You also have options with which ISP you use. If none of them will offer not to whore you out for data you also have the option to not use it at all.
Sci/Tech Senate Votes to Reverse FCC Consumer Internet Privacy Rules
- Thread starter Freeloading Rusty
- Start date
-
- Tags
- internet
Americans will not have an option to use an ISP who does not whore them out.
Hence my point, you have no choice to use an ISP provide who doesnt track and sell your shit under the changed rules.
Your only option is to opt out of using the internet, which is unrealistic.
I guess we have to agree to disagree on this one cuz we keep going back and forth covering the same points over and over again.
As @Splinty has pointed out your option will be reduced bill with whoring, regular bill without.
Serious question, why is not using the internet unrealistic?
Im not so sure about that.
The commissioners of the FTC and FCC are worried about your online privacy
Because everything is on the internet now from banking to govt tax returns to bills to interacting with your public officials.
Good luck finding or applying for a job if you dont use the internet.
The internet isn't a prerequisite for any of those things. Not even a little.
Really?
Good luck living your life without internet access.
Let us know how that goes for you.... via snail mail.
I've never applied for a job online. Most managers I've met appreciate when someone shows the initiative involved in physically going to meet a perspective employer. If I'm writing a member of provincial or federal parliament I will email, but I can tell you unequivocally that snail mail is more likely to be read by the actual recipient than an email. It's also free outside of the envelope and the paper. Banking? I still do most of my banking that way.
Lol @ anyone who's concerned about privacy filing their tax returns online.
I think applying for jobs in person, unless its a trade job or entry level job, is becoming a thing of the past. I work for an agency that provides employment counselling and can tell you with certainty, most job applications are now done online. Want a govt job, good luck finding someone to hand your resume into and when you do, they will turn you away and tell you to apply online via their job posting / website.
Many smaller communities across Canada dont have access to physical banks with tellers. A large percentage of Canadians have to do their banking online.
How about finding out any information, do you still pull out your phone book when looking up a business or address? Do you still pull out a map when looking for directions?
How about acquiring credit and a credit card? If you have access to a bank, guess what, they go online to set it up with the credit card company. How do you view your bills? Do you go down to the bank machine every time?
Just keeping in contact with people, you would be awfully isolated if you only has snail mail to keep in contact with anyone living outside your city.
How do you submit claims for things like health or dental benefits?
How do you pursue post secondary education?
They have Service Canada offices where jobs are posted among other things. Government jobs were never the type of thing you applied for off the street.
"Any information" is pretty expansive. Phone calls typically yield the easiest and most accurate results when obtaining information.
Good for them?
They show up in my mailbox about a month before they're due.
Sometimes I pay them online out of convenience. I didn't bank online at all until about 2 years ago.
or I could call or text them.
In the case of dental, the dentist submits them. I've never had to submit health benefits.
Well, when you're I was in high school you filled out the paperwork with your "guidance" councilor. Failing that you could go to the institutions office or if they're to far to physically go to them, you could mail it.
I'm not suggesting life isn't easier with the internet, but it's in no way the necessity we're told it is.
Buddy of mine applied to a job at Deutsche Bahn just yesterday, helped him a little.
Anyhow, its not even possible per e-mail anymore, they have an own career-system.
He had to register an account, fill in his info, skills, education, regions etc., search the job he wanted to apply for in the first place, and then was able to upload some documents into it and finally start the process.
Good luck trying to find anyone there who would not laugh at you if you try giving them an offline application.
There is no doubt that the internet has already become a necessity for even a normal modern life. Which is actually reflected in our laws since a while already, maybe not in yours, dunno.
Anyhow, its not even possible per e-mail anymore, they have an own career-system.
He had to register an account, fill in his info, skills, education, regions etc., search the job he wanted to apply for in the first place, and then was able to upload some documents into it and finally start the process.
Good luck trying to find anyone there who would not laugh at you if you try giving them an offline application.
