jump to content
my subreddits
more »
Want to join? Log in or sign up in seconds.|
[-]
use the following search parameters to narrow your results:
subreddit:subreddit
find submissions in "subreddit"
author:username
find submissions by "username"
site:example.com
find submissions from "example.com"
url:text
search for "text" in url
selftext:text
search for "text" in self post contents
self:yes (or self:no)
include (or exclude) self posts
nsfw:yes (or nsfw:no)
include (or exclude) results marked as NSFW
e.g. subreddit:aww site:imgur.com dog
this post was submitted on
3,212 points (94% upvoted)
shortlink:
reset password
Submit a new linkSubmit a Link
Post only if you support Trump!
Submit a new text postSubmit a Text Post
Post only if you support Trump!

The_Donald

subscribeunsubscribe384,695 Centipedes readers
9,304 Winners online users here now

TWITTER @TheDonaldReddit

Welcome to the forum of choice for The President of The United States, Donald Trump!
Be advised this forum is for serious supporters. We have jokes, comics, memes, and are not politically correct. Please read and respect our rules below before contributing.
All Press Inquiries: RedditTheDonald [at] gmail.com

RULES

  1. Do not violate Sitewide Content Policy
  2. No Trolling/Concern Trolling
  3. No Racism/Anti-Semitism
  4. No Releasing Personal Information or Doxxing
  5. No Vote Manipulation, Brigading, or Asking for Votes
  6. This is a forum for supporters of Trump ONLY
  7. No Posts About Being Banned From or Linking To Other Subreddits
  8. Ban appeals, suggestions, concerns (including sticky choices) go to modmail
  9. No Posts About Trump Assassination Threats (Send screenshots + Archive.is link to the FBI).
  10. Please do not behave in a way outside of this forum that would reflect poorly on it.
If you feel you were banned by mistake, you are free to appeal by sending us a polite message via Modmail.
Have a question? see our WIKI!
Op-Eds by Donald J. Trump

Recent AMAs (see full list)

Name Date
President Donald J. Trump 07/27/16
Kaya Jones 03/28/17
Peter Boykin 03/27/17
Corey Stewart 03/24/17
Trump's First Member 02/03/17
Madison Gesiotto 02/02/17
Joe Biggs 02/01/17
Robert Spencer 01/27/17
James Allsup 01/26/17
Howie Carr 01/26/17
Tucker Carlson 01/13/17
Dave Rubin 12/19/16
General Bert Mizusawa 11/08/16
Mike Cernovich 11/04/16
Bill Mitchell 11/03/16
Paul Nehlen 11/02/16
Chuck Johnson 11/01/16
Malik Obama 10/31/16
Richard Davis, M.D. 10/26/16
Brad Parscale 10/25/16
Ben Garrison 10/18/16
Wayne Dupree 10/17/16
James O'Keefe 10/14/16
Curt Schilling 10/12/16
Contact /u/rsashe1980 or /u/treteste to set up an AMA

IMPORTANT LINKS

RELATED SUBREDDITS

All Press Inquiries: RedditTheDonald [at] gmail.com
created by [deleted]MAGAa community for
3211
3212
3213
submitted by shadowman3001BPA

Argument for:

Many Republicans saw these new rules as a power grab during the closing days of the Obama Administration. The rule was issued on December 2, 2016 and took effect on January 3, 2017, less than three weeks before President Trump took office. Supporters of the bill argue that the legislation would prevent the one-size-fits-all regulation.
“Under the FTC’s watch, our internet and data economy has been the envy of the world. The agency’s evidence-based approach calibrates privacy and data-security requirements to the sensitivity of information collected,” Senate lead sponsor Flake wrote in a Wall Street Journal op-ed.
“The FCC rules subject all web browsing and app usage data to the same restrictive requirements as sensitive personal information. That means that information generated from looking up the latest Cardinals score or checking the weather in Scottsdale is treated the same as personal health and financial data.”
ISP companies also contended that the FCC rules have placed them at a disadvantage with other non-ISP Internet companies that also collect user data, like Netflix or Facebook.

Argument against:

Privacy advocates warn that the legislation could produce dire consequences for consumer privacy, with Privacy News Online calling it “a bill to let telecoms sell your private Internet history.”
“Its goal is to remove all the hard-earned net neutrality regulations gained to protect your internet history from advertisers and and worse,” they wrote. “Specifically, the FCC had been able to prevent internet service providers (ISPs) from spying on your internet history, and selling what they gathered, without express permission. This legal protection on your internet history is currently under attack thanks to these 24 Senators and lots of ISP lobbying spend.”
That’s not false, as ISPs have been previously shown to sell user data to third parties, who in turn use it for marketing or other purposes.

My two cents:

As a foreword, I'll say that I would have no issue with a bill to prevent all companies, ISP and websites, from collecting your data.
Why I support the bill, though, is different. As it stands, every website/app/etc that you use has the right to collect and sell your private data (with a few exceptions, medical data and whatnot). That means Google, Facebook, that farming app on your phone, all legally allowed to collect and sell. Keep in mind that it's neigh impossible to use the internet without websites and apps, and with a relatively small demand for websites that don't collect and sell, a relatively small supply has appeared.
This bill offsets the late-January FCC rule preventing ONLY ISP's from collecting and selling your data. Not the rest of the internet. In my humble opinion, the government shouldn't allow some companies access to your data, while restricting other companies access to that same data. Also worth noting that you can opt out of your ISP's data collection should you choose. The government isn't here to play favorites, nor should it be here to consolidate money and power to companies like Google, Facebook, and Twitter.
The free market has a way of working things out. Should the demand for privacy increase to the point that it's economically viable for an ISP to advertise that they don't collect any of your data, it will happen. Should you be out there redpilling people about their privacy until that demand is met? Absolutely.
Obviously this is a devisive issue on this subreddit, and I've noticed enough that I felt it's worth a sticky to discuss.

Let me reiterate, because people don't seem to be reading the text that isn't big and bold. ISPs are required to let you opt out (though they make it difficult to find out how).

