Congress just killed Internet privacy protections

[momeNt]

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.

Do you now that in some countries there are roughly the same number of people on facebook as people who have access to adequate sanitation and clean drinking water? Implying utilities as "non-optional" just reeks of privilege. It's really disgusting and shows a disconnect from the world reality. Please get grounded.

Further, not even using other countries as an example, implying online socialization as something as optional, is also disconnected from the social nature of human beings. Sure the guy 1,000 miles away from his family can simply stop using facebook, but he'll lose a drastic amount of his social fulfillment by cutting himself off of that. He could also dig a hole and shit in it if his sewer bill gets too high.

Also, privacy is available, get and pay for a VPN, this is actually the value of the (de)regulation.

 

[agent00f]

Do you now that in some countries there are roughly the same number of people on facebook as people who have access to adequate sanitation and clean drinking water? Implying utilities as "non-optional" just reeks of privilege. It's really disgusting and shows a disconnect from the world reality. Please get grounded.

Further, not even using other countries as an example, implying online socialization as something as optional, is also disconnected from the social nature of human beings. Sure the guy 1,000 miles away from his family can simply stop using facebook, but he'll lose a drastic amount of his social fulfillment by cutting himself off of that. He could also dig a hole and shit in it if his sewer bill gets too high.

Also, privacy is available, get and pay for a VPN, this is actually the value of the (de)regulation.

Facebook literally works by sacrificing privacy. Makes sense why nobody's ever accuse you of being not conservative.

 

[momeNt]

Facebook literally works by sacrificing privacy. Makes sense why nobody's ever accuse you of being not conservative.

You're confusing how people use facebook vs how facebook uses people. Facebook accesses your internet history and location history in order to provide targeted ads. That is different than you posting on your wall - hey i just visited X place, or I just searched for X thing. Facebook offers opt-out of the tracking and internet surveillance, but many don't. None of that has anything to do with how people sacrifice their privacy by using facebook.

Besides, Facebook makes on average $13 per user in the USA. I do not see how telecoms would be able to even manage using what data they are able to obtain, package it for advertisers, and reliably sell it to even make a profit. They have a much smaller user base than Facebook so I just am not sure the economy is there.

 

[ch33zw1z]

You're confusing the Internet with optional services which rely on the Internet...continually.

Not sure you really understand the breadth of this ruling, or the abilities of telco's.

 

[ivwshane]

You're confusing the Internet with optional services which rely on the Internet...continually.

Not sure you really understand the breadth of this ruling, or the abilities of telco's.

He doesn't but it won't stop him from thinking he does and using mental gymnastics to defend his feelings.

 

[agent00f]

You're confusing how people use facebook vs how facebook uses people. Facebook accesses your internet history and location history in order to provide targeted ads. That is different than you posting on your wall - hey i just visited X place, or I just searched for X thing. Facebook offers opt-out of the tracking and internet surveillance, but many don't. None of that has anything to do with how people sacrifice their privacy by using facebook.

Besides, Facebook makes on average $13 per user in the USA. I do not see how telecoms would be able to even manage using what data they are able to obtain, package it for advertisers, and reliably sell it to even make a profit. They have a much smaller user base than Facebook so I just am not sure the economy is there.

Thanks for confirming it's literally their business model to leverage that network effect (ie provide social network services for free in exchange for related user info), in stark contrast to pipe providers. I'd hope that one day you'd gain enough basic integrity to admit this, but we both know that's not happening.

Also pretty hilarious how hard you have to pretend more people use facebook than the internet.

 

[momeNt]

You're confusing the Internet with optional services which rely on the Internet...continually.

Not sure you really understand the breadth of this ruling, or the abilities of telco's.

Please tell me how they'll be able to monetize this. Remeber facebook's revenue is $13 per user, and they control the platform on which the ads are viewed, this would just be the data side of the equation, not even the advertising side. Is facebook going to buy the info? No, they already get better. Like who is going to buy it that doesn't already get cookie data from other websites monetizing your consent to provide location data or web habits? I see it as mostly a non-issue. Telcos want to board a train that is already at the next station.