There is no doubt that the internet has already become a necessity for even a normal modern life. Which is actually reflected in our laws since a while already, maybe not in yours, dunno.
I think people who support the republitards who passed this bill should be the ones who have to live under the rule of this bill.
For now, the rest of us should use Comcast, Verizon & AT&T:
Comcast, Verizon, AT&T will not sell internet browsing history despite repeal of privacy laws
For now, the rest of us should use Comcast, Verizon & AT&T:
Comcast, Verizon, AT&T will not sell internet browsing history despite repeal of privacy laws
You must spend a lot of time in line at the post office.
I would assume most people would rather not have to do all that extra work just to avoid using the internet.
I only really go to the post office for things like parcel pickup/drop off or for forms that are federally required to be sent by mail. Lines are short and the staff is extremely pleasant. There's something to be said for human interaction and community employment.
This is an alarming post.
Around 2011 when posters would make threads regarding NSA Spying and Big Brother watching, threads were met with the old "its a conspiracy" image.
Now today posters simply say...yeah so? I have nothing to hide ...
The populace have become docile and accepted the Orwellian state of affairs.....
Terrible...just terrible.
I agree with you 100%. Trying to be funny I suppose. Read an article in the paper today (one of the last few who reads em) about people in Sweden (hipsters) gleefully taking a computer chip in their fingernail. That was nutty conspiracy minded stuff years ago. People are sheep. If taking a little chip will get you through security lines in airports, stadiums, stores etc. it ain't gonna be hard to convince people especially when you got the celebs doing it. Sad state of affairs.
Lots of interesting perspectives on this thread and I'm heartened to hear many of them. As I've chronicled elsewhere, this is one of my particular research interests. So, a couple points:
1) The internet is not a total necessity in some walks of life, as
@JohnyHendricksBeard accurately points out, but it is getting increasingly difficult to manage and within the next 5-10 years, in most of North America at least it will likely be a near impossibility to navigate modern society without web access. This is very much by design as the tech industry has successfully ingratiated itself into every other industry on earth and is still aggressively pushing its agenda of datafication and informationalism on every corner of public and private life.
2) As
@MC Gusto says, allowing ISPs access to this data is a bit more dangerous because they collect much more information than a single browser or other online service reliably can even as it tracks you across multiple platforms. Add to this the lack of choice many communities have and there is no real market mechnism to avoid giving away wholesale hyper-precise data. Precision here is key. There is information other products and services collect on you to make inferences that may be valuable for serving you advertising, but ISPs have thousands of data points on you that have disquieting implications for how you can be targeted. Something to consider is how networked objects in the internet of things will feed information through your ISP to make it so you are never truly unmonitored. It was these and other fears that sparked the Obama era FCC rules in the first place.
3) Regarding the FCC vs FTC debate, @Splinty has framed some of the hysteria well. There is absolutely a "Trump and GOP destroy internet privacy" narrative in place around this issue when really what's happening is a return to a prior status quo that wasn't even upended that long ago. The Obama administration's move was largely anticipatory. The GOP's position has basically been that this regulation is unneeded and on top of that they want to curb the powers of the FCC which were expanded somewhat in the wake of the net neutrality fight. This is sort of giving one back to the ISPs who lost out big during that battle. Digital content publishers successfully convinced the public that their freedom was at stake when essentially ISPs wanted financial concessions from big tech to help support the expansion and upgrading of infrastructure. This move sidesteps the politically influential tech companies and allows telecoms to find alternative revenue schemes, i.e. data selling, essentially getting them into the same game many other tech companies are already in. The FTC will ultimately determine whether they overstep their bounds, but they are a bit less nimble than the FCC.