The December rule makes the collection data requiring and Opt-In, while the bill requires an Opt-Out (like websites do)
top 200 commentsshow 500
[–]TrumpiriumRUS[M] [score hidden] - stickied comment (5 children)
Please note that this does not reflect the position of the mod team as a whole, we each have our own opinions.
Mine being that aside from relegating control from the FCC back to the FTC and restoring the pre-Obama status quo, this is essentially a toothless piece of legislation, which has been the subject of massive amounts of exaggeration and shilling across various subreddits by the same organizations that actively suppressed any discussion about the TPP last year.
[–]StirlingGRUS 317 points318 points319 points  (46 children)
I think there needs to be a new bill that introduces an all encompassing privacy protection. I don't like ISPs or websites selling my shit, and I don't see any major positives to this.
[–]OnlyTrump16USA 35 points36 points37 points  (38 children)
But they can't just ban it selectively because that will create unfair advantages. That leads to cronyism and corruption.
[–]catvideos22CA 229 points230 points231 points  (33 children)
You can choose not to use Facebook and still use the internet. You cannot choose to use a different ISP.
[–]ohno_thatsucks 56 points57 points58 points  (3 children)
Exactly. I don't want the postman opening my mail to see what they can advertise to me. You can't opt out.
[–]StirlingGRUS 57 points58 points59 points  (5 children)
This is an excellent point
[–]ITworksGuys 10 points11 points12 points  (12 children)
You are still going to use Google or a site that uses Google analytics.
You are still going to use email, and iphone, or any other device/service that is online.
[–]whodknee_ 21 points22 points23 points  (8 children)
In ublock origin you can block all connections to google analytics.
You can choose a different email provider. You can use an android phone without Gapps. Etc etc.
With isps most people have 2 high speed options. Both of which will probably sell your information now.
This would be like there only being 2 email options, gmail and yahoo mail, bith of which look at all your emails to target you with ads.
[–]maga_tax 18 points19 points20 points  (0 children)
But I think u/StirlingG is suggesting that no one should have the right to sell that information. If representatives claim to promote privacy and also claim to want to level the playing field, why not prevent both ISPs and website from doing so unless you opt in?
[–]unfetteredbymemesKEK 311 points312 points313 points  (65 children)
It makes me uncomfortable.
But then I remember the NSA scandal, and Vault 7 and I think about going off the grid.
Then I remember there is no T_D off the grid.
fuck.
[–]Gridorr 57 points58 points59 points  (40 children)
Have an Android phone? Get Orbot problem fixed
[–]unfetteredbymemesKEK 35 points36 points37 points  (0 children)
I do actually.
Orbot. Noted
[–]Edenburger 29 points30 points31 points  (11 children)
There isn't an app that can be created that will fix all the privacy/spying issues inherent with Android and Windows 10.
[–]Commander_KEKUSA 10 points11 points12 points  (8 children)
I wouldn't trust Tor as a sole source of security. Rumors have been circulating for years that it is compromised.
[–]snukesnizz76 5 points6 points7 points  (5 children)
wasnt it "built by the navy"
[–]-realAlexJones 5 points6 points7 points  (4 children)
They released it so they're not the only ones on the tor network
[–]DogFartsAreGreat 4 points5 points6 points  (4 children)
Commenting to save this.
[–]EverySingleRedditor 5 points6 points7 points  (0 children)
Just download the app instead
Spez: or just save the comment
[–]sublimeinslimeDTOM 13 points14 points15 points  (8 children)
The dilemmas we face in modern society!
[–]unfetteredbymemesKEK 7 points8 points9 points  (7 children)
Since I'm technology retarded, I have absolutely no idea how we might keep malicious government entities from getting our metadata
[–]AverinMIAFRA 7 points8 points9 points  (6 children)
They tap directly into ISP backbones - L3, Cogent, Verizon, etc... There is no way to keep that from happening, at least when it pertains to the NSA.
"There should be a law against this type of thing..."
[–]unfetteredbymemesKEK 5 points6 points7 points  (5 children)
I thought there was...
[–]AverinMIAFRA 11 points12 points13 points  (4 children)
Me too, guess the 4th amendment doesn't mean much anymore.
[–]unfetteredbymemesKEK 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
Not when the internet is a civil right and your infringing on my "safe Space"
[–]XMAGA_1776XCOAL 11 points12 points13 points  (3 children)
I think if the CIA really wanted you, the law would be a minor annoyance.
[–]unfetteredbymemesKEK 7 points8 points9 points  (2 children)
Yeah FUCK THE CI- gggggggggggggggasssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss
[–]hasapointKEK 8 points9 points10 points  (1 child)
Oh, man, he just got Candleja-
[–]finally_a_normal_guyTX 18 points19 points20 points  (6 children)
“
It makes me uncomfortable.
Same here. I know Trump has shown support for the "surveillance state" in the past, but after what he's now gone through with being spied on I really wish he would come out against anything that expands these creepy powers (as it related to allowing our personal data disseminated in ANY WAY).
[–]unfetteredbymemesKEK 4 points5 points6 points  (5 children)
Yeah. My issue is with regressive left, if they were to introduce these powers, they would start to try and restrict free speech online by; demanding the internet is civil-right, then demanding that it is safe place for civil discussion, then jailing people for disagreement.
[–]Hoffa 461 points462 points463 points  (47 children)
I am against anything and anyone that can track and sell my internet browser history.
[–]Freedom_famKEK 273 points274 points275 points  (12 children)
I agree.
This shouldn't be an opt-out. It should be an opt-in, with royalty checks auto-credited to my bill.
[–]sh2003KEK 71 points72 points73 points  (2 children)
I like this idea. I'd be ok with this.
[–]TheHighestEagleDTOM 29 points30 points31 points  (1 child)
This makes the most sense and is best for the people.
Naturally we'll have to fight tooth and nail for the thing that is best for the people. Fucking sad...
We got this though.
[–]SargaronUSA 8 points9 points10 points  (0 children)
Yes I concur.
[–]MonkeyManWheeMN 8 points9 points10 points  (1 child)
This is how new companies break into this space, we need these monopolies to end.
Pay people to allow this, it's our data, even if it's not much, you would show faith to your customers, and that may be enough to separate you from the rest of the herd.
[–]A_GADSDEN_LATINOMA 19 points20 points21 points  (9 children)
Which is why I use a combination of uBlock Origin and uMatrix. One to generally block advertisements, and the other to whitelist specific subdomains/CDNs, scripts, images, cookies and other objects on a per-web site basis. uMatrix also has the ability to change your user agent every 5 minutes and use multiple ones that you can even specify.
In addition, I make sure to use the Self-Destructing Cookies extension for Firefox, to make sure I automatically delete cookies from the sites I've whitelisted and have no active tabs in use.
Lastly, I disable my browser history altogether, so the sites I visit, especially search engines, don't get to determine what I've previously visited.
Most importantly, though, always use HTTPS when possible. Your ISP can see all HTTP traffic, as it's unencrypted. From the browser you're using, to the content you're downloading and submitting, to even your OS and screen resolution settings. It's all public under HTTP.
