6 ms·

I thanked Rand Paul for his Internet Rights efforts lately. He replied.

52 points by scrapcode 13y ago

hkmurakami 13y ago
I recalled this line by Lawrence Lessig during Rand Paul's filibuster regarding drone strikes on American citizens: There is plenty to disagree with Rand Paul about. But this filibuster is not. Thank you, sir. http://twitter.com/lessig/status/309415470879100928 http://twitter.com/lessig/status/309415470879100928 I feel the same way about his efforts on Internet rights.
- rubinelli 13y ago
  Even when you don't agree with the guy, it's refreshing seeing someone defend a position because he believes in it, and not because his job depends on it.
  - beatgammit 13y ago
    The 12-79 rejection of his amendment is appaling, especially since it directly appeals to the constitution, but that would make it inconvenient for things like the MegaUpload takedown, now wouldn't it.
  - benjamincburns 13y ago
    Definitely. I'm pretty moderate, but lately the Republican party (or at least a very vocal minority therein) has just seemed far, far too out of touch with reality to me. However when Rand Paul talks I listen and consider carefully what he has to say. I don't always, or even usually, agree with him - but I respect him and his principles. I can't say the same for many other current Republican leaders.
  - threeseed 13y ago
    it's refreshing seeing someone defend a position because he believes in it, and not because his job depends on it You might be want to be careful with that line. Rand Paul is not stupid. He knows how critical the "internet generation" was to his father's success. You only had to look at how Ron Paul's supporters cleverly involved themselves in the mechanics of the primary process to know that this was a group that punched above its weight. Given that Rand is clearly positioning himself for 2016 every decision he makes is not necessarily altruistic.
    - pvnick 13y ago
      >Given that Rand is clearly positioning himself for 2016 every decision he makes is not necessarily altruistic. I don't care what his motivations are he's still got my vote by a long shot. And that sentiment gets stronger with every mention Rand gets in the media.
    - bones6 13y ago
      He's not ignorant of his base by any stretch of the imagination, but I think it's still safe to say he and his father were libertarian freedom fighter hipsters, way before it was cool.
  - HarryRotha 13y ago
    Rand does play politics a lot. Personally I'm hoping his beliefs line up more closely with his fathers than with his own rhetoric. I would probably vote form just based on that hope, although I won't be too surprised if I end up disappointed.
  - SeanKilleen 13y ago
    A little bit of an issue on that one. He reversed his position a little while later and said that it was just about that one word. In that same statement, he advocated the use of a drone to kill someone who robbed a liquor store of $50. I shit you not. See http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/04/23/1204296/-Rand-Paul-reverses-position-supports-drone-killings-of-American-citizens-on-American-soil http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/04/23/1204296/-Rand-Paul-... (article is biased liberally; I'm more of a moderate but it's where I saw the information.) I'm happy that he actually used the spoken filibuster instead of hiding behind rules-based filibusters (which have been the cause of some of the worst obstruction in our country's history), but I no longer hold the belief (as I did right after his filibuster) that it was some sort of principled stand.
ck2 13y ago
You know that channel selection concept for consumers where you get to pick and choose what you want and only pay for those parts? I'd like to be able to pick and chose the parts of each individual in Congress. There is little else of Rand Paul worth paying for.
- tocomment 13y ago
  What are the parts you don't like? I don't follow him that closely but doesn't he have a lot of pro-freedom views?
  - LanceH 13y ago
    Spend less than we take in is very unpopular since nobody thinks their programs should be cut.
  - magnusj 13y ago
    He is first and foremost social conservative, leaning libertarian on a few issues, and a state rights man on most issues (which isn't really about freedom. It's born out of a realization by reactionary southern people, that they can't get enough national support to implement their desired anti-freedom policies on a federal level). For instance, he opposes women's right to abortion (except in certain cases), same-sex marriage, birthright citizenship, and any gun-control (the laissez faire regulation of killer devices in the US is, in my view, a huge infringement on freedom).
    - pvnick 13y ago
      >the laissez faire regulation of killer devices in the US is, in my view, a huge infringement on freedom That is some professionally constructed doublespeak. Orwell would be impressed!
      - sultezdukes 13y ago
        The leftists think stuff like that works.
benjamincburns 13y ago
I know this is obnoxious to post on HN, but since you're pushing the discussion here... > One of the few that are fighting against our privacy and rights on the internet is KY Senator Rand Paul. I think you meant "fighting for our privacy?"
- scrapcode 13y ago
  Indeed I did. Thanks.
calinet6 13y ago
Please: blockquote { color: #333; }
da3da 13y ago
Just a nit-picky thing, but I thought it would be nice to get a heads-up. In the third sentence of the first paragraph it should be "your senators" rather than "you're senators"
mlader 13y ago
Well, whether or not you agree with Rand Paul as a politician, I think an actual discussion of the economics at hand would be more fruitful. And by the economics, I do not mean "regulation attacks our liberties and cripples the economy," but more specifically I'm interested in the following quote: "Many of the calls for additional legislation depend on the false premise that there is a 'market failure' regarding cybersecurity, and that businesses cannot adequately protect themselves." From what I understand, the Obama administration believes that cybersecurity is a public good, and that there is a free riding problem. One company finds a vulnerability or comes up with a new security solution, shares that information with other companies, and then everyone benefits. The idea is that many companies would assume that others will put in the resources to solve these problems, and that they can benefit from the resulting information. Overall expenditure in cybersecurity may be increasing, however, I'm curious what the distribution of spending looks like across various industries. Are there a few players that make up the large portion of spending, or is it spread out among more companies. In the former, a free rider problem seems more likely, while in the latter I don't really see a problem. Personally, I'd assume that many companies are very worried about cybersecurity and free riding is a minor issue. It's bad for a business' bottom line and reputation to have a security breach, especially if they deal with customer finances. Honestly though, I do not know enough about the industry and would love to hear from someone who is more familiar with the economics and incentives.