Thanks for confirming it's literally their business model to leverage that network effect (ie provide social network services for free in exchange for related user info), in stark contrast to pipe providers. I'd hope that one day you'd gain enough basic integrity to admit this, but we both know that's not happening.

Also pretty hilarious how hard you have to pretend more people use facebook than the internet.

When have I said that?



I guess let me take a step back. ISPs want to add it into their business model, but regulation is stopping that. I am not sure I understand why. What is the principle in use here?

 

[agent00f]

Please tell me how they'll be able to monetize this. Remeber facebook's revenue is $13 per user, and they control the platform on which the ads are viewed, this would just be the data side of the equation, not even the advertising side. Is facebook going to buy the info? No, they already get better. Like who is going to buy it that doesn't already get cookie data from other websites monetizing your consent to provide location data or web habits? I see it as mostly a non-issue. Telcos want to board a train that is already at the next station.

When have I said that?

I guess let me take a step back. ISPs want to add it into their business model, but regulation is stopping that. I am not sure I understand why. What is the principle in use here?

Pretty obvious that conservatives would rather die before admitting enough brain cells to grasp the simple difference between a social application who purpose is mine data for its networking effects, and a data pipe whose purpose is providing data.

 

[ch33zw1z]

Please tell me how they'll be able to monetize this.

Easy, they see everything over the wire. Your DNS requests, your streaming traffic, anything from you. They can harvest far more than anyone else. And, you can't stop it outside of a VPN, which not all online services allow. They are not a service on the internet, it's not a cookie I can block. Even if I choose a different DNS server, the traffic still has to and from stamps after the hostname is resolved.

Facebook pales in comparison to what this means for the consumer.

They can sell your history, at a base level, and you can't opt out.

Opting out of the Internet is not the option anyone in the USA is willingly going to accept.

Opt out of a service running on the Internet, not a problem, do it everyday.

Remeber facebook's revenue is $13 per user, and they control the platform on which the ads are viewed, this would just be the data side of the equation, not even the advertising side. Is facebook going to buy the info? No, they already get better. Like who is going to buy it that doesn't already get cookie data from other websites monetizing your consent to provide location data or web habits? I see it as mostly a non-issue. Telcos want to board a train that is already at the next station.

Enough with facebook. Not everyone uses it, and they don't have my data. So you continue to present this as an issue, and it's not applicable. It's a foolish comparison. It literally is not the same thing. If you continue to do this, I can only assume you have no education of technology...specifically what the Internet is.

 

[bshole]

Besides, Facebook makes on average $13 per user in the USA. I do not see how telecoms would be able to even manage using what data they are able to obtain, package it for advertisers, and reliably sell it to even make a profit. They have a much smaller user base than Facebook so I just am not sure the economy is there.

ROFLMFAO!!! You may not be able to figure it out but the telecoms SURE THE FU CK did! Why do you think they paid off every single frigging Republican to vote for this monstrosity? A piece of filth that is supported by only 6% of the population (including you apparently). You may not mind your ISP storing every keystroke you have ever made on their own hard drives for eternity, the vast majority of Americans do.

 

[momeNt]

Easy, they see everything over the wire. Your DNS requests, your streaming traffic, anything from you. They can harvest far more than anyone else. And, you can't stop it outside of a VPN, which not all online services allow. They are not a service on the internet, it's not a cookie I can block. Even if I choose a different DNS server, the traffic still has to and from stamps after the hostname is resolved.

Facebook pales in comparison to what this means for the consumer.

They can sell your history, at a base level, and you can't opt out.

Opting out of the Internet is not the option anyone in the USA is willingly going to accept.

Opt out of a service running on the Internet, not a problem, do it everyday.