With HTTPS, all your ISP can see is the general site you're trying to contact. So, if you're trying to access https://website.com/test123, your ISP will only see website.com.
[–]BLSullyWI 3 points4 points5 points  (0 children)
Great list of extensions/methods to minimize your identifiable footprint!
I'd add Privacy Badger by the EFF
[–]Octo_R0ck 4 points5 points6 points  (1 child)
I piggy-back off your last few paragraphs, there is an extension called HTTPS Everywhere that will help encrypt traffic requests to websites overall. It is for Chrome, Firefox, and Opera.
[–]ImWithUSVA 1 point2 points3 points  (4 children)
It does raise concerns, but this is how its been for decades.... Nothing has changed. Why are we pissed now? If anything we should be less pissed because URLs and DNS requests have gotten more secure.
I dont see how congress could regulate the monitoring or collecting of the data. Thats almost impossible. Even if congress regulated the selling of the data, the company themselves could still use it. Or they could somehow mask it. I think there's work to be done, but this bill was garbage, (in 2016).
[–]kanagawa 5 points6 points7 points  (1 child)
Then use tor. Otherwise, you're already tracked everywhere by nearly everyone.
[–]BLSullyWI 7 points8 points9 points  (0 children)
Still have to be careful how you're using Tor. It isn't a panacea to tracking. If you use gmail through Tor, allow 3rd party cookies, etc, it doesn't change the fact that advertisers and such can track you. Same with VPN services, etc.
Obviously more complicated than that, but the majority of users, technically minded or not, should get the gist of it.
[–]dilth98 141 points142 points143 points  (11 children)
“
The free market has a way of working things out. Should the demand for privacy increase to the point that it's economically viable for an ISP to advertise that they don't collect any of your data, it will happen.
There is no economic incentive to do this because there is near zero competition in the ISP space.
ISP is not a free market. Most of them have government granted monopolies on their service area.
[–]RightTheirWrongs 36 points37 points38 points  (0 children)
100% agree. There is no alternative choices without options. And the ISP game is not about competition.
[–]LordReekrusARMY 26 points27 points28 points  (0 children)
Thank you for posting this. Saved me the effort. Free market competition is not free market competition when the government guiding hand picks and chooses who owns the market based on lobbying.
See: Energy industry and what they've done to solar as one example.
[–]gwrightivCA 5 points6 points7 points  (1 child)
“
Should the demand for privacy increase to the point that it's economically viable for an ISP
“
There is no economic incentive to do this
I agree that there is no incentive to offer a privacy centric ISP. They'd be losing out on potential revenue in selling the data. Since they weren't selling data, they'd need to have a high price point. The high price point would stop people from wanting to use them. This hypothetical privacy ISP wouldn't be able to compete against the cheaper ones selling data.
[–]DragofireheartNH 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
“
ISP is not a free market. Most of them have government granted
Found the problem.
[–]90s_camp 193 points194 points195 points  (14 children)
You don't have to use google, facebook etc. You have to use your ISP. Big difference.
[–]dirket 43 points44 points45 points  (0 children)
And let's be real, the ISP world is a classic example of market failure. The free market will not be able to correct this issue. Even if you blame the government for the market failure, reversing it is not going to happen overnight and we need protection. Yes it's bad that Google can sell my data, but at least there are alternatives and they don't see the entirety of my history, only what goes through their services. And let's not forget that with Google and Facebook you get a free* service out of the deal, whereas your ISP still overcharges you for some of the worst Internet speeds in the West.
*no monetary transaction, but you're paying with your data. If you don't have tracking protection on your browser they might also get your data through adsense etc.
[–]RightTheirWrongs 60 points61 points62 points  (3 children)
Exactly, I know I have one choice of ISP where I live. Please tell me of the land that has 10+
[–]Tejava4LyfeCA 19 points20 points21 points  (1 child)
You also don't pay a monthly fee. Those sites gives you a free service in exchange for your browsing. The ISP already overcharges for a service that could be better but is throttled and capped and now they want to make more.
[–]Southern_deplOregonOR 127 points128 points129 points  (22 children)
slippery slope intensifies
[–]shadowman3001BPA[S] 29 points30 points31 points  (21 children)
Keep in mind that the bill in effect doesn't really change much, as the rules put in place in January haven't even taken effect.
[–]Southern_deplOregonOR 14 points15 points16 points  (3 children)
I know, and thank you for showing both sides.
This is merely a grain of sand in the desert that is the destruction of the 4th amendment.
[–]Baba-Yaga- 6 points7 points8 points  (2 children)
But its for your protection!!!
/s
[–]Southern_deplOregonOR 12 points13 points14 points  (0 children)
"The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help."
-Ronald Reagan
[–]wheredidiputitKEK 5 points6 points7 points  (16 children)
yeah that's my take away from this. Facebook, Netflix, etc are already doing this. If anything it's leveled the playing field out. Doesn't mean I like it though. But I'd rather everyone have access than just a few.
[–]maga_tax 23 points24 points25 points  (2 children)
I understand that argument, but instead of allowing everyone to sell private data, why not allow nobody to do so?
[–]StJimmy92OH 5 points6 points7 points  (0 children)
Which would be a good next step, which OP even says is what he thinks should happen.
[–]HeyThatsAccurate 7 points8 points9 points  (1 child)
Yeah but you can choose not to use those services. You can't choose a different ISP in many situations.
[–]Zinitaki 11 points12 points13 points  (2 children)
The difference here is that websites like Facebook and Netflix are limited in their data collection and you can choose not to go to their websites but with ISPs they can collect ALL your internet browsing data. I'm not a fan of any website collecting my data for profit but i'll take limited and (somewhat) optional over all my browsing activities.
[–]ZyramRo 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
I only have one upvote for this, would that I had a thousand.
[–]SenorFreddyBlock 16 points17 points18 points  (7 children)
“
Shill: Hey, guys, these other dudes are already stealing your data and selling it if you visit their sites, how about we make it so your ISPs (who have a near monopoly on the industry) can steal and sell your data too?
Cucks: Alright yeah, WOO HOOO, dems are against this so that automatically means it's a good thing!
Holy shit, kill yourself.
[–]RuktovMAGA 273 points274 points275 points  (51 children)
Thank you for offering both sides of the issue.
[–]BamaBangsMAGA 194 points195 points196 points  (10 children)
Seen nowhere else on Reddit.
[–]rickscarf 60 points61 points62 points  (7 children)
Oh no, that sucks
[–]SpezzitDTOM 21 points22 points23 points  (4 children)
INDEED
[–]DrRat 13 points14 points15 points  (3 children)
BILL CLINTON IS A RAPIST
[–]ThelemaAndLouiseKEK 4 points5 points6 points  (0 children)
Counterpoint: shut the fuck up, fascist!
[–]GraceJonestownMAGA 7 points8 points9 points  (0 children)

