Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I contacted both of my Senators and my Rep and asked just HOW they thought allowing the sale of peoples' browsing/search histories was serving the people, the job they're allegedly doing.
So far only one response which was a lame deflection about trying to ease regulatory burdens brought about by the FCC or some such BS with NOT ONE WORD addressing the question I actually asked. I will continue to Email this buffoon, everyday if need be until he actually decides to answer the question he's asked.
That is noble but plenty of lobbyists are paying to make this happen. That browsing history can be sold to retailers, recruiters, mortgage and credit companies, rental companies, corporations, the possibilities are endless and it will likely hurt or embarrass many. What will be interesting is if some politicians end up in that mix.
Let's say it all gets shown in gory detail, the IP address sources, every website, every download, all of it, for anyone to see.
Apart from some mild embarrassment, would you be in any trouble?
The defense of "well, if you haven't done anything bad, so you have nothing to worry about" to justify privacy violations has always been a bad one.
No one should have to give this information up, regardless of whether they're a "good" person or not. Especially when it will be used to exploit us, whether we like it or not.
I can't believe people haven't made more noise about the nonsense that Trump and Congress just pushed through regarding ISP sale of browsing data. I can't think of a single positive thing that would come from allowing that - at least, for the general public (I'm sure there are plenty of people quite happy about it!).
The defense of "well, if you haven't done anything bad, so you have nothing to worry about" to defend privacy violations has always been a bad one.
No one should have to give this information up, regardless of whether they're a "good" person or not. Especially when it will be used to exploit us, whether we like it or not.
I can't believe people haven't made more noise about the nonsense that Trump and Congress just pushed through regarding ISP sale of browsing data. I can't think of a single positive thing that would come from allowing that - at least, for the general public (I'm sure there are plenty of people quite happy about it!).
Trump supporters aren't going to complain about anything Trump does including this. And Democrats know that it will probably be a Republican that gets burned by the exposure but it doesn't make it right.
.........I can't believe people haven't made more noise about the nonsense that Trump and Congress just pushed through regarding ISP sale of browsing data. I can't think of a single positive thing that would come from allowing that - at least, for the general public (I'm sure there are plenty of people quite happy about it!).
That's what I pay PACs for, to carry on the fight.
What consumers need to do is demand that their information not be sold. I foresee an ISP provider advertising such a policy in the near future.
All internet providers are supposed to have a method available where you can opt-out. I already contacted my ISP and opted-out. It's free to opt-out. Everyone is opted-in by default and the only way to opt-out is the request it.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,330 posts, read 54,428,613 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by whogo
What consumers need to do is demand that their information not be sold. I foresee an ISP provider advertising such a policy in the near future.
I think it goes a little deeper than that. I think people need to put pressure on their Congress people to explain just HOW this serves the people they allegedly represent.
Personally, I'm less than impressed with their representation. Early in the junior NC Senator's first term he was speaking of what he called too many regulatory burdens on small businesses. One of his 'brilliant' ideas to ease that burden was ending the requirement for restaurant employees to wash their hands after using the rest room, of course he added to that a requirement that establishments that ended that requirement would have to post a sign that their employees weren't required to wash their hands. I'm not sure why he was even proposing this, is hand washing a Federal Reg? But I sure as hell see no reduction in regulatory burden when eliminating one regulation requires replacement by another. The air is apparently quite thin in their Ivory Tower.
I'm guessing a lot of embarrassment, turned down credit, jobs denied, schools denied, etc. are likely but Trump supporters are true believers that he is never wrong and he is laughing all the way to the bank.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