52 points by scrapcode 13y ago

I recalled this line by Lawrence Lessig during Rand Paul's filibuster regarding drone strikes on American citizens: There is plenty to disagree with Rand Paul about. But this filibuster is not. Thank you, sir. http://twitter.com/lessig/status/309415470879100928 http://twitter.com/lessig/status/309415470879100928 I feel the same way about his efforts on Internet rights.

rubinelli 13y ago
Even when you don't agree with the guy, it's refreshing seeing someone defend a position because he believes in it, and not because his job depends on it.
- beatgammit 13y ago
  The 12-79 rejection of his amendment is appaling, especially since it directly appeals to the constitution, but that would make it inconvenient for things like the MegaUpload takedown, now wouldn't it.
- benjamincburns 13y ago
  Definitely. I'm pretty moderate, but lately the Republican party (or at least a very vocal minority therein) has just seemed far, far too out of touch with reality to me. However when Rand Paul talks I listen and consider carefully what he has to say. I don't always, or even usually, agree with him - but I respect him and his principles. I can't say the same for many other current Republican leaders.
- threeseed 13y ago
  it's refreshing seeing someone defend a position because he believes in it, and not because his job depends on it You might be want to be careful with that line. Rand Paul is not stupid. He knows how critical the "internet generation" was to his father's success. You only had to look at how Ron Paul's supporters cleverly involved themselves in the mechanics of the primary process to know that this was a group that punched above its weight. Given that Rand is clearly positioning himself for 2016 every decision he makes is not necessarily altruistic.
  - pvnick 13y ago
    >Given that Rand is clearly positioning himself for 2016 every decision he makes is not necessarily altruistic. I don't care what his motivations are he's still got my vote by a long shot. And that sentiment gets stronger with every mention Rand gets in the media.
  - bones6 13y ago
    He's not ignorant of his base by any stretch of the imagination, but I think it's still safe to say he and his father were libertarian freedom fighter hipsters, way before it was cool.
- HarryRotha 13y ago
  Rand does play politics a lot. Personally I'm hoping his beliefs line up more closely with his fathers than with his own rhetoric. I would probably vote form just based on that hope, although I won't be too surprised if I end up disappointed.
- SeanKilleen 13y ago
  A little bit of an issue on that one. He reversed his position a little while later and said that it was just about that one word. In that same statement, he advocated the use of a drone to kill someone who robbed a liquor store of $50. I shit you not. See http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/04/23/1204296/-Rand-Paul-reverses-position-supports-drone-killings-of-American-citizens-on-American-soil http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/04/23/1204296/-Rand-Paul-... (article is biased liberally; I'm more of a moderate but it's where I saw the information.) I'm happy that he actually used the spoken filibuster instead of hiding behind rules-based filibusters (which have been the cause of some of the worst obstruction in our country's history), but I no longer hold the belief (as I did right after his filibuster) that it was some sort of principled stand.

