Congress just killed Internet privacy protections

[OutHouse]

Does this mean you're happy to let ISPs monetize your internet habits?

do you facebook? do you Gmail. are you happy that they are monetizing your internet habits and much more?

 

[nakedfrog]

do you facebook? do you Gmail. are you happy that they are monetizing your internet habits and much more?

Does this mean YOU are happy to let ISPs monetize your internet habits?

 

[ch33zw1z]

do you facebook? do you Gmail. are you happy that they are monetizing your internet habits and much more?

dude, stop. You have a choice in those products. Your "opt out" choice now is no Internet at all, or VPN...which is not allowed by streaming services

 

[zinfamous]

Do you read what people post or do you have a "Troll" button that randomly posts? Messing with this FCC ruling should be at the bottom of the the to-do list for Congress. Or do you think that it's ok for more people have access to information that probably shouldn't have? I know the Dims seem to love changing the rules to favor less privacy protection.... for their political opponents anyways.

yup, I misread the intent of your post. Carry on.

 

[momeNt]

dude, stop. You have a choice in those products. Your "opt out" choice now is no Internet at all, or VPN...which is not allowed by streaming services

Facebook and gmail have essentially monopolies. You can choose to either use them, or not, same with the internet really. You will have a drastically different life experience without facebook the same as if you had it without internet.

 

[nakedfrog]

Facebook and gmail have essentially monopolies. You can choose to either use them, or not, same with the internet really. You will have a drastically different life experience without facebook the same as if you had it without internet.

Oh, BS. I could easily live without gmail and Facebook, it costs forty bucks a year (without even shopping around) to have a virtual server with mail/FTP/HTTP on it that has webmail.
I don't even know what the argument is that would make Facebook "essential" but then, I barely use it as is.

 

[ch33zw1z]

Facebook and gmail have essentially monopolies. You can choose to either use them, or not, same with the internet really. You will have a drastically different life experience without facebook the same as if you had it without internet.

Facebook or Google = Service

Internet = Utility

I don't need facebook or google in order to use the Internet, and there's alternate services for both.

Deja vu

 

[ch33zw1z]

Nvm

 

[brandonbull]

Okay. I just did. Zero reputable sources.

But I do agree that Congress had better things to do than pass this turd, but they got paid to pass this turd.

http://www.thirteen.org/edonline/accessislam/about.html

 

[Thunder 57]

...Rand Paul should have been president.

Ding Ding Ding!! Yes, he should have. He actually has integrity. Rare in a politician on either side.

 

[bononos]

wait.. the co-sponsor of the bill abstained from voting?!
wtfWHY?

Thats one way of straddling the fence I guess.

Iirc, that was a new FCC thing last fall, set to go into effect late this year.
Not sure what your point is, other than ISP'S having been making shitloads of money off us on both sides for longer than most realize.
The FCC ruling was a step in the right direction to protect users privacy.

His point is probably to confuse and divert attention.

 

[bononos]

Ding Ding Ding!! Yes, he should have. He actually has integrity. Rare in a politician on either side.

Are you trying to be funny, he co-sponsored the bill in the title of the thread.

 

[agent00f]

Facebook and gmail have essentially monopolies. You can choose to either use them, or not, same with the internet really. You will have a drastically different life experience without facebook the same as if you had it without internet.

do you facebook? do you Gmail. are you happy that they are monetizing your internet habits and much more?

http://www.thirteen.org/edonline/accessislam/about.html

"Using facebook invalidates all right to internet privacy" -- degenerate water boys

Have you guys thought out the defense plan for when your dear leader/party move onto putting browns/women in their place? Or is it more an ad hoc thing?

 

[momeNt]

"Using facebook invalidates all right to internet privacy" -- degenerate water boys

Have you guys thought out the defense plan for when your dear leader/party move onto putting browns/women in their place? Or is it more an ad hoc thing?

You guys are carrying the water the water for facebook and google. I am not defending a right of the telecos to be able to get this information. If anybody asks, I'll offer what expertise I have in setting up a VPN to avoid having your information tracked.

I'd like to see right of ways opened up so more providers can get into the area so that privacy can actually be a point of competition to be honest.

 

[kage69]

Facebook and gmail have essentially monopolies. You can choose to either use them, or not, same with the internet really. You will have a drastically different life experience without facebook the same as if you had it without internet.

What the hell are you talking about? Trying to liken their standing to the dearth of ISP choices practically nationwide is a completely asinine position.

Who are you to judge someone's life experience based on their use or non use of Facebook? Are you trying to sound like a pompous asshole here?

 

[momeNt]

What the hell are you talking about? Trying to liken their standing to the dearth of ISP choices practically nationwide is a completely asinine position.

Who are you to judge someone's life experience based on their use or non use of Facebook? Are you trying to sound like a pompous asshole here?

Those who use facebook, and then choose not to because of their privacy policy, probably end up similarly unhappy for those who have the internet, and then choose not to have it because of their privacy policy. That's all I'm saying.

Who am I to judge? That's pretty obvious isn't it? Nobody of course? That's sort of the point though, to pass regulations, and judgments, and act like we know what is best for people. This is America.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

Facebook and gmail have essentially monopolies. You can choose to either use them, or not, same with the internet really. You will have a drastically different life experience without facebook the same as if you had it without internet.

