC: CC 26 | ADA 6 | ExchSubs 14 1 point 16 hours ago Where's a good country for me to move to? I'm so sick of this shit! permalink embed save report reply [–]adichandraBronze | Apple 32 1 point 15 hours ago Damn the US now looks more communist than Russia and China. permalink embed save report reply [–]322118 1 point 15 hours ago Motherfuckers are always deliberately wording shit differently so the normal people doesn’t know what it actually fucking means. permalink embed save report reply [–]SpaceFaceMistake 1 point 15 hours ago I honestly thought this was already available to the the gov.. permalink embed save report reply [–]ShinAlastor 1 point 15 hours ago It is against freedom that act. permalink embed save report reply [–]sanju7850 1 point 15 hours ago Did anyone heard about catch some scammer groups nowadays, who scams around 5 to 6 cr. permalink embed save report reply [+]chooseayellowfruit 1 point 15 hours ago (0 children) [–]DynamoDylanPlatinum | QC: CC 227 1 point 14 hours ago Basically anything that's taking away money from the government must be banned. permalink embed save report reply [–]ConstantGeographer 1 point 14 hours ago I agree with all of this and would add a few cups of Citizens United to the mix. Not only is this a digital Patriotic Act on steroids but also a dose of protectionism for corporations who want to seal off foreign competition. permalink embed save report reply [–]VPNApePlatinum | 6 months old | QC: BTC 108 | r/WSB 131 1 point 14 hours ago I want to know why in the ever loving fuck they thought to name the thing after TikTok. It's like the most popular thing around and tons of voters would oppose a ban, even if it's a Chinese spy tool. The time to ban tik tok was years ago, not now. In terms of crypto, idk want this law enables the govt to do that they can't already do. The govt doesn't need special permission to go seize saylor's coins. They can also just claim your coins were previously used in a crime and go after you as well. permalink embed save report reply [–]Intr3pidG4ming 1 point 13 hours ago If this passes, even China's censorship of the internet would be a joke in comparison to the USA. So much to USA being the land of the free. permalink embed save report reply [–]blindao_blindadoBronze 1 point 13 hours ago We already have the guns to fight against those pigfuckers: trade with Monero, anonymize your traffic. This battle can only be won silently, protests won't do the job (e.g take France very recently as example) they will pass the bills which benefit bankers and the rich no matter what we do, there is only one way out of this permalink embed save report reply [–]P0TAT0FARM3RTin 1 point 13 hours ago What’s next? Great American Firewall? permalink embed save report reply [–]7sevenheavenTin 1 point 13 hours ago Jesus, is our government the empire from Star Wars? permalink embed save report reply [–]jesus0815Tin 1 point 12 hours ago This is basically a digital coup de etat. permalink embed save report reply [–]Ill-Candy-4926 1 point 12 hours ago does this also mean that if i tried to write and release a song protesting this i could get arrested???! permalink embed save report reply [–]eetaylogPlatinum | QC: CC 748 | VET 7 1 point 12 hours ago Laughs in Web3. permalink embed save report reply [–]bwatts53Platinum | QC: BTC 24 | r/WSB 21 1 point 12 hours ago But how do you get this information out to more people permalink embed save report reply [–]Chocolatebear95 1 point 12 hours ago What can we do as US citizens? Who should we reach out to about this? How can I help make a difference in not passing this bill permalink embed save report reply [–]SmallReflection2552Bronze | QC: CC 19 1 point 12 hours ago We should all be seriously concerned. permalink embed save report reply [–]Sumurnites6 - 7 years account age. 175 - 350 comment karma. 1 point 12 hours ago Literally the opposite of why crypto was started in the 1st place. They desperately need their grubby little hands controlling it. Do we have a person who's fighting this on the front line? Our person with a cape on? permalink embed save report reply [–]permabanned36 1 point 12 hours ago 5% chance of passing permalink embed save report reply [–]SinCollectorPlatinum | QC: CC 158 1 point 12 hours ago I WAS ELECTED TO LEAD, NOT TO READ permalink embed save report reply [–]SIMPLE_C_AS_CAN_B 1 point 11 hours ago Thank god you posted this, I would have had no idea… things are getting so whacky, fuckkkkkkkk man… the fact that this legislation is even being considered boils my blood 🩸 permalink embed save report reply [–]cryptoboyczTin | LRC 6 1 point 11 hours ago Freedom destroyers permalink embed save report reply [–]The_Chorizo_BanditSilver | QC: CC 846, XRP 41 | TRX 28 1 point 11 hours ago Can we just point out that this is a concern only for Americans, who may lose their privacy and rights. Doesn’t apply to the rest of the western world. Land of the free my ass. permalink embed save report reply [–]Long_EducationalTin | Technology 13 1 point 11 hours ago They are doing