ck2 13y ago

You know that channel selection concept for consumers where you get to pick and choose what you want and only pay for those parts? I'd like to be able to pick and chose the parts of each individual in Congress. There is little else of Rand Paul worth paying for.

tocomment 13y ago
What are the parts you don't like? I don't follow him that closely but doesn't he have a lot of pro-freedom views?
- LanceH 13y ago
  Spend less than we take in is very unpopular since nobody thinks their programs should be cut.
- magnusj 13y ago
  He is first and foremost social conservative, leaning libertarian on a few issues, and a state rights man on most issues (which isn't really about freedom. It's born out of a realization by reactionary southern people, that they can't get enough national support to implement their desired anti-freedom policies on a federal level). For instance, he opposes women's right to abortion (except in certain cases), same-sex marriage, birthright citizenship, and any gun-control (the laissez faire regulation of killer devices in the US is, in my view, a huge infringement on freedom).
  - pvnick 13y ago
    >the laissez faire regulation of killer devices in the US is, in my view, a huge infringement on freedom That is some professionally constructed doublespeak. Orwell would be impressed!
    - sultezdukes 13y ago
      The leftists think stuff like that works.

benjamincburns 13y ago

I know this is obnoxious to post on HN, but since you're pushing the discussion here... > One of the few that are fighting against our privacy and rights on the internet is KY Senator Rand Paul. I think you meant "fighting for our privacy?"

scrapcode 13y ago
Indeed I did. Thanks.

calinet6 13y ago

Please: blockquote { color: #333; }

da3da 13y ago

Just a nit-picky thing, but I thought it would be nice to get a heads-up. In the third sentence of the first paragraph it should be "your senators" rather than "you're senators"

mlader 13y ago

Well, whether or not you agree with Rand Paul as a politician, I think an actual discussion of the economics at hand would be more fruitful. And by the economics, I do not mean "regulation attacks our liberties and cripples the economy," but more specifically I'm interested in the following quote: "Many of the calls for additional legislation depend on the false premise that there is a 'market failure' regarding cybersecurity, and that businesses cannot adequately protect themselves." From what I understand, the Obama administration believes that cybersecurity is a public good, and that there is a free riding problem. One company finds a vulnerability or comes up with a new security solution, shares that information with other companies, and then everyone benefits. The idea is that many companies would assume that others will put in the resources to solve these problems, and that they can benefit from the resulting information. Overall expenditure in cybersecurity may be increasing, however, I'm curious what the distribution of spending looks like across various industries. Are there a few players that make up the large portion of spending, or is it spread out among more companies. In the former, a free rider problem seems more likely, while in the latter I don't really see a problem. Personally, I'd assume that many companies are very worried about cybersecurity and free riding is a minor issue. It's bad for a business' bottom line and reputation to have a security breach, especially if they deal with customer finances. Honestly though, I do not know enough about the industry and would love to hear from someone who is more familiar with the economics and incentives.