I don't see any conceivable benefit to this.
Compared to, say the EPA regs rollback, where the justification is supposedly coal jobs, there doesn't seem to be even any attempt at spinning this as having a positive benefit to the public.
Genuinely curious if anyone out there supports this.
They are eliminating one of those midnight regulations put out by the Obama administration in December after the election but before he left office. In theory, I don't have a problem with requiring ISPs to let you opt in or opt out. I think it should also be required of the Googles and Facebooks of the world. But in general I don't care one way or the other unless, for some reason, the sale of my info results in identity theft.
Link: http://nymag.com/selectall/2017/03/why-congress-is-dismantling-the-fccs-internet-privacy-rules.html
And fully understand it? Your question is overly simplistic.
I'd like an actual response, not the first arrow out of the lazyman's quiver.
if you understand networking, DNS routing, data compilation by search engines, etc.... nothing you do on the internet is secret. A very large majority of all internet traffic is routed through multiple ISPs across the globe. The only way your information is secure while online is through encrypted connections (sites that begin with https:// instead of just http://). Open up the command prompt on your computer (type cmd in the "RUN/Search" box and hit enter). In the black window that opens up, type tracert www.google.com and watch the list scroll of all of the internet switches and routers that your PC goes through just to get to the google.com search engine. All of those switches know the IP address of your home router and what the destination address is that you are going to. On top of that, your PC is capturing a lot of things you are doing online every day and storing them in cookies that your browser communicates with websites concerning your browsing habits... this has nothing to do with your ISP, it is Internet Explorer or whatever other browser you use. That is why you can search for a pair of running shoes on google.com and when you go to amazon.com all of the sudden those shoes you searched for on google are now in an advertisement on Amazon. If you don't want your ISP to know what you are doing, take precautions on your own... there are multiple things you can do. First off, change the DNS server settings on either your router or the device you are working on... there are a bunch of them to pick from. OpenDNS is a good one and is free, plus it gives you the added security of limiting access to specific categories of sites to protect your kids. That change alone will at least limit the amount of DNS lookups that your specific ISP gets when you are online.
i haven't read the entire bill, but it honestly doesn't bother me in the least that it is repealed. Just more meaningless regulation that a political party is trying to use for fear mongering purposes. No ISP in their right mind is going to sell your financial information to a third-party (what financial information do they even have outside of what the service information is that you are paying for)... browsing history, maybe so, but it is already readily available to anyone who wants it honestly unless you are very vigilant in your surfing practices.
I don't use google for search. I don't have a gmail address. I avoid non https sites. You don't have to explain any of that to me. I'm using a VPN right now.
To make an analogy, if the phone company was wiretapping everybody and used voice software to look for keywords and then targeted ads at us, people would be going insane. This is very similar, but hardly anyone is educated on these issues.
Here's a lesson for everybody: when services (Google, Facebook) are free, you are the product.
Honestly, I am glad that you at a minimum appear to be educated on internet security. Without the overarching talking point privacy in general, what are the specific concerns that you feel ISPs will be allowed to do? What data of your's do you think they are going to sell? You can't possibly believe they would attempt to capture phone/email conversations and sell the contents of those discussions with third-parties. There are a whole lot of lawyers that would be ready and willing to take those cases.
I think ISPs are going to monetize browsing history. I don't think it's right or fair that someone I can't choose not to use can do that. I think citizens should have privacy rights and should be allowed to opt out (use google if you like, I won't), but shouldn't be forced to.
I don't think they will use email content, but you can learn a lot about a person by search and browser history.
The crazy thing to me is that all the self-proclaimed libertarians in Congress supported this privacy invasion. I doubt that many of them even understood it. At least I hope they didn't, even if I wish they had.
Where is the advantage for companies that wasn't there before?
needed?
The question should be "Why is the regulation needed?" There should be a burden of proof that their is benefit. What are the true concerns for those of you that are looking to just bash whatever the opposition says/does?
(no message)
(no message)
and you don't see a difference between google, which I can choose not to visit, and AT&T, which I might be forced to use for internet service, depending on my geography?
(no message)
(no message)
in your post. So, they want to you can do same thing at ISP market as you did on internet market with Google/Facebook...
