|
|
Post by tkasper01 on Mar 30, 2017 5:58:47 GMT -5
You don't transmit bank account info, social security numbers, medical info, etc through YouTube or Facebook or Google. But you do thru your ISP. Bingo. This is terrible in my opinion. Trump, congress and the FCC just fucked us in the ass with no lube. |
|
|
|
Post by DDNYjets on Mar 30, 2017 6:14:16 GMT -5
Seems like all these protections we are worried about losing we never had in the first place. Can't believe Im about to sauce CNN but I figured I would go there for a worst-case spin on this. money.cnn.com/2017/03/29/technology/internet-privacy-outrage/Seems like another Obama land mine. Either way, if everything we are hearing about this is true, I hope Trump would veto. |
|
|
|
Post by Sonny Werblin on Mar 30, 2017 6:43:44 GMT -5
I don't like the fact that Google and Facebook get to do this, and would prefer that no one be able to sell this info without my consent. That said, if Facebook and Google get to do it, all internet companies should be allowed. I'm against monopolies.
|
|
|
|
Post by porgyman on Mar 30, 2017 7:57:49 GMT -5
I don't like the fact that Google and Facebook get to do this, and would prefer that no one be able to sell this info without my consent. That said, if Facebook and Google get to do it, all internet companies should be allowed. I'm against monopolies. Once again, the issue is Facebook and Google don't have access (that I know of) to my SS number and bank account numbers. Verizon FIOS does. Besides, I'd rather not have my bank with knowledge about my visiting the Singapore Squirters site 37 times last month. |
|
|
|
Post by ventesette on Mar 30, 2017 8:05:57 GMT -5
You don't transmit bank account info, social security numbers, medical info, etc through YouTube or Facebook or Google. But you do thru your ISP. Bingo. This is terrible in my opinion. Trump, congress and the FCC just fucked us in the ass with no lube. Did you guys actually read the articles, or just decide "no internet privacy bad!" ? My understanding is that these were new FCC regs to protect our privacy which never went into effect. Congress and Trump overturned the new rules before they went into effect. This isn't a change since the rules didn't go into effect. The FCC made the rules, so I fail to see how they "fucked us in the ass with no lube." Finally, your banking information certainly should be encrypted which should keep your ISP from accessing it. If it's not, maybe bring that up with your bank. President Trump is expected to sign into law a decision by Congress to overturn new privacy rules for Internet service providers. Passed by the Federal Communications Commission in October, the rules never went into effect. If they had, it would have given consumers more control over how ISPs use the data they collect. |
|
|
|
Post by Trades on Mar 30, 2017 8:21:33 GMT -5
This Plus everyone is talking about giving permission but how many of us actually read all the fine print of or even understand every End User License Agreement (EULA)? |
|
|
|
Post by BEAC0NJET on Mar 30, 2017 8:26:00 GMT -5
This is true. Any banking sites, healthcare related sites, etc. should be https URLs, so it should be secure. And yes, they're just reversing something that never went into effect anyway, so its really just status quo? Me, I have this idealistic view of privacy that ISPs should view your browsing history and data like the post office does - they deliver the packets but don't look at the content. Probably not realistic in any way, I realize... |
|
|
|
Post by Trades on Mar 30, 2017 8:29:24 GMT -5
If you are that worried use a VPN.
|
|
|
|
Post by porgyman on Mar 30, 2017 8:36:12 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Trades on Mar 30, 2017 8:36:58 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by tkasper01 on Mar 30, 2017 8:49:18 GMT -5
You are correct. But they had been slated to kick in and now never will. That is fucking bad no matter what side of the aisle your seat is. |
|
|
|
Post by ventesette on Mar 30, 2017 8:49:28 GMT -5
I don't get it. 1. They already have access to the information. This was just going to make it so they needed your permission to use it. 2. Those "examples" are cyber-attacks. How does a government reg stop that? Those were already criminal events. It's not like this was going to stop them. |
|
|
|
Post by 2foolish on Mar 30, 2017 9:18:23 GMT -5
Meh. Ragu is already selling our info. Every time you install an app or use a program you agree to this stuff. They already have all this information. I would like to see something in the bill that requires them to reinvest the money in our network infrastructure so we get better internet or use the revenue to bring down the costs to consumer. Pipe dream, I know. True, but you can avoid this by not using certain apps. No way to avoid it now. im sure some bright enterprising young man or ho will come up with something.. |
|
|
|
Post by Ff2 on Mar 30, 2017 9:20:06 GMT -5
You guys sure give aways your freedomz easily.
|
|
|
|
Post by BEAC0NJET on Mar 30, 2017 9:22:23 GMT -5
Yes, those 11 breaches were companies that were hacked, that people had already consented to giving their info to, for cyber commerce, banking, etc.
|
|