4) Your data is being shared nearly everywhere you go online, either via your ISP, your mobile device, your browser, various cookies on sites you've visited or apps and files you've downloaded. Everyone sort of knows this and unfortunately as
@Enock said, there's a sense of resignation toward it. Once upon a time it was conspiratorial to think you were being so carefully monitored, but in the wake of the NSA revelations and other findings, it seems many believe it's just a sad condition of the post-9/11 world where surveillance equals safety. Worse still, people believe in the tradeoff fallacy where getting discounts on goods or services is worth a little monitoring and besides, what do you have to hide? Besides the troubling implications that line of thinking has for notions privacy and subjectivity, the thing that is most worrisome is that there this data collection and sale represents one of the greatest wealth redistributions in human history. The currency generated through this click economy has created most of the current richest companies and individuals in the world. What they are profiting off of is us; our lives, likes, habits, and preferences. For free market disciples, this aspect of our selves should be our property. And if it is, we should be able to barter it as we please. Discounts on our service may be one such exchange, but there should be plenty of others. For the more communitarian minded, the collective intelligence that's being mined should come with accompanying social responsibility reinvestments from the companies mining our data. Token corporate giving may be insufficient. Regardless of which ideology you subscribe to, there is room for policy reform around who owns our data, how it's used and what its value is. We feel resignation because we think there's nothing we can do, but this system was deliberately created. It didn't come into being organically.
5) Do not trust any company that says they will not profit off of this system if they legally can. They will betray you.
1) The internet is not a total necessity in some walks of life, as
@JohnyHendricksBeard accurately points out, but it is getting increasingly difficult to manage and within the next 5-10 years, in most of North America at least it will likely be a near impossibility to navigate modern society without web access. This is very much by design as the tech industry has successfully ingratiated itself into every other industry on earth and is still aggressively pushing its agenda of datafication and informationalism on every corner of public and private life.2) As
@MC Gusto says, allowing ISPs access to this data is a bit more dangerous because they collect much more information than a single browser or other online service reliably can even as it tracks you across multiple platforms. Add to this the lack of choice many communities have and there is no real market mechnism to avoid giving away wholesale hyper-precise data. Precision here is key. There is information other products and services collect on you to make inferences that may be valuable for serving you advertising, but ISPs have thousands of data points on you that have disquieting implications for how you can be targeted. Something to consider is how networked objects in the internet of things will feed information through your ISP to make it so you are never truly unmonitored. It was these and other fears that sparked the Obama era FCC rules in the first place.3) Regarding the FCC vs FTC debate, @Splinty has framed some of the hysteria well. There is absolutely a "Trump and GOP destroy internet privacy" narrative in place around this issue when really what's happening is a return to a prior status quo that wasn't even upended that long ago. The Obama administration's move was largely anticipatory. The GOP's position has basically been that this regulation is unneeded and on top of that they want to curb the powers of the FCC which were expanded somewhat in the wake of the net neutrality fight. This is sort of giving one back to the ISPs who lost out big during that battle. Digital content publishers successfully convinced the public that their freedom was at stake when essentially ISPs wanted financial concessions from big tech to help support the expansion and upgrading of infrastructure. This move sidesteps the politically influential tech companies and allows telecoms to find alternative revenue schemes, i.e. data selling, essentially getting them into the same game many other tech companies are already in. The FTC will ultimately determine whether they overstep their bounds, but they are a bit less nimble than the FCC.