Enough with facebook. Not everyone uses it, and they don't have my data. So you continue to present this as an issue, and it's not applicable. It's a foolish comparison. It literally is not the same thing. If you continue to do this, I can only assume you have no education of technology...specifically what the Internet is.

That's what they see, not how they'll be able to monetize it. A VPN is opting out.

 

[momeNt]

ROFLMFAO!!! You may not be able to figure it out but the telecoms SURE THE FU CK did! Why do you think they paid off every single frigging Republican to vote for this monstrosity? A piece of filth that is supported by only 6% of the population (including you apparently). You may not mind your ISP storing every keystroke you have ever made on their own hard drives for eternity, the vast majority of Americans do.

I'm only happy about this because it puts the responsibility of privacy back into our hands. It provides a much needed sense of distrust in the relationship between government and the people that has been severely lacking by conservatives and liberals alike.

 

[ch33zw1z]

That's what they see, not how they'll be able to monetize it. A VPN is opting out.

They monetize it by selling your history to anyone.

A vpn doesn't opt you out, as not all services online allow the proxy.

Not only do you already pay top dollar for Internet access, now ISP's have the official green light to make more money off you.

And it won't stop there. As they beef up their storage systems to maintain this harvested data, that cost will again be passed along to the consumer.

Good job not talking about Facebook this time.

 

[momeNt]

They monetize it by selling your history to anyone.

A vpn doesn't opt you out, as not all services online allow the proxy.

Not only do you already pay top dollar for Internet access, now ISP's have the official green light to make more money off you.

And it won't stop there. As they beef up their storage systems to maintain this harvested data, that cost will again be passed along to the consumer.

Good job not talking about Facebook this time.

First bold - These are services, all services all optional - see : facebook =D

Second bold - Correct, they are going to have to charge more to process, store, and sell the data, because they won't actually be able to make money off of it, because others do it better. Glad you understand that all this is doing is providing them with information that will cost them more to maintain and harvest than it will actually make, so it will cost us more to use their service because we are going to subsidize their money-losing data mining. Makes you wonder, why not just not do it and charge more and make more money? Hmmmm...

 

[bshole]

First bold - These are services, all services all optional - see : facebook =D

Second bold - Correct, they are going to have to charge more to process, store, and sell the data, because they won't actually be able to make money off of it, because others do it better. Glad you understand that all this is doing is providing them with information that will cost them more to maintain and harvest than it will actually make, so it will cost us more to use their service because we are going to subsidize their money-losing data mining. Makes you wonder, why not just not do it and charge more and make more money? Hmmmm...

My god if only the CEO's at these ISP's had access to your mind. They are about to make a huge mistake because they didn't consult you first.

And yes I hope the Republicans burn in hell for this along with the Net Neutrality horror show coming up next. They do the opposite of what 90%+ of America wants in favor of the 1% and their mind slaves eat up it like it they are the ones benefitting...

 

[momeNt]

My god if only the CEO's at these ISP's had access to your mind. They are about to make a huge mistake because they didn't consult you first.

And yes I hope the Republicans burn in hell for his along with the Net Neutrality horror show coming up next. They do the opposite of what 90%+ of America wants in favor of the 1% and there mind slaves eat up it like it they are the ones benefitting...

Many of the CEOs have already pledged they would not do anything with the data.

For the most part I believe that the plan from the start was to remove this rule from the FCC regs, and expand FTC powers to cover telcos. Currently how ad data is handled with Facebook and Google is through the FTC, so telcos exist in a policy gap.

 

[Sonikku]

Many of the CEOs have already pledged they would not do anything with the data.

If you believe that, I think Trump has a wall to sell you.

 

[bshole]

Many of the CEOs have already pledged they would not do anything with the data.

For the most part I believe that the plan from the start was to remove this rule from the FCC regs, and expand FTC powers to cover telcos. Currently how ad data is handled with Facebook and Google is through the FTC, so telcos exist in a policy gap.

