Time Warner Cable....

[Imakeholesinu]

...just tried to make a connection to my PC over port 8080.

206.169.193.251:1652. WTF?

Port 1652 is a telco port for XNMP. IEEE Standard for XNMP

What the fuck are these telco's up to?

PeerGuardian2 for the win!

[Tessian]

Care to speak English there? I'm pretty sure this would make sense if you included the 60% of the explanation that you seem to have omitted.

[Imakeholesinu]

I was using peerguardian but I just left it on and was browsing around the interwebs. Then all the sudden I get an alert on it that there was a TCP connection that was blocked. I look and it was time warner cable attempting to connect to my machine. Why is time warner so interested what I do on my AT&T DSL?

[Blotus]

Guess big corporations can't be bothered to go out and look for their own kiddy porn, so they just try and jack yours. I honestly did not tip them off.

[Zeus]

I was using peerguardian but I just left it on and was browsing around the interwebs. Then all the sudden I get an alert on it that there was a TCP connection that was blocked. I look and it was time warner cable attempting to connect to my machine. Why is time warner so interested what I do on my AT&T DSL?

They want to see just how much you're pirating. Don't you guys in the US have some sort of law where people who d'load can be charged?

[Imakeholesinu]

Oh, our shit for brains senate just decided to grant immunity to telco's for spying on us. Dumb fucks.

And Obama voted for it! WHAT THE FUCK!!!

[Zeus]

It amazes me how every few years the public, both in Canada and the US, can fall for the same bullshit from the political parties. There's very few real differences between any party anymore, regardless of what they make you believe, as long as they're governed by their contributions.

Same shit, different pile

[RentCavalier]

I agree. I'm still all for us overthrowing the State and creating a Free Market Anarcho-Capitalist society.

[SineSwiper]

Oh, our shit for brains senate just decided to grant immunity to telco's for spying on us. Dumb fucks.

And Obama voted for it! WHAT THE FUCK!!!

To his credit, he said that he wasn't happy with that provision, but he figured that a compromised solution was better than nothing. More here: http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/0 ... ports.html

I have to say that many people are focusing on the negative, which sucks, but the bill means that we aren't going to see this sort of illegal wiretap bullshit. It's basically saying "Yeah, the telcos were breaching the law, but so was our President for authorizing it. We can't really fault them because the government said to do it, and this bill will prevent it from happening again."

Frankly, if it was our ISP, we would have told them "subpoena or fuck off".

[Tessian]

Oh, our shit for brains senate just decided to grant immunity to telco's for spying on us. Dumb fucks.

And Obama voted for it! WHAT THE FUCK!!!

To his credit, he said that he wasn't happy with that provision, but he figured that a compromised solution was better than nothing. More here: http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/0 ... ports.html

I have to say that many people are focusing on the negative, which sucks, but the bill means that we aren't going to see this sort of illegal wiretap bullshit. It's basically saying "Yeah, the telcos were breaching the law, but so was our President for authorizing it. We can't really fault them because the government said to do it, and this bill will prevent it from happening again."

Frankly, if it was our ISP, we would have told them "subpoena or fuck off".

Talk about focusing on the negative... I never read anywhere that actually said this was preventing it from happening in the future. In that case whatever; you can't really prosecute a company for doing something the executive branch told them to do (you can get angry at the executive branch for telling them, though)

[Tessian]

Er Sine? I think you ignored half of that law... it's doing a lot more than just allowing retroactive immunity.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/com ... 7129.story

Checks and balances are sooo 20th century....

[SineSwiper]

It's a bit of an overexaggeration. The FISC is a "secret court". No information is public. So, there's already no oversight. I don't like the law, and I think surveillance should be overhauled. However, his example here:

The reach of such surveillance has already hampered my work. I was once told about a showdown between a U.S. warship and the Iranian navy that had the potential to escalate into a military conflict. I contacted someone who was on the ship at the time of the alleged incident and who reportedly had photos. His first question was whether my phone and e-mails were being monitored.

What could I say? How could I know? I offered to travel to see him but, frightened of retribution, he refused. I do not know if the man's story is true. I only know that the fear of surveillance made it impossible for me to determine its veracity. Under this law, all those who hold information that could embarrass and expose the lies of those in power will have similar fears. Confidentiality, and the understanding that as a reporter I will honor this confidentiality, permits a free press to function. Take it away and a free press withers and dies.

So, suddenly, having a "secret court" would allow him to answer the question of whether he was being monitored or not? No. Not at all. This secret court doesn't announce who they are monitoring, so it's a dumb and overblown argument. The government has been monitoring phone and emails for as long as there has been phone and emails.

[SineSwiper]

Actually, where the hell is that reporter getting his source information?

Looking at an AP article:

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Amendment bill also would:

_Require FISA court permission to wiretap Americans who are overseas.

So, what part of that says that the FISA has no power any more?