this because they (the ultra wealthy and their bought congress) see what is happening in France and they are afraid of people organizing against them. Never has there been more worker unions. Never has there been a greater wealth inequality. China and Tiktok are just a distraction for this bill's true purpose. They are afraid of an uprising here in the U.S. and it shows. permalink embed save report reply [–]trrrringPlatinum | QC: CC 132 1 point 11 hours ago This bill will restrict the internet, the best invention since sliced bread. Don't allow this to happen! permalink embed save report reply [–]shortybobertBronze | QC: CC 25 | Technology 12 1 point 11 hours ago Literally the least important part of this is how it affects crypto lol. But it's still incredibly important to kill it permalink embed save report reply [–]Durpy15648DCA & HODL 1 point 11 hours ago *uh-oh* I'm in danger! permalink embed save report reply [–]Starshot84Tin | GMEJungle 25 | GME subs 41 1 point 9 hours ago Jail time for those who are identified as a natural person permalink embed save report reply [–]Jeff5704Tin | 5 months old 1 point 9 hours ago This is a serious threat to internet privacy and has far-reaching consequences if passed. It allows the government to access personal data and enforce harsh measures based on what it deems as national security, with penalties so severe that even VPNs may not protect users. The bill's language is too broad and allows for government overreach, which could potentially stifle innovation and progress in the digital world. It is crucial for everyone to stay informed and educated about this bill and its potential impact on the future of internet freedom and cryptocurrencies. permalink embed save report reply [–]Consistent_Many_1858Platinum | QC: ETH 26 | MiningSubs 27 1 point 9 hours ago That's one thing I hate about so called Western democracy. It's not a true democracy where few politicians get to decide for entire population. Why not have a proper referendum where people can decide what to do. This new restrict act is in breach of civil liberties and freedom. permalink embed save report reply [–]redamidBronze | QC: CC 15 1 point 9 hours ago Privacy and governments name a better duo permalink embed save report reply [–]QuartzPuffyStarTin | Privacy 10 1 point 9 hours ago tHe gOvErNmEnT iSn´T gOiNg aFtEr cRyPtO tHiS yEaR. tHeY aRe oNLy dOiNg tHeiR jObS, wE hAvE nOtHiNg tO wOrRy aBoUt. f*cK CeXXX! /s (just in case it isn´t obvious) But seriously, there´s a big plan against crypto this year going into execution. With how the geopolitical arena is changing, nd the threats that arise from all of the big actors, they are coming hard on anything they can´t fully control. If we don´t unite, it will be bye bye for mainstream crypto, and it will remain as an underworld banned and prosecuted instrument. permalink embed save report reply [–]SchniiicTin 1 point 9 hours ago Oof. They really try to shut it completely down in the US. Hoping for everyone that the worst scenario will never happen. This sounds horrible permalink embed save report reply [–]DAlmightyTin 1 point 8 hours ago I say shut it all down. permalink embed save report reply [–]1959Chicagoan 1 point 8 hours ago I can't imagine living life thinking the sky is falling from a different fictional threat every day. SMH permalink embed save report reply [–]720smh 1 point 8 hours ago Does anyone know if a website exists to petition against it yet? I’ve seen them in the past for various local issues where you fill out a form and it gets sent to your representative. permalink embed save report reply [–]bafflesaurusTin 1 point 7 hours ago This will never pass. Every business uses VPN at some level so they would literally have to arrest the entire skilled labor market. I wish politicians weren't so brain dead. permalink embed save report reply [–]RedddLedddBronze 1 point 7 hours ago Yep, just another move to choke the last ounce of humanity and freedom from us mere mortals. God forbid we should be able to share anything between ourselves unabated or at will. Once again, we will own nothing and be happy apparently. They told us what they were doing and the vast majority stuck their heads in the sand (myself included to begin with). This is not just the US, this is global and we should all be up in arms about it. permalink embed save report reply [–]Slack008Tin 1 point 7 hours ago Typical fed trying to get into everyone's business permalink embed save report reply [–]JustBreatheBelieveTin | Politics 32 1 point 6 hours ago >shall, upon conviction, be fined not more than $1,000,000, or if ural person, may be imprisoned for not more than 20 years, or both. Up to a million...up to 20 years...OR BOTH?! Wow-eee. That's a lot of leeway. Scary stuff. permalink embed save report reply [–]Wine-and-wings 1 point 6 hours ago a) Priority Information And Communications Technology Areas.