Trump’s signature makes it official: ISP privacy rules are dead
- Thread starter JournalBot
- Start date
Well this is not surprising but still depressing nonetheless. Politicians lately don't even seem interested in at least paying lip service to consumer protection. (That by itself is not so surprising the surprising bit is that people still cheer for them)
Upvote
90
(92
/
-2)
"Those flawed privacy rules, which never went into effect, were designed to benefit one group of favored companies, not online consumers."
Wait... what group of companies would this privacy rule have benefited?
Wait... what group of companies would this privacy rule have benefited?
Upvote
143
(144
/
-1)
Upvote
132
(133
/
-1)
I'm still waiting for my alarm clock to go off and wake me from this ongoing horrible nightmare. 
Upvote
109
(112
/
-3)
Upvote
49
(54
/
-5)
They were claiming that social networking companies has access to private information that ISPs don't.
Now ISPs not only have access to private info, they can sell it.
EDIT: Sorry, not sell it. "Share it" to third party vendors who would pay for the privilege.
Upvote
56
(57
/
-1)
robert.walter
Ars Praefectus
Captured regulatory.
Captured legislative.
Captured administrative.
Captured judicial.
Captured states' legislative, admin and judicial.
The above categories, to varying degrees, are at this point.
This is what fascism looks like and how it starts.
Captured legislative.
Captured administrative.
Captured judicial.
Captured states' legislative, admin and judicial.
The above categories, to varying degrees, are at this point.
This is what fascism looks like and how it starts.
Upvote
105
(122
/
-17)
Even if he doesn't I'm sure patriots (totally not lobbyists) in telcos will make America great again (or at least make Trump rich).
Upvote
34
(35
/
-1)
It probably won't be too long before some hacker group starts posting web histories of all of those in congress who voted for this. I imagine they will give the information away for free and not even charge anyone.
-d
-d
Upvote
52
(54
/
-2)
r/T_D were convinced he was going to veto. Even they, amazingly, knew that this law was a bad idea.
I wonder what excuse they will put forth?
I wonder what excuse they will put forth?
Upvote
88
(89
/
-1)
Depends on whose customer. Pretty certain lobbyists are getting exactly what they are paying for.
Upvote
36
(36
/
0)
I can't even begin to comprehend the mental gymnastics they must have gone through to convince themselves of that. That makes no sense whatsoever.
Upvote
69
(70
/
-1)
It's all about choice.
You can choose not to use Google or Facebook. There are alternatives.
You can choose not to use the ISP in your area, and for many, that choice means choosing not to use the Internet.
Of you can choose to give up all pretence of privacy in your online activities. It's all there, all for sale and your ISP has unfettered access to do whatever they choose with it. I'm sure it's all really well-secured by your ISP, and your online history will never leak.
Upvote
53
(59
/
-6)
Yet one more thing to hate him for. Although honestly I don't really think he gives a shit one way or the other. He just thinks he's "winning" and that's all that's important as long as the toadies and sycophants keep telling him so.
Upvote
53
(57
/
-4)
How much do you want to bet that Pai will repeat these exact same lines with a completely straight face when he gets called up on it?
Upvote
27
(28
/
-1)
It's a false flag operation put up by Benghazi-loving Clintonites (and planned in the Comet Pizza basement behind the false floor) to destabilise the Glorious Leader's Thousand Year Reign of Happiness. I'm sure they're putting together a jpeg with red arrows linking the indisputable facts that prove the conspiracy.
Upvote
78
(80
/
-2)
Dark times. I am ashamed to say I voted for one of the clowns who helped make this travesty possible. It seemed a reasonable choice-- the other guy was clearly seeking office to profit on his seat. I didn't see this sort of thing coming. Maybe I should have. At the national level there just don't appear to be many candidates who will actually serve their constituency these days.
Upvote
14
(21
/
-7)
Alternative reality and everything else is fake news and CLINTON!!
Upvote
32
(35
/
-3)
So, is there anyone left who still believes that there aren't any real differences between the Republicans and the Democrats?
Upvote
139
(151
/
-12)
Everybody needs a VPN. https://thatoneprivacysite.net/vpn-comparison-chart/
NOTE: Stay away from the free ones, they still need to make their money and they may do it by selling your information
NOTE: Stay away from the free ones, they still need to make their money and they may do it by selling your information
Upvote
34
(35
/
-1)
I went over to Breitbart, and while the articles about this are, generally, positive.... The comments ar generally negative, with the "This is BS" ones getting a fair ammount of upvotes.
Breitbart commenters are actively critical of Trump for this and getting upvoted for it. That's like... what? Trump fans beginning to lose their faith in Trump, over at Breitbart of all places.
Breitbart commenters are actively critical of Trump for this and getting upvoted for it. That's like... what? Trump fans beginning to lose their faith in Trump, over at Breitbart of all places.
Upvote
97
(101
/
-4)
Potentially the same mental gymnastics they mastered supporting him in the first place...
Upvote
38
(40
/
-2)
There was a lot of disenfranchisement by the GOP. They won by the slimmest of margins via gerrymandering and voter suppression.
A minority (19% at last estimate) managed to squeak in a technical victory, suckered in like any mark.
Congress is in the hands of the GOP because of what I said earlier, combined with the lack of critical thinking that let them lie about ACA, their unwillingness to engage honestly in drafting legislation, and their control at the state level that caused multiple GOP controlled states to deny their citizens access to the medicaid expansion.
By all measures they're more likely to have voted progressive or not at all, with a 20% chance of having voted for trump.
Upvote
81
(89
/
-8)
Pahahaha. Just went to Breitbart and click on their Privacy Policy.
Only thing that appears on the page is "Not found". Not even a 404 code. Just "Not found"
Upvote
80
(81
/
-1)
I think you mean Republicans. It's hard to say that it's "politicians" as a whole when you have all of one party voting to screw you in favor of corporations who are lining their pockets and all of the other voting not to.
Upvote
66
(69
/
-3)
Upvote
16
(16
/
0)
"Those flawed privacy rules, which never went into effect, were designed to benefit one group of favored companies, not online consumers."
This sort of thing is depressing to read. There are potentially logical reasons to revise or remove the old rules, but they were clearly *intended* to benefit consumers. Pretending otherwise, instead of pointing out legitimate weaknesses, is an attempt to confuse the issue.
This sort of thing is depressing to read. There are potentially logical reasons to revise or remove the old rules, but they were clearly *intended* to benefit consumers. Pretending otherwise, instead of pointing out legitimate weaknesses, is an attempt to confuse the issue.
Upvote
36
(37
/
-1)
I went there too to check. Couldn't find any FCC-related thread in the first four pages. It seems like they're ignoring it.
Upvote
13
(13
/
0)
- Status