INFOWARS.COM

[–]calm-forestOH 4 points5 points6 points  (1 child)
Evan.. EVAN

EVAN EVAN EVAN EVAN.

[–]CantContheDonMAGA 107 points108 points109 points  (33 children)
The only thing he's wrong about is that market competition would encourage a privacy-based ISP.
It's next to impossible to start a new ISP. The ISPs should be regulated, or more preferably, broken up so that they actually compete.
[–]Optimus_Prime3 12 points13 points14 points  (0 children)
I also hadn't thought about this and would love if this is what the bill spawned. With that being said I'm still against it
[–]WeAreGonnaMAGACA 12 points13 points14 points  (0 children)
It's not going to change unless the Feds get to de-regulating the "right of way" issue.
Right now, ISPs have to get permission from thousands of local municipal governments to put wires on telephone poles, or to dig to put wire in trenches, or even to share space in existing underground conduits.
As you would imagine, this process is incredibly difficult, expensive, time-consuming, and corrupt. It is a way for ISPs to keep competitors from ever getting started.
The Feds need to step in, and say "no more" to these local governments who make the market lack competition.
If ISPs were facing market pressure, then I wouldn't care about the ISP privacy issue, because I'd have a choice in providers. Until and unless this is resolved, the Feds should be doing everything they can to protect individual privacy.
[–]kanagawa 33 points34 points35 points  (11 children)
It's next to impossible because of regulation. If we deregulated the ISP market, every town would get five ISPs overnight. There is no large tech investment needed to launch an ISP, youjust hook up some routers and you're up.
The only hard part is the last mile wiring and even there the technology has come so far that our regulations are just slowing everyone down.
I'm an Internet entrepreneur.
[–]calm-forestOH 28 points29 points30 points  (1 child)
Gotta bust up the municipality franchise agreements.
Godspeed to you if you ever have to deal with local governments.
[–]kanagawa 9 points10 points11 points  (0 children)
Yup. Those types of agreements are what should be restricted throughout regulations. Even as bad as they are, though, if I could have made even 10% margins in that business, then I'd still be selling Internet hookups and dealing with locals and loving every minute.
[–]DragofireheartNH 13 points14 points15 points  (0 children)
More ISPs would be good. Competition helps weed out the bad ones.
[–]Wtf_socialism_reallyUSA 8 points9 points10 points  (3 children)
Except that isn't how it works, especially if you offer better speeds than the big names.
You literally have Google as an example to prove you wrong.
These regulations are new. Why didn't "five ISPs pop up overnight" before?
I don't even want to point out how stupid the "just hook up some routers" statement is.
[–]kanagawa 5 points6 points7 points  (2 children)
Since I worked at Google when they launched the ISP project, I can assure you they had already spent hundreds of millions on lawyers by the time any fiber went in ground.
And if you think hooking up routers is a stupid way to make an ISP, I don't know what to tell you.
[–]Chewies_MomTX 6 points7 points8 points  (9 children)
So your argument is then to allow gov't to restrict the advertising market into ISPs and Non-ISPs and then force the ISPs to compete against each other, even though in most municipalities there is only one choice for an ISP?
[–]CantContheDonMAGA 6 points7 points8 points  (8 children)
My argument is get rid of the regs that allow the ISPs to have a monopoly. With a monopoly, nothing holds them back from collusion so they can all profit from the data.
[–]Chewies_MomTX 3 points4 points5 points  (7 children)
But that's not federal. that's local laws.
[–]CantContheDonMAGA 2 points3 points4 points  (5 children)
The corporations have both local and federal laws under their thumb. Something must be done.
[–]IvetteAramis 4 points5 points6 points  (1 child)
I doubt someone wealthy enough who could start a new ISP, would start one and not sell people's data. Selling our information would only profit companies, not doing so would only be lost profit. It's like saying the richest people in the world could end starvation, they possibly COULD, but they aren't.
[–]shadowman3001BPA[S] 5 points6 points7 points  (4 children)
Well, I wasn't implying that the market competition would encourage an entirely new ISP, but rather if there was enough demand that it made an attractive selling point to a current ISP (enough to gain enough customers to offset the selling of data), that a current ISP could change their policy on collection.
[–]CantContheDonMAGA 14 points15 points16 points  (2 children)
Problem is with only a few companies, it's too easy to collude if there's a lot of money in the data collection. Just all agree to do it, keep it hush hush, rake in the money.
[–]Katfish29[M] 2 points3 points4 points  (1 child)
That is against anti-trust laws. Our current admin has been on the recird against corporate collusion and the manipulation of market share.
[–]CantContheDonMAGA 3 points4 points5 points  (0 children)
I don't trust anti-trust laws to be faithfully enforced, even with Trump as President. He is merely a beachhead against the massive establishment. It's a huge fight to make progress on any issue.
[–]Bucks2001WI 12 points13 points14 points  (2 children)
I'm glad that this was stickied.
Personally, I'd be in favor of the mods stickying more detailed, well-researched content, instead of the usual influx of tiresome memes.
[–]IvetteAramis 103 points104 points105 points  (40 children)
Personally I don't want my information sold, I understand some of it already is but if I can prevent it from happening I would want to keep it that way. It'll up for sale, anyone can buy it and use your browsing history against you.
[+][deleted]  (24 children)
[removed]
    [–]curlytootUSA 5 points6 points7 points  (3 children)
    OP is crazy for presenting both sides of the argument...?
    [–]OldRuskiNoir 9 points10 points11 points  (2 children)
    I think OP is crazy for his opinion on the matter. Did you get to the bottom of his post?
    [–]DJ_Trump_2016FL 94 points95 points96 points  (1 child)
    Glad this is being addressed. Thanks mods
    [–]ChrisTheCoolBeanMI 6 points7 points8 points  (0 children)
    Listen here, we got the best mods. The best.
    [–]TheMadmanDidIt 30 points31 points32 points  (14 children)
    I had this discussion yesterday with someone- I think we should address the real issue which is the monopolization of ISPs. If we allow the ISPs to sell our data, then it's a choice of the one Internet service provider or having no Internet right now. However, if we are able to encourage the increase of multiple choices in the ISP market, then there are bound to be ISPs that protect vs those that sell. Thus you can pay for service for those ISPs protecting your data.
    [–]ImYammerin 9 points10 points11 points  (4 children)
    Enforce laws on the books(anti-trust) and the problem is solved. Sounds familiar, can't remember why..
    [–]RulerOfSlidesNJ 9 points10 points11 points  (0 children)