—In carrying out sections 3 and 4, the Secretary shall prioritize evaluation of— (1) information and communications technology products or services used by a party to a covered transaction in a sector designated as critical infrastructure in Policy Directive 21 (February 12, 2013; relating to critical infrastructure security and resilience); (2) software, hardware, or any other product or service integral to telecommunications products and services, including— (A) wireless local area networks; (B) mobile networks; (C) satellite payloads; (D) satellite operations and control; (E) cable access points; (F) wireline access points; (G) core networking systems; (H) long-, short-, and back-haul networks; or (I) edge computer platforms; (3) any software, hardware, or any other product or service integral to data hosting or computing service that uses, processes, or retains, or is expected to use, process, or retain, sensitive personal data with respect to greater than 1,000,000 persons in the United States at any point during the year period preceding the date on which the covered transaction is referred to the Secretary for review or the Secretary initiates review of the covered transaction, including— (A) internet hosting services; (B) cloud-based or distributed computing and data storage; (C) machine learning, predictive analytics, and data science products and services, including those involving the provision of services to assist a party utilize, manage, or maintain open-source software; (D) managed services; and (E) content delivery services; (4) internet- or network-enabled sensors, webcams, end-point surveillance or monitoring devices, modems and home networking devices if greater than 1,000,000 units have been sold to persons in the United States at any point during the year period preceding the date on which the covered transaction is referred to the Secretary for review or the Secretary initiates review of the covered transaction; (5) unmanned vehicles, including drones and other aerials systems, autonomous or semi-autonomous vehicles, or any other product or service integral to the provision, maintenance, or management of such products or services; (6) software designed or used primarily for connecting with and communicating via the internet that is in use by greater than 1,000,000 persons in the United States at any point during the year period preceding the date on which the covered transaction is referred to the Secretary for review or the Secretary initiates review of the covered transaction, including— (A) desktop applications; (B) mobile applications; (C) gaming applications; (D) payment applications; or (E) web-based applications; or (7) information and communications technology products and services integral to— (A) artificial intelligence and machine learning; (B) quantum key distribution; (C) quantum communications; (D) quantum computing; (E) post-quantum cryptography; (F) autonomous systems; (G) advanced robotics; (H) biotechnology; (I) synthetic biology; (J) computational biology; and (K) e-commerce technology and services, including any electronic techniques for accomplishing business transactions, online retail, internet-enabled logistics, internet-enabled payment technology, and online marketplaces. permalink embed save report reply [–]wanderer000020201 - 2 years account age. 35 - 100 comment karma. 1 point 5 hours ago This is fucking scary, that's all I have to add. permalink embed save report reply [–]hicoBMTin | CC critic 1 point 4 hours ago USA it’s out of control! permalink embed save report reply [–]Optimal-Two-6382Tin | Superstonk 104 1 point 4 hours ago Patriot act 2.0. permalink embed save report reply [–]Sage-Like_Wisdom 1 point 4 hours ago I’m not worried. The more they tighten their grip, the more people will be willing to just not comply. States are already talking secession. It’s time the fascist left has their dystopia they crave and leave the rest of us to freedom. permalink embed save report reply [–]IcyMasterPeas 1 point 3 hours ago I just created r/RESTRICTact in hopes that a real huge focused discussion about this can be made in public view. permalink embed save report reply [–]evoxyseahPlatinum | QC: CC 206, BTC 22, LW 18 | ADA 19 1 point 3 hours ago Woah, this is something we need to fight against. Jobs will be lost and freedom of speech will be gone? permalink embed save report reply [–]_Commando_Silver | QC: ETH 180, BTC 27, CC 21 | LINK 55 | TraderSubs 161 1 point 3 hours ago Restrict act? I'm surprised they didn't call it "Freedom act" permalink embed save report reply [–]Icy_Elevator_7886 1 point 1 hour ago Time to remove the tyrannical elite! permalink embed save report reply [–]JonSnerrrrrrTin | GMEJungle 52 | GME subs 52 1 point 59 minutes ago It's crazy, but that's most bills in the US. They say it's for one thing but there are literally hundreds of other things embedded and, as stated, gives far too much overreach. I don't know how we can ever stop it from happening. A bill to make smaller and more concise bills? permalink embed save report reply [–]mikeoxwells2Bronze | QC: CC 22 1 point 13 minutes ago Who wrote this bill? Who sponsored it?

1 3