Out of curiosity, would you be upset if your neighbor started monitoring your internet usage and sharing it with anybody who would listen? Do you think he would have committed a crime if he engaged in such activity? If so, given that corporations are people, why are they above the law? If not, why don't you believe in privacy rights?

 

[momeNt]

Out of curiosity, would you be upset if your neighbor started monitoring your internet usage and sharing it with anybody who would listen? Do you think he would have committed a crime if he engaged in such activity? If so, given that corporations are people, why are they above the law? If not, why don't you believe in privacy rights?

It would depend entirely on whether or not that was expressly identified in the terms and conditions of his neighborship with me.

 

[ch33zw1z]

First bold - These are services, all services all optional - see : facebook =D

Second bold - Correct, they are going to have to charge more to process, store, and sell the data, because they won't actually be able to make money off of it, because others do it better. Glad you understand that all this is doing is providing them with information that will cost them more to maintain and harvest than it will actually make, so it will cost us more to use their service because we are going to subsidize their money-losing data mining. Makes you wonder, why not just not do it and charge more and make more money? Hmmmm...

See, I knew you could decipher between ISP's and services.

But you negate your own point. VPN is opting out, until you can't opt out.

So what do you do now? Cancel that paid service (unlike FB, where you're the product being sold) or opt in by default and now....you're again the product being sold...by default.

Now the ISP has taken a preferred treatment role simply by being the ISP

VPN != opting out, as you would like to believe

And if you think for a minute that ISPs will lose money on this deal, then go back over the thread. Not a chance.

 

[ch33zw1z]

It would depend entirely on whether or not that was expressly identified in the terms and conditions of his neighborship with me.

Well, those rules just changed without your consent.

 

[momeNt]

See, I knew you could decipher between ISP's and services.

But you negate your own point. VPN is opting out, until you can't opt out.

So what do you do now? Cancel that paid service (unlike FB, where you're the product being sold) or opt in by default and now....you're again the product being sold...by default.

Now the ISP has taken a preferred treatment role simply by being the ISP

VPN != opting out, as you would like to believe

And if you think for a minute that ISPs will lose money on this deal, then go back over the thread. Not a chance.

I'm really questioning how on one hand you think they will begin charging people to handle and process the data, and on another hand, that they'll be able to make money off the deal. All they would have to do is simply charge and not touch any of the data if that was the case. Basically you are saying that a business model is viable if the cost of the good being sold is worth more than the sale price. Why would they want to do that? Or do you not believe that they will charge you to handle the data because it must be worth it to not charge for it if they were expecting to sell it for a profit.

 

[bshole]

Actually the ISPs should charge a $10 monthly fee to not store any of your data or spy on you. I would pay it.

 

[ch33zw1z]

I'm really questioning how on one hand you think they will begin charging people to handle and process the data, and on another hand, that they'll be able to make money off the deal.

Are you looking for an itemized section of the bill specifying what they're using your monthly payment for? Don't hold your breath.

All they would have to do is simply charge and not touch any of the data if that was the case.

Why would they not touch the data? It's essentially pure profit for them, minus the cost of data storage.

Basically you are saying that a business model is viable if the cost of the good being sold is worth more than the sale price.

Nobody has said that. There's already a business model for ISP's, and it's making them plenty of money. Allowing ISP's to sell customers web history is a lucrative side gig.

Why would they want to do that? Or do you not believe that they will charge you to handle the data because it must be worth it to not charge for it if they were expecting to sell it for a profit.

For anything they need to process and store the data, the costs will absolutely be placed on the consumer. Ask yourself this, and assume your subscribed services haven't changed, has your Telco bill ever gone down? Mine sure hasn't.

Corporations (aka people) will not eat the costs of anything, consumers will.

Welcome to corporate America, where the corporate entity reigns supreme.

 

[ch33zw1z]

Actually the ISPs should charge a $10 monthly fee to not store any of your data or spy on you. I would pay it.

They can reduce Internet bill by 90% and do whatever they want with my web history. We all have a price