The First 100 days

Trump has set this up to avoid getting the blame. He'll bash whomever he has to to protect himself. The reality is that Ryan tried to put together a bill that he thought would appease everybody but ultimately ended up pissing everybody off.

 

Just another corporate victory. From the article:

The Senate measure was introduced two weeks ago by Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) and 23 Republican co-sponsors. Flake said at the time that he is trying to "protect consumers from overreaching Internet regulation." FCC Chairman Ajit Pai argues that consumers would be confused if there are different privacy rules for ISPs than for online companies like Google and Facebook. "American consumers should not have to be lawyers or engineers to figure out if their information is protected," Pai recently told Democratic lawmakers.

Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) argued today that the privacy rules "hurt job creators and stifle economic growth." Cornyn also said the FCC's privacy rulemaking involves the "government picking winners and losers," and was among the "harmful rules and regulations put forward by the Obama administration at the last moment."
​

The Republican spin appears to be they want to restrict regulations (Flake) and boost the economy (Cornyn). I find this to be a disgusting rationalization for sucking up to corporate donors at the expense of privacy.

 

Given I can choose to visit Google or Bing vs. my ISP has my full internet usage the argument that the government is "picking winners and losers" facetious. This would be akin to the government allowing cell phone companies to sell your call log and transcripts to advertisers. Everyone should be calling their congressman over this sh!tty legislation.

 

friggin GOP...MY DATA is MY DATA. If I don't give you explicit permission to share it then hands off.

 

BOSD
If only that were true. But your data is out there for the world to see often in one place;where you were born,highest level of education,where you work How much you make,whhat your credit rating is where you live ,how much your house is worth, where all you have lived,all your phone numbers,if you have had traffic citations or criminal record,who all you might have been married to,all children ,if they have had traffic citations or criminal records the brand name of beer ,the last porn site you visited
All frequently in one place. Most of it for free. Big Brother is bigger than anyone could imagine.
I think the sites we visit are not as big a deal as how these sites can capture so much personal info and put it all in one place.

 

I get it. Not naïve on the subject. Used to be an army intel officer focused on what we referred to as Info Ops (information warfare). That was just a frustrated outcry.

I didn't have a facebook page until 2 months ago and even then I opened a personal page only so I could link a professional page.

I just hate how we are all being sold down the river by the gov't. If individuals choose to opt in so the can the next coupon...so be it. But it should be an explicit opt in requirement.

 

I knew you were just venting . I was just stunned at the depth and detail of every aspect of your life all in one place. And there are so many sites. You can opt out but it would take hours to do and 6 mons later a new site would spring up. Truth finder seems to be one of the newer sites with amazing detail.
Honestly I do know why there is not more identity theft.

 

Today Trump signed 4 more repeal of Obama stuff bills

 

Bloomberg says that 73 million hours and $36 billion were spent in Dodd-Frank paperwork from 2010 through mid-2016

 

Someone is confused about how long Trump has been president

 

Rumor that Senate Rs getting ready to use the nuclear option to confirm Gorsuch

 

The Dems appear to be in a bit of panic mode as the new DNC chair has asked for resignations from all staff

"Democratic National Committee Chairman Tom Perez has launched a major overhaul of the party's organization, which has been stung by recent crises — and the DNC has requested resignation letters from all current staffers....."​

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/ele...asks-all-staffers-resignation-letters-n739676

 

This was my first thought about Trump's most recent EO.

 

Back to that sh!tty bill which is currently sitting on Trump's desk waiting for his signature. You know, the one that gives our ISP's the right to sell all our browsing habits to advertisers without asking us for permission. F Data Privacy, right? Max Temkin, the creator of Cards Against Humanity has this offer. I'd contribute money for this to happen!

 

This is fake news. He's not bringing back Fotomat workers' jobs until he gets Blockbuster employees back to work renting out VHS tapes.

 

More jobs is great news, but why post a picture of DNC headquarters with the announcement?

 

Somebody needs to tell Dab Aggin that using coal won't cause blackouts like relying on the "high tech" industry of wind power does. Australia case in point.

 

No, I don't have any more information than this image. I can't help you.

 

This browser history crap is the kind of thing that tarnishes people's image of the GOP and undermines its agenda. Is this really what blue collar people in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania had in mind when they voted Republican for the first time in 30 years? I doubt it. Most people don't truly want a 100 percent unregulated market, and that includes Republicans. (Before you say, "well, I want no regulation," ask yourself if you support right to work laws. If you do, then you support regulation.) What they want is the elimination of unreasonable and unduly burdensome regulation that imposes major barriers to commerce and isn't supported by a strong cost-benefit analysis.

Protecting people's browser history isn't unreasonable or unduly burdensome. It's quite sensible, and those who are pushing this look like people trying to hustle an easy and risk-free buck at the expense of basic privacy. It reminds me of the few people dumb enough to oppose the do-not-call lists - just very dumb politics. Furthermore, though the porn angle is humorous, it's somewhat of a shame that it is becoming a key part of the debate, because that actually should be the least of our concerns. My browser history may not have porn sites in it, but it does have banking, credit card, mortgage, taxing authorities, and financial services sites in it (not to mention hornfans). Furthermore, some people store their credit card information and passwords in their browser. I don't, but some do. Is that stuff for sale? And for what? So internet providers can make a little cash on the side selling our information to companies that want to hassle us with even more junk mail? And what if these companies sell or allow our information to be given to people with even more nefarious intentions like fraud or identity theft?

