Sci/Tech Senate Votes to Reverse FCC Consumer Internet Privacy Rules
- Thread starter Freeloading Rusty
- Start date
-
- Tags
- internet
D
Deleted member 1
Guest
For any criticism of the law, I don't that's an accurate one.
The GOP is purely moving government OUT of the way on this one. Like that or not? I think that's a good argument to have between us.
But currently government allows some entities to track you and sell your info, but makes it illegal for others to do so.
This is purely a move of government out of the way and letting business and consumers interact however they end up doing in the flux of the market.
So you support this move?
D
Deleted member 1
Guest
I just said I think its a fair argument to have.
But I don't think framing it as GOP adding government into your internet is accurate
Does ISP's currently have a right to sell your personal information? Well now that the GOP has stepped in they might. Seems like the govt is stepping in to provide big business with rights over its citizens to me.
Makes me glad to be Canadian, I dont need my insurance companies or potential employers having possible access to all the unhealthy and dirty things I do on the internet
D
Deleted member 1
Guest
The default is that the information is available and owned by the ISP... who currently cannot do anything with it. ISPs would like to aggregate that data and sell trends to marketers like Facebook or Google currently does.
In the past, AT&T looked at opt-in options where you could get a discount on your internet bill if you allowed this data to be used to give targeted marketing. That is, instead of googles ad network showing up, you would see AT&Ts ad network. This is the end goal. They want a piece of the game that Google and Facebook have a de facto duopoly on for much of the internet population.
I
The FCC (government) banned ISPs doing this. The GOP is moving the FCC rules out of the way.
It has been argued that the FCC rules don't actually protect consumers, but simply choose winners in the market place by allowing some to do this through cookies and other tracking mechanisms but bans ISPs from doing it via their own logs.
How is that the current default if the GOP has to change the law to allow it?
Good for companies like Google who do similar. People choose to use Google knowing they do this. Lots of people do not have a choice about which service provider to use as their often is only one choice in many rural parts. Difference being, one consumer choses to use a product that they know sells their information, the other consumer has no choice on if they use an ISP who sells their info.
What good does allowing ISP's to sell customers personal data do for the American people?
D
Deleted member 1
Guest
The technical and historical default. The FCC move occurred in Oct 2016.
How is not the default if the FCC had to change the rules 2 weeks before the election?
D
Deleted member 1
Guest
Who knows.
What good does it do to allow Google to sell customers personal data or be protected from competition?
The push by the administration and current FCC is that the Federal Trade Commission has the authority and oversight to manage this issue in a consumer protection manner.
So we'll see what the FTC does. They are the ones responsible for antitrust moves and I would submit a much more appropriate venue for consumer protection moves than the FCC, an organization that is supposed to be managing spectrum and standards.
D
Deleted member 1
Guest
So here is the FTC position that will presumably govern ISP data:
https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/do...ommunications-commission/160527fcccomment.pdf
https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/public_statements/951923/160527fccohlhausenstmt1.pdf
Highly sensitive data like the financial, health, detailed geo location data all requires an opt-in. This is not changed before or after the FCC move last October.
Other information is an opt-out. This is the same as it was until October 2016. Then FCC rules came in. Now we are back to October 2016 in policy on this.
So write the FTC for what you want, but I just don't see the panic that is being put on display all over the blogosphere.
https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/do...ommunications-commission/160527fcccomment.pdf
https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/public_statements/951923/160527fccohlhausenstmt1.pdf
Highly sensitive data like the financial, health, detailed geo location data all requires an opt-in. This is not changed before or after the FCC move last October.
Other information is an opt-out. This is the same as it was until October 2016. Then FCC rules came in. Now we are back to October 2016 in policy on this.
So write the FTC for what you want, but I just don't see the panic that is being put on display all over the blogosphere.
Consumers have the choice to decide to use Google or not.
Often, consumers don't have a choice of ISP service providers or an option to select one who will not sell your personal info.
Apples and oranges.
Didn't Trump and co. just slash all the consumer protection laws?
Last edited:
Yep. Just looking out for his business dealings post-impeachment.
D
Deleted member 1
Guest
The Federal trade commission that will be overseeing this going forward supports an opt-out option.
The FCC rule made it such that AT&T cannot offer you a cheaper internet service in exchange for more targeted advertising or letting your day to be aggregated to sell to marketers.
When reading the data from the Federal Trade Commission consumers have consistently responded that they are more interested in low price Broadband than they are privacy with that broadband. If that is the case, then it makes sense to provide an Marketplace action in which users can choose to get those lower prices in exchange for not opting out.
In a world in which only a handful of companies owned by media conglomerates run all of the ad Networks you do not have a choice. You are tracked and marketed to and data aggregated by the same people no matter which service you start at.
Yes. There are no more consumer protection laws in the United States. They all went away.
Everyone has access to a choice where their personal details are not sold?
This is simply a case of those choosing cheaper internet are agreeing to their data being sold off?
If that's true, I don't see it as big of deal.
Again, apples and oranges. Two totally separate products.
Google is a product people choose to consume knowing they track and sell your information. People can choose to use other internet search engines and email products which do not track and sell your information. Google is a free service in exchange for your data.
This is much different than an ISP provider who may be your sole access to the internet.
Come on now you act like you guys have all this protection after your govt just chose to shit all over your privacy. Just like your environmental protection laws will protect your health and clean drinking water. Keep the faith!
D
Deleted member 1
Guest
First off, nothing has changed at all.
The internet was a certain way on October 2016.