    B U S T T H A T T R U S T

    [–]SHOW_ME_RARE_PEPESWI 4 points5 points6 points  (2 children)
    The megacorporations are part of the new feudalism. The monied PTB won't allow this without some serious retribution. Bankers, CEOs and Lawyers/Politicians are the new "noble classes". Liberals that point to this and say capitalism is bad have no idea the fuck their talking about.
    [–]ImYammerin 2 points3 points4 points  (1 child)
    Really sad. Kind of like when there think RINOS represent people like me. I am not even a "true conservative" on a number of issues, but I identify far more with the grassroots than the "moderate" wing of the party.
    [–]SHOW_ME_RARE_PEPESWI 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
    Hopefully we can move that Overton window more towards populism and fire all these asshats in the next 2 elections.
    [–]loopdojo 23 points24 points25 points  (2 children)
    I see your point about certain entities being able to access your data previously, and that this just enables the ISP to do the same.
    However, if I may offer an admittedly not perfect analogy...
    I can choose which websites and services to use, like which stores and places I drive my car to.
    I cannot choose whether I am driving roads or not, the ISP being the road.
    [–]ITworksGuys 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
    Every online service/webpage collects some data on you.
    [–]jdovejrFL 91 points92 points93 points  (9 children)
    As a network engineer, I see this from both sides.
    First, I believe this is a good way to allow ISP's make targeted ads. It also allows for a customized internet experience. A lot of braindead people want this.
    From my rational side, ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME? VETO THIS SHIT NOW
    [–]vpny 18 points19 points20 points  (2 children)
    You explained a feature on your first point. A feature that further insulates and controls the message a corporation wants to provide a user. This is possibly the worst thing to allow a 'braindead' person.
    [–]jdovejrFL 10 points11 points12 points  (1 child)
    I know. That was a hint of sarcasm.
    [–]vpny 3 points4 points5 points  (0 children)
    Aye. Good to hear. Was wondering how a network engineer could have such outlook. You guys are among the most calibrated on this topic.
    [–]sh2003KEK 7 points8 points9 points  (0 children)
    > customized internet experience
    If Reddit and /r/redacted have taught me anything, it's taught me that I DO NOT WANT THIS.
    [–]Jack_CandleNAVY 5 points6 points7 points  (0 children)
    The bold got me lol.
    [–]Jack_CandleNAVY 75 points76 points77 points  (12 children)
    It's taking us in the wrong direction. We should be limiting the kind of data, not just saying "Hey those apps get more data then I doooo Not fair!" Then say here you go Comcast, Verizon, and other companies that have been known to screw us over all the time. We're going to give you power over us even more.
    This is a bad bill. I'm all for the free market but this sort of thing shouldn't be for sell in the market in the first place. We need to worry about whats best for America and quit riding the dick of the premise of whats best for the free market ideology.
    [–]DangerQAOH 2 points3 points4 points  (5 children)
    What is the power? To be advertised to?
    [–]Jack_CandleNAVY 4 points5 points6 points  (4 children)
    You know damn well that they aren't going to use the data for just that. They will continue to push and push for more as long as we let them get away with it.
    [–]trumps_amygdalaWA 48 points49 points50 points  (2 children)
    How about NO companies have access?
    [–]Ukatox 46 points47 points48 points  (6 children)
    The free market has a way of working it out... guess I'll goto a competing cable company that won't sell my data if Comcast decides to sell my data.. oh wait...
    [–]kendrickshalamarNJ 5 points6 points7 points  (0 children)
    Regardless of the ISP you use, the websites you visit also have their own ISPs. There's no way to really know if you'll be tracked (but you probably will be).
    [–]ObiMemeKenobiUSA 11 points12 points13 points  (0 children)
    This is much appreciated
    [–]448Ul61VunsU 12 points13 points14 points  (0 children)
    Imo, it's one thing when amazon targets me by analyzing my purchase history; it's another thing entirely when usps opens my amazon packages then starts sending me ads based on the packages they opened.
    Now, if this bill accompanied a deregulation of ISOs, allowing for competition of ISPs that either do or do not analyze traffic, IMO that would be fine.
    [–]jChristopherj 11 points12 points13 points  (0 children)
    Non-ISPs can only see a small part of the puzzle, whereas ISPs can see everything. ISPs also have a huge fucking monopoly; you can choose not to use Facebook, but you rarely have a choice in who your ISP provider is.
    I would be ok with this if you do in fact have the ability to opt out, but it is my understanding that you won't be able to. This is a key point.
    If you can't opt out, then there is nothing fueling this other than outright corruption, and in that case I really hope President Trump vetos this.
    [–]LpupUSA 9 points10 points11 points  (2 children)
    This is a gross oversimplification, and I'm sorry a free market only works when there is transparency. What are the many different ways this can be abused?
    • Say goodbye to the anonymized profile you had. Could you be figured out before based on some of that info? Sure, if one spent enough time. This allows you to go directly to the ISP only say who you wanted to collect specific data on.
    • Free markets only work when there is transparency. This isn't a free market. It is turning you into a commodity, not opening up a whole new world as a consumer.
    • Say goodbye to torrents. Entertainment companies that are vertically integrated as monopolies (Comcast) will just scrape the data claiming they bought it from themselves so it's OKAY and sue into oblivion.
    • With journalism the way it is, do you really want to trust journalists with access to your browser records? Keep in mind, Gawker published the phone numbers and socials of all gun owners in Ney York because... reasons? Imagine A group like ANTIFA being able to get access to your data. Then looking up where you work and tattling to your boss
    • Oh, don't forget foreign countries now can buy up unanonymized data. Rather than before when someone put a request a certain type of client and received anonymized