Here's a quick explanation:
- People do "opt in" to giving search history and other private information to Google and Facebook (and some other sites) simply by using those sites. However, it is pretty easy to simply NOT USE those sites and avoid the problem. Use search engines that don't collect and sell search data (ixquick.com is a good one, and there are others).
- Many, many people in this country do not "opt in" to giving internet browsing history to their internet service provider, because they only have the option of 1 internet service provider and, even if you have multiple options, probably all of them are going to sell your data now. Common options for internet service are Verizon FIOS, AT&T, Comcast/Xfinity and Spectrum/Time Warner. All of those supported this bill and will rely on the repeal of the law to sell the information about the sites you visit to advertisers, marketing companies and God knows who else. I'm not sure that any major ISPs will not do this.
- You then have 2 options to prevent your internet history from being sold: use a virtual private network (which costs money, many people don't understand and slows your connection speeds) or don't use the internet. Is that even realistic in this day and age? Almost certainly not, so you can accept that your data is not private or you can subscribe and use a VPN.
If it's not a big deal, post your last week's browser history, without any editing. I'd love to see it.
targeted from advertising. Did you cancel your gmail because google wiretap email content for advertising? Opting out some features as you mentioned is just a small fraction of Google's whole targeted advertising. The bottom line is, without targeted advertising, Google, Facebook, yahoo...can't survive.
Let's go back to your original issue, you don't mind trading your data with someone, but you want more choices. Just like you don't mind giving your home address for delivery to sellers on Amazon, but you want to see more sellers, not just one seller, therefore you have more choices for purchase. So, let's have fair advertising competition among sellers. So, the issue is about fair competition, not about trading your data with someone.
There seems to be a language barrier happening here.
(no message)
(no message)
since you're a simpleton, I'll try to speak your language.
ISP is the company that puts wires into your house so the internet can work. Google/Facebook are content providers. You can pick/choose what content to access. You often cannot pick who puts the wires into your house. They have monopolies on the infrastructure.
I'm sorry I wasted this amount of time arguing with a guy without an education. Dumbass.
When a question is about what this or that means to you, not what this or that is, you have to answer it with your own understanding. This is the difference between secondary education learning and higher education learning. Otherwise, you just sound like her, a pseudo community college graduate. LOL.
A little bit background: From very beginning, FCC classified ISP as information service which is subject to less regulation. We saw a booming business, broadband service on almost every home. Obama's FCC, however in last year, changed ISP as public utility which is subjected to much tougher regulation. This is part of Obama's scheme of net neutrality which is based on communist style egalitarianism (I think the topic was discussed on this board too). Anyway, that's all you need to know. I know you can't take too much. If there is misunderstanding between us, that's because we're not at same level in term of knowledge and education. I can't bring you up and you can't drag me down.
(no message)
Every town/home has at least one Telecom company of some form that provides an internet service. Additionally, if you have cellular coverage, your possibilities expand exponentially. I live in a small town and have at least five different providers to pick from and #'s 6 and 7 are within 1/4 mile of my house.
and what part of the country do you like in that has 5 ISPs to choose from? I have 2 and I live in a major suburb of a largish metro area.
I live in a small town in little ole' Tennessee. We have a pure telephone company that offers DSL, a cable provider that offers TV, phone, and broadband, a second telephone company option that providers telephone and broadband (fiber into the home with digital TV), and at least two nationwide cellular providers that offer complete coverage through the entire area with home-based cellular broadband.
Maybe Tennessee is just too republican and we like competition. :-)
maybe that is the case.
(no message)
But necessary.
Supporters of the repeal said the FCC unfairly required internet service providers like AT&T, Comcast and Verizon to do more to protect customers' privacy than websites like Google or Facebook.
(Wasn't aware of this until your post.)
I can choose not to visit google and facebook, but I can't reasonably choose not to go through my ISPs routers.
Also, google and facebook only know about what you do on google and facebook respectively. Your ISP is capable of knowing everything you do on facebook, google and everywhere else.
(no message)
You realize those assholes elected Trump, right? Fuck 'em!
they suck, they have a monopoly and dont have to try to not suck because I have no fucking choice. But I am sure those idiots will be responsible with my privacy.
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)