Facebook and google may be ubiquitous, but they are not monopolies. Furthermore, I'm fine with accepting data harvesting within a service by the service provider (I wish they wouldn't, but I accept that it's 'a thing' with free services). ISPs however are generally limited to a single offering for any given citizen, and so there's no choice in the matter. Internet access has become a defacto requirement for today's life in a first world nation, if one is to live at first world nation standards. Most rational people would call the existing ISP situation a monopoly, unfortunately the courts don't seem to agree with us.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

Those who use facebook, and then choose not to because of their privacy policy, probably end up similarly unhappy for those who have the internet, and then choose not to have it because of their privacy policy. That's all I'm saying.

I stopped using Facebook a few years ago precisely because of their privacy policies, and couldn't be happier. One less monkey on my back.

If i had to lose the internet as a whole though? Whole different can of worms. That would dramatically affect my life, both personally and professionally.

 

[kage69]

Those who use facebook, and then choose not to because of their privacy policy, probably end up similarly unhappy for those who have the internet, and then choose not to have it because of their privacy policy. That's all I'm saying.

If that was your intent then the mention of monopolies was entirely counterproductive.

FWIW I know dozens of people who cut Facebook out of their lives and are happier for it. Can't really liken that to anyone without internet service as a connection to email and the web is near mandatory these days.

 

[momeNt]

If that was your intent then the mention of monopolies was entirely counterproductive.

FWIW I know dozens of people who cut Facebook out of their lives and are happier for it. Can't really liken that to anyone without internet service as a connection to email and the web is near mandatory these days.

I stopped using Facebook a few years ago precisely because of their privacy policies, and couldn't be happier. One less monkey on my back.

If i had to lose the internet as a whole though? Whole different can of worms. That would dramatically affect my life, both personally and professionally.

You do not know the people who basically only have internet because of facebook then? I do not know why you are trivializing the problems of one set of people in favor of your own. I personally could never be that selfish, but to each their own.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

You do not know the people who basically only have internet because of facebook then? I do not know why you are trivializing the problems of one set of people in favor of your own.

Let me rephrase. While some people 'live' on facebook, it is not necessary for non-social existence within our country. Internet access is required for many things, and is becoming more and more necessary. If this were a Venn diagram, there'd be a 'need' category which contained 75% of the internet, along with a bunch of other stuff. There'd also be a 'want' category, which contained the internet, facebook, and other stuff.

Furthermore, again, there are alternatives to Facebook. For some 90% of the US population, there's a *single* internet provider.

I personally could never be that selfish, but to each their own.

Let your argument stand on its own merit, don't reduce yourself to personal jabs.

 

[nakedfrog]

http://www.thirteen.org/edonline/accessislam/about.html

I guess if I extrapolate from your reasoning, I was indoctrinated into Greek, Roman, and Norse religions because I learned stuff about them in school. BY ODIN'S BEARD!

 

[momeNt]

Let me rephrase. While some people 'live' on facebook, it is not necessary for non-social existence within our country. Internet access is required for many things, and is becoming more and more necessary. If this were a Venn diagram, there'd be a 'need' category which contained 75% of the internet, along with a bunch of other stuff. There'd also be a 'want' category, which contained the internet, facebook, and other stuff.

Furthermore, again, there are alternatives to Facebook. For some 90% of the US population, there's a *single* internet provider.


Let your argument stand on its own merit, don't reduce yourself to personal jabs.

Really that was more at Kage, who called me a pompous ass without realizing how he was being hypocritical.

I am reading that 30% of Americans have only a single ISP provider.

Without competition there will be little incentive for them to actually price the product lower with this new found revenue stream, it might help make the teleco market more competitive for the 70% of Americans that do have competition for their ISP.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

Really that was more at Kage, who called me a pompous ass without realizing how he was being hypocritical.

Understood.

I am reading that 30% of Americans have only a single ISP provider.

My numbers are probably skewed because my experience has always been with a single provider. Unfortunately most probably have one of two, and if both are doing the same thing and the barrier for new entrants is so high that a third option cannot show up, it's basically a shit sandwich for everyone. Ironically you can draw a direct correlation to our current political system to this.

Without competition there will be little incentive for them to actually price the product lower with this new found revenue stream, it might help make the teleco market more competitive for the 70% of Americans that do have competition for their ISP.

Given normal ISP behavior, I'd expect them to start charging more for 'security and handling of personal information'. You can bet that no existing ISP is going to leave money on that table though. 'X for the little people' only works in certain markets, and ISPs ain't one of them.

 

[agent00f]

You guys are carrying the water the water for facebook and google. I am not defending a right of the telecos to be able to get this information. If anybody asks, I'll offer what expertise I have in setting up a VPN to avoid having your information tracked.

I'd like to see right of ways opened up so more providers can get into the area so that privacy can actually be a point of competition to be honest.

Just look at how dumb this conservative argument is: because some people use facebook, an optional service whose entire point is predicated on the network effect of sharing personal info, there's no need for privacy in the monopolized basic data pipe for everyone. Once you can figure out just how goddamn stupid this is, you can brag about how much less conservative you'll be.