In response to AT&T and others adding an opt-in option for cheaper net for advertisement data sharing...
2 weeks before the election the FCC moved to and banned this practice.
That banning of this practice was to roll out this month but not really fully online until later in 2017.
The GOP simply got rid of these new FCC rules.
The FCC then released a statement (the FCC head was already a dissenting FCC official from the above) and acknowledge the FTC's role in this venue, that it was an overreach of the scope of the FCC.
The FTC has not made rules on this beyond their position papers...because the FCC was tasked with this under the Obama admin, so why would they.
However, prior to October, there was no wild-west abuses that keep being mentioned in the blogosphere. Presumably, because consumers will flip their shit if they aren't getting something in the trade of their data...aggregated or not. At&t knew this and offered an opt-in for lower prices...the government banned that practice. But that practice will probably be back.
In an optimistic viewpoint, if anyone has half a brain in the Washington, they will recognize the job-killing force that is monopolies and duopolies.
If an ISP gains an unfair advantage over both internet access as well targeted advertisement, you will have a strong position to move on anti-trust laws.
So if things got worse...they'd probably actually get better. Versus the current stalemate where the FCC (the same one above that made the privacy rules) has failed completely to give consumer choice.
D
Deleted member 1
Guest
Was our government shitting all over our privacy yesterday?
Last October 2016?
Nothing has changed with respect to my internet data today or yesterday.
In Canada you have an opt-in system and I'd venture this is couched in legalize on an ISPs splash screen:
No, your Canadian internet service provider can't sell your information as in the U.S.
And your metadata is completely open, which is plenty enough for marketers and identification.
The FTC promotes an opt-out system with clear consumer notice. Different tactic, but seems just like Amazon Kindle that has relevant ads and a big button that says pay here to make them go away...or keep using your cheap kindle model.
In the end, this is just an evolution of the market place and will likely eventually open up the avenues
@Kneeblock has mentioned before in the click economy.
D
Deleted member 1
Guest
@KneeblockAdded you after edit -- How do you see ISPs opt-in/opt-out options in relation to the click economy?
If at&t is providing a cheaper product for your internet movement, is that adequate? Or is it just the rudimentary beginning of the content economy you have described before?
I received two letters today from companies that I have accounts with explaining this and giving me a number to call to opt out.
Nothing has changed yet you mean. And when approved it will.
Currently ISPs cant sell your data, once this law is dismantled by the Republicans, they can.
There will be a marked difference between say Nov 2016 and May 2017 in regards to your privacy.
Americans were provided extra privacy rights last year and they are now being taken away, in order to appease big business. Permission to use your personal informaiton will now be assumed instead of asked for.
D
Deleted member 1
Guest
No I mean, really nothing has changed.
Some rules were going to roll out but they hadn't yet. They just won't roll out now.
Transparency in opting out would be fine with you as above. And that's just what the FTC proposes. Why don't we wait for any level of abuse first instead of hypotheticals. The only move in this direction so far was a transparent opt-in by At&T (which you said you would be okay with) and the FCC banned that.
I would argue that if the FTC had been tasked with this process, instead of the FCC, we wouldn't be having this conversation in the first place and that is simply an opinion on ones expectations of various governmental arms.
I'd also argue that if the FCC hadn't over reached the GOP wouldn't have found allies. Forcing opt-in models only probably would have appeased both sides. But still, why is the FCC managing this?
#MAGA
Do you think any American citizens support this 'change'?
Well I guess we can look at it this way, at least congress has actually done something now.
Do you think any American citizens support this 'change'?
Well I guess we can look at it this way, at least congress has actually done something now.
D
Deleted member 1
Guest
If the FTC moves to implement the rules of their public position paper, I support it.
Banning the ability for consumers to negotiate their data as a currency is short sighted and heavy handed.
The FCC should manage spectrum and standards.
Consumer protections should be managed under more appropriate venues like the FTC.
I would also support a stronger anti-trust crack down if you see the ad networks getting unfair market share (like facebook's current status). The market works...when you have competition. It fails with consolidated market options.
I don't think it's fair to say that the average person understands the extent to which Google data mines. Kind of like how when people buy a fitbit they don't realize that the info it gathers is sold off. Fitbits are actually really, really messed up. That's another thread though.
The thing about Google, Amazon, Facebook using these tactics is that if you think about it and really break it down.....
You will see that Google, Amazon, Facebook ect, are all really just simple websites! (Massive in scale) but still just a simple website on a vast vast ocean of potential known as the Internet. But nobody forces anyone to visit these sites. People freely choose to visit these sites despite many many other options out there that are way less pervasive.
With Google, Amazon, Facebook ect, they all list exactly what they plan on doing with your information in the TOS (Terms Of Service) Agreement, ....you know that part when you sign up for something, skip all the fine print and hit "Accept"...at least thats what most people do.
I'd say 95% of users on the net do not even take the time to read what rights they are giving up when signing up for these "Simple Website" services, this goes along with Apps downloaded to electronic devices.
The user always had the option to visit those websites like Google, Facebook, Amazon, Twitter...ect....they were given a choice to visit those sites and use their services and they were also given the option to either "Accept" or "Reject" the TOS laid out in order for them to use those services....the user always had a choice!
But now...they just took the "Big Brother" shit to a whole new level!
Allowing ISP full access just opened up a Pandoras box of users getting fucked in the ass....and trust me...many will be getting fucked in the ass in the coming years ....
I don't know about you?....but I don't like getting fucked in the Ass.
Last edited:
let me get this straight-- big brother is real?