    • Opt-out; but makes it hard to find out how, doesn't have to give you a time window for opting out, or even any consequences if they lie and say it's opted out but 'WHOOPSIE' they made a boo boo and have been secretly selling it and telling you otherwise. That is assuming that they even let you and follow the law. Well at least you can always just change service provid.... oh wait, most can't.
    • BTW, you thought the NSA and CIA being able to blackmail people based on browsing history was scary? How scary do you think it's gonna get when you can target specific individuals and LEGALLY give any horrible browsing history away.
    • VPN will save us? Maybe. Keep in mind using a VPN or TOR is probable cause for law enforcement. Even then, most lower to middle class people can't afford another $20 fee on top of their current internet fees while ISPs are looking to cap the amount of data people can use on their network without getting slammed with extra fees. At best this is selling out the voters who voted for Trump. At worse, it's opening the door for no longer allowing middle/lower class internet access through price hiking to optimal cockbag levels, because profit doesn't lie with providing EVERYBODY internet.
    • What do you think would of happened in the 2016 election if this happened? If you guessed 'everyone who looks at wikileaks or anything wikileaks related becomes an 'enemy of the state' or 'aiding an embedding terror' or worse... then you are correct!
    I voted for Trump because I was scared of the Draconian overreach that Hillary had exposed via Wikileaks, not so Trump could sign off on the different kinds of Draconian measures.
    [–]trumppleRUS 45 points46 points47 points  (20 children)
    So if it reverses something that was done 3 weeks before Trump's inauguration then where was the controversy for 8 years?
    [–]calm-forestOH 24 points25 points26 points  (9 children)
    Not only does it reverse a very young regulation, but it reverses a young regulation that never went into effect.
    Literally absolutely nothing has changed since the day you first got online.
    You should all also read about PII, and what our current laws already do.
    As a last thought: If you don't want your ISP to see your data, take the precautions to protect it. Use a VPN (not PIA... that news ad they took out is a marketing money grab... US VPN companies are not to be trusted.), encrypt everything you can, use GPG (PGP) for sensitive emails, etc.
    [–]Wtf_socialism_reallyUSA 7 points8 points9 points  (8 children)
    When you use a VPN, you lose a lot of your speed. Especially if you go outside of your region.
    That is a workaround, not a viable fix. We live in America, we're supposed to be able to have our cake and eat it too.
    [–]OnlyTrump16USA 12 points13 points14 points  (2 children)
    It's fear mongering BS. Fake news is making it sound like we're about to have our rights and privacy taken away.
    [–]I_AM_TRY 3 points4 points5 points  (1 child)
    How is it fake news? Your Internet history has never been sold like this would allow. Cookies track your Web history and Facebook et al. can track you, but you could avoid those websites or use ghostery, adblockers, and disable cookies. The ISPs will be able to sell everything, completely eroding the last bit of privacy. That isn't fake in any sense of the word. It also isn't fear mongering. There are reasons we need privacy and I'd be happy to provide you with some historical examples of the necessity of privacy if you have not heard/read about any.
    [–]Jack_CandleNAVY 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
    Its fair to say that the discussion wasn't being had then because we were all worried about the election, pizza gate, Comey letter, and all that. Now we have a fake Russia narrative going on so we have time to talk about this and its for this story to bubble up to the surface. It's bad regardless of when it was or was not in place.
    [–]Optimus_Prime3 7 points8 points9 points  (2 children)
    I haven't seen where you can opt out of the data collection from your ISP, can you point me to that?
    [–]shadowman3001BPA[S] 5 points6 points7 points  (0 children)
    Easiest is to point to http://www.tomsguide.com/us/senate-isps-private-data,news-24737.html which explains that it's an opt-out that you have to contact your ISP for.
    [–]InvictumAquilaeTN 6 points7 points8 points  (0 children)
    Personally I don't want anyone to have a right to see or sell data they have collected from me unless they get express permission separate from terms of service.
    I'm of the opinion that no one including the government and private companies has the right to gather personal information and that the constitution guarantees that right.
    [–]OldRuskiNoir 16 points17 points18 points  (0 children)
    "Opt-in/out"
    That will work great! Just like the Do Not Call list has!
    [–]CovenantX 7 points8 points9 points  (0 children)
    I think of an ISP much differently than I do an app or a browser. Apps and browsers collect only a fraction of my data and I can choose not to use our disable permissions. The ISP, however, sees all and knows all from browsing to apps because it can collect base level data. We are already surveilled by the government enough why should an ISP, to which I pay for money to, further monetize my life?
    [–]Wolf3500KEK 7 points8 points9 points  (0 children)
    Companies always say they want to collect data for the sake of marketing. I don't care whether that is true or not, if we keep increasing data collection on average people it will lead to an Orwellian world. That is why this data collection needs to regulated or throw out completely as a violation of the forth amendment.
    [–]shadowbananawarenessUSA 6 points7 points8 points  (1 child)
    “
    The rule was issued on December 2, 2016 and took effect on January 3, 2017, less than three weeks before President Trump took office.
    This is just political theater.
    [–]sh2003KEK 5 points6 points7 points  (11 children)
    I've read both sides. The difference is - with Netflix/Facebook/Twatter, you can OPT OUT of using those services if you don't want them collecting your data. I've deleted my Facebook for example. You can't just stop using an ISP if it's the only one in your area (COMCAST). If we had more ISP choices that offered privacy protections and offered up some real choices then I'd be ok with it since I had a choice to have a private connection or not.