4) Your data is being shared nearly everywhere you go online, either via your ISP, your mobile device, your browser, various cookies on sites you've visited or apps and files you've downloaded. Everyone sort of knows this and unfortunately as
@Enock said, there's a sense of resignation toward it. Once upon a time it was conspiratorial to think you were being so carefully monitored, but in the wake of the NSA revelations and other findings, it seems many believe it's just a sad condition of the post-9/11 world where surveillance equals safety. Worse still, people believe in the tradeoff fallacy where getting discounts on goods or services is worth a little monitoring and besides, what do you have to hide? Besides the troubling implications that line of thinking has for notions privacy and subjectivity, the thing that is most worrisome is that there this data collection and sale represents one of the greatest wealth redistributions in human history. The currency generated through this click economy has created most of the current richest companies and individuals in the world. What they are profiting off of is us; our lives, likes, habits, and preferences. For free market disciples, this aspect of our selves should be our property. And if it is, we should be able to barter it as we please. Discounts on our service may be one such exchange, but there should be plenty of others. For the more communitarian minded, the collective intelligence that's being mined should come with accompanying social responsibility reinvestments from the companies mining our data. Token corporate giving may be insufficient. Regardless of which ideology you subscribe to, there is room for policy reform around who owns our data, how it's used and what its value is. We feel resignation because we think there's nothing we can do, but this system was deliberately created. It didn't come into being organically. 5) Do not trust any company that says they will not profit off of this system if they legally can. They will betray you.
Wow, great post - well thought out.Lots of interesting perspectives on this thread and I'm heartened to hear many of them. As I've chronicled elsewhere, this is one of my particular research interests. So, a couple points:
1) The internet is not a total necessity in some walks of life, as
2) As
3) Regarding the FCC vs FTC debate, @Splinty has framed some of the hysteria well. There is absolutely a "Trump and GOP destroy internet privacy" narrative in place around this issue when really what's happening is a return to a prior status quo that wasn't even upended that long ago. The Obama administration's move was largely anticipatory. The GOP's position has basically been that this regulation is unneeded and on top of that they want to curb the powers of the FCC which were expanded somewhat in the wake of the net neutrality fight. This is sort of giving one back to the ISPs who lost out big during that battle. Digital content publishers successfully convinced the public that their freedom was at stake when essentially ISPs wanted financial concessions from big tech to help support the expansion and upgrading of infrastructure. This move sidesteps the politically influential tech companies and allows telecoms to find alternative revenue schemes, i.e. data selling, essentially getting them into the same game many other tech companies are already in. The FTC will ultimately determine whether they overstep their bounds, but they are a bit less nimble than the FCC.
4) Your data is being shared nearly everywhere you go online, either via your ISP, your mobile device, your browser, various cookies on sites you've visited or apps and files you've downloaded. Everyone sort of knows this and unfortunately as
5) Do not trust any company that says they will not profit off of this system if they legally can. They will betray you.
For the WIN.Lots of interesting perspectives on this thread and I'm heartened to hear many of them. As I've chronicled elsewhere, this is one of my particular research interests. So, a couple points:
1) The internet is not a total necessity in some walks of life, as
2) As
3) Regarding the FCC vs FTC debate, @Splinty has framed some of the hysteria well. There is absolutely a "Trump and GOP destroy internet privacy" narrative in place around this issue when really what's happening is a return to a prior status quo that wasn't even upended that long ago. The Obama administration's move was largely anticipatory. The GOP's position has basically been that this regulation is unneeded and on top of that they want to curb the powers of the FCC which were expanded somewhat in the wake of the net neutrality fight. This is sort of giving one back to the ISPs who lost out big during that battle. Digital content publishers successfully convinced the public that their freedom was at stake when essentially ISPs wanted financial concessions from big tech to help support the expansion and upgrading of infrastructure. This move sidesteps the politically influential tech companies and allows telecoms to find alternative revenue schemes, i.e. data selling, essentially getting them into the same game many other tech companies are already in. The FTC will ultimately determine whether they overstep their bounds, but they are a bit less nimble than the FCC.
4) Your data is being shared nearly everywhere you go online, either via your ISP, your mobile device, your browser, various cookies on sites you've visited or apps and files you've downloaded. Everyone sort of knows this and unfortunately as
5) Do not trust any company that says they will not profit off of this system if they legally can. They will betray you.
Comcast wants to control what you do online. Do you want to let them?
This could be your last chance to stop ISPs from messing up your Internet.
This could be your last chance to stop ISPs from messing up your Internet.