Personally, I'm not too worried about this, because Germany would never tolerate it. However, if I move back to the US, I'll probably completely shutdown my financial presence online and pay bills by paper check like it's 1985. Hell, maybe I'll start wearing skinny ties and listening to Def Leppard or Pat Benatar.

 

I guess my issue with this is that from my understanding, all this does is make sure that Google is able to minimize its competition. Just because the ISPs can't do it doesn't mean it's not already being done.

In addition, the question of selling data and the question of bank passwords are two different things. That has nothing to do with the question of selling data. If you don't want bank passwords to be hacked, don't do transactions online. That's not on the ISP or anyone else but you and the company with which you're doing business.

Ultimately not very many people (and I include myself) have a very solid understanding of the relationships between providers, search and digital marketing groups, and what happens on your personal computer. I need to do more research on this myself, but from what I know in working with AdWords, analytics and other platforms, the data people are worried about releasing is already out there. And Google is making a mint on it - do you ever wonder why they were in Obama's back pocket for eight years?? Where do you think his internet policy was coming from?

The data that gets collected and sold to advertisers isn't on an individual basis form the standpoint of someone in an office looking you up and saying "ok, so and so goes to these sites and looks at these videos, etc..." No one looks at big data at that level - even as we personalize our digital experiences more and more. It's done through AI, which is becoming better and better at figuring out what we like based on our online activity, and then matching us with content that will be useful. Can it be creepy? Yep! But anyone who has a smart phone knows how much that data improves their online experience.

 

PH,

Here's the big difference. I can stop Google from acquiring my information and selling it and still use the internet in my home. I can't do that with my ISP. In short, they've got the consumer by the balls a lot more than Google does.

Also, with respect to bank passwords, you're blurring two things that aren't the same thing. It's true that anybody can hack my banking information if they can figure out my password. (I'm not an idiot like John Podesta, so my passwords are damn near impossible to guess, and I don't respond to phishing scams.) However, they still have to figure out where I do my banking (which would be in my browsing history). In addition, like I said, some people store their credit card numbers in their browser. Google Chrome prompts me to do that from time to time. (I always decline.) Is that part of your browsing history? If it is, that's a big deal, and it has nothing to do with hacking your password on your bank's website or your credit card company's website.

 

I can opt in to Google through using their ecosystem (Gmail, Maps, Search). The rule being reversed required the ISP to ask me to opt-in. Now, they don't have to ask me at all thus I have no option of stopping them from selling my data.

For those that care, Google has built a tool that any google user can access to see exactly what they collect and control what you allow them or not allow them to collect. I don't trust Comcast (ISP) or T-Mobile (Wireless provider) to do the same.

 

1. We shouldn't be letting Google or anyone else do it without express opt-in consent. We should pressing for more privacy not less. I actually have a couple of accounts that I have to pay extra to get a paper bill specifically because I don't want to take them online but the provider is trying to make/encourage me to, with extra fees.
2. As mentioned, even if you take the position that it's already happening, there is a huge difference between the monopoly that some ISPs enjoy in some areas and my choice to use Google as a search engine.
3. While this data is not tagged to you by name, it is tagged via cookies and it's not a huge leap to tag it to a person if/when the government ever wanted to.
4. At some point in the not so far off future, IoT (Internet of Things) will be a reality and virtually every device and transaction you have will be through the internet. Your fridge will order all your food/beer/wine. Your medicine cabinet will order your drugs and so forth. Alexa will know that you asked for reservations and directions to the steak house. Do you really want to have companies that far into your business? The only value most citizens get out of it is that the companies and the ISPs are better able to target market. Is that really worth giving up your privacy?
5. Imagine the computing power that will be available in 20 years. Its not what can they do with it TODAY....Its what can they do with it in 10 or 20 years....It's what can a bad guy do with it, when one inevitably breaks into their system?

The only reason to collect this data is that it makes their business models more profitable. That is not a good enough reason in my book.

Again....Friggin GOP.

 

ISP's have it by name. A law enforcement agency can get it now with the appropriate warrant. Assuming the ISP's won't sell it with your private information is a big leap.

The more I look into this, the worse this legislation becomes. We all should be marching on Washington with pitchforks and torches over this pile of dung.

The worst part? They are using the same Congressional reconciliation process used for all other legislation which means that this can't be corrected for years! I will not vote for a single politician that voted for this legislation ever.

 

And ALL of that data goes through your ISP. It's one thing if I configure my fridge to order from Amazon.com or my medicine reorder to go through Drugstore.com. My ISP is the ONLY one that has access to them all.

Comcast and ISP's just won the Internet. No net neutrality and now this???? They've turned their monopoly over the copper into my home into a mega-monopoly.

 

And of course, a private company can get it by simply filling a lawsuit and issuing a subpoena.