    [–]51BootwearerUSMC 6 points7 points8 points  (2 children)
    Against, but I'm against most of what the Republicans do.
    It's usually just pandering to the people who pay them the most.
    I'm hopeful that Trump will veto the fuck out of this bill.
    [–]vpny 13 points14 points15 points  (0 children)
    Difference is I have a choice to stop using Twitter or Facebook or any other service that collects my data. Ontop of that, they are free services so that's the trade off in this case. I don't have a choice to change ISP when they're all collecting the data AND when I'm PAYING them for the service in question.
    [–]CrossCheckPanda 5 points6 points7 points  (3 children)
    I think the issue is the monopoly and difficulty of finding a new ISP. If I don't like Googles data collection policy I can use bing or yahoo. If I don't like reddits policy I can use voat or 9 gag or something.
    If I don't like time Warners policy I can suck it up and deal or simply not have Internet.
    [–]Commander_KEKUSA 5 points6 points7 points  (0 children)
    My problem here is that I am paying my Internet Service Provider for a service. As long as they are taking my money they should be advocating for me, Not advertisers.
    It is no different then the employee that steals all the left overs from a catered lunch at the office after everybody else goes home for the day. Why do ISP's feel entitled to take data that dosn't belong to them, just because they have access to it and sell it for a profit?
    [–]bitchalotCA 4 points5 points6 points  (0 children)
    So far anti privacy legislation and data aggregation hasn't been positive for the public. After watching the Trump witch hunt with the Media and others twisting every bit of information they could find into propaganda, it surprising any politician would support it. Trump supporters were outed, harassed. On Reddit some from the T_D are labeled and banned. Conservatives have been censored on Twitter, Youtube and other sites. What stops ISPs from sharing who goes to those sites? I just don't see any upsides to sharing/selling this information. Would love it if Trump came out against it.
    [–]SaltmineinspectorDTOM 53 points54 points55 points  (30 children)
    My two cents.
    It is government regulation therefore it is bad.
    [–]THORisHIDING 26 points27 points28 points  (16 children)
    I am normally first in line for this argument but this is not a circumstance where the market can dictate behaviors. Most customers are stuck in environments where they only have one ISP to choose from. They can't switch ISPs because of the possibility of this behavior and as such the market is restricted from choice.
    So the true problem is the issue of consumer choice in telecommunications--but that's vastly beyond the scope of this issue.
    [–]rickscarf 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
    Ron Swanson
    [–]Edenburger 5 points6 points7 points  (1 child)
    You'd normally be correct but if you don't like the data collection my ISP is performing what other choice do you have? Most American's have exactly one choice for internet provider. Now that's in effect because of buying politicians and local ordinances but there is almost ZERO competition anywhere.
    Until they can fix all the regulations that have created this noncompetitive terrible customer service cesspool we currently sit in for providers i'm ok with them being stricter on them when it comes to privacy regulations.
    [–]usa_foot_printKEK 2 points3 points4 points  (2 children)
    Thats stupid. Some government regulations are great like removing lead from paint.
    [–]Gridorr 10 points11 points12 points  (0 children)
    You offered both sides????? You ARE real news. Thank you. You just did better journalism then all of MSM simply by giving both sides
    [–]YourFriendlyVikingFL 22 points23 points24 points  (3 children)
    I don't see why anyone would support this bill. I have been a hard core Trump supporter since the very beginning and if he would sign this bill it would devistate my opinion of him.
    Just because some companies already do have our private history doens't make it right or OK that others might have it as well. I don't think anyone should have any personal information on us without our consent. This goes against our core values as Republicans for a smaller goverment and our security.
    Whoever voted yes on this bill should have their personal information on Billboards across the United States.
    [–]RightTheirWrongs 10 points11 points12 points  (1 child)
    Anytime you give a company with no direct competition MORE power, it's not a good thing. Those who obtain power will fight to keep it. When given the tools and the power, they will both be abused.
    It's like when comcast started putting data caps on home Internet, because there is only one ISP choice, I HAVE to live with it. So now its data caps and selling my personal info, all while charging me INSANE prices, all thanks to no competition.
    To argue, " Well others do it too " is not good enough for me. I am not worried about the poor ol ISP company not getting more of me than some other crummy website I don't believe in. I can choose not to use Facebook and apps, I cannot choose my ISP. Let's do away with rules that allow these monopolies to exist, and maybe when there are numerous options, THEN we can discuss what a free market may or may not do, but right now, we do not have one.
    [–]Fred_BastardKEK 5 points6 points7 points  (1 child)
    I commend you for presenting both sides of this argument, and a reasoned case for why you believe as you do.
    I personally don't think that letting more companies collect and sell my data is the answer to crony capitalism.
    I think the answer is forcing ANYONE who would collect and sell my information to:
    A) Receive my explicit permission B) Compensate me for it.
    The current argument made by companies like Facebook is:
    A) Accepting the TOS is granting explicit permission B) The otherwise free use of the platform is your compensation.
    I invite others to discuss.
    [–]Wtf_socialism_reallyUSA 4 points5 points6 points  (5 children)
    ISPs and free market don't work together in the U.S. Unless the federal government places regulations on ISP or on the city/state level, no new ISPs can break into the market.
    Start up costs are astronomical, and that's assuming the city or state even allows you to do it, because they all make back door deals with the ISPs.
    Google has been in battle with the big name ISPs (Comcast, ATT, Verizon) because they made such deals, and they utilized loop holes forcing Google to create entirely new infrastructure.
    This has completely stopped the free market -- monopolies and oligopolies are counters to capitalism -- and without first stopping those situations, nothing will happen.
    Not every start up has Google's brand or wealth -- in fact, none do. So how does a free market work in this situation? It doesn't.
    Additionally, I do not empathize with "ISPs feeling disadvantaged". They get a shitload of my money, they don't get to save and sell my data in the future. I don't want my data to come back and bite me in the ass years later like the left tried to do with the "grab them by the pussy" crap.
    I have the options to avoid people who sell my data. I don't have to use Google, I don't use Twitter, I don't use Facebook.
    There are no options with ISPs. They ensure that in most cities, in most states. They also don't invest in their infrastructure using all that extra profit, making me emphasize even less. We are so far behind in our infrastructure, and people are brainwashed into thinking that 12Mbps is "high speed internet".
    If people want a free market in internet, then there is a paradox. There must be regulations somewhere, be it on city/state governments or the ISPs themselves.
    Finally, if the argument truly was that "wahh we are disadvantaged", then they could amend it to stop everyone from selling our data.
    But it turns out that people are willing to let their data get shopped around as a commodity, and oh if the government happens to pay for certain data, well there's a loophole for them too. Oh, and if someone has anything against one of my fetishes, who knows! It might come up in some form of background check. Oh, and if I say something stupid, it might get pulled out of context because it's saved and sold.
    The arguments in favor of allowing ISPs to sell our data are illogical and do not take into account reality in the market.
    Hilariously if this argument worked, we would actually have more ISPs than we do, but instead we have a shining example (Google) of how hard it is to offer actually good speeds and not play by the ISPs' rules.
    This push against net neutrality is something I do not approve of and I will be voting against my current representative for voting for this. My data is not a commodity. My data is mine. I can walk around the world without having someone spying on me 24/7, why can't the internet be that way?
    [–]GingerMan512KEK 4 points5 points6 points  (1 child)
    This is how I understand this. Obama let the FCC oversee "the internet". Being under the FCC they can regulate language and content like they do with radio, print, and TV. So now they can deem something offensive or hate speech and ban it. That's why we want it back with the FTC.
    [–]gwrightivCA 4 points5 points6 points  (6 children)
    If you guys want privacy, you should consider using a VPN service or creating your own VPN. Your traffic is not secure and therefor it is is readable/collectable/sellable. Maybe try Tor.
    [–]Rekd998 3 points4 points5 points  (4 children)
    Is this why now my amazon kindle seems to know what books to recommend based on what I've been doing on my computer?
    Kinda creeped me out... I don't have anything to hide but it's still discerning.
    [–]ITworksGuys 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
    No, that is Amazon doing that. It doesn't have anything to do with your ISP.
    You probably have cookies reporting back to Amazon about what pages you are visiting.
    [–]Islam-Delenda-Est 3 points4 points5 points  (1 child)
    For people who want to do their own research, here is the regulation being repealed:
    Here is the justification the chairman of the privacy committee gave for its repeal:
    TL;DR: This repeal isn't bad, we survived till 2017 without these regulations, they were pretty much just a powergrab from FTC->FCC anyway which makes the regulatory environment more complicated because edge providers and ISPs will have completely different privacy regulations with them in place. Trump should veto it anyway, Internet privacy is the new third rail of politics, and taking it away looks worse than medicare cuts, even if it is completely harmless and justified.
    [–]mafck 4 points5 points6 points  (2 children)
    Should do a post like this for Ryancare and Randcare as well. Ryancare fixing Obamacare (getting rid of the mandate while keeping the 'pre-existing conditions' clause) and Randcare injecting free market principles back into the system. Both can be implemented together and is part of what Trump is calling his 3 stage process.
    [–]shadowman3001BPA[S] 2 points3 points4 points  (1 child)
    I'm hoping for something a bit better than just a post, but something's in the works. Shhhhhh
    [–]butka 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
    The difference is Google, Facebook, etc. provide a free product to consumers to be sold in exchange for the free service.
    ISPs are charging for their service, and now they get to sell our data? There's a chance to avoid using facebook and Google. You can't avoid connecting through your ISP, and often times there's only one or two choices for ISPs.
    It's not apples to apples and you shouldn't bend over for this shit. Fuck that.
    [–]Lynchton 3 points4 points5 points  (0 children)
    Veto this shit. The best argument for this is it's not fair that only some people should do a bad thing so let's allow everyone to do a bad thing. How about going the other direction and stopping the big websites. As others have pointed out, "the free market will fix it" side argument is also bunk as long as there is not currently a free market with ISPs.
    How does this help Americans, "the forgotten man"? How does this improve the economy? How does it make America great in any way? It's special interest swamp bullshit and Trump signing this would be the first thing he's done as president to disappoint me. At the very least use it as a bargaining chip for votes on something actually beneficial.
    [–]MichiganMaga313 3 points4 points5 points  (1 child)
    Don't give me the "free market will fix it" response here when the telecom companies are a giant monopoly and the cost of entry is so high that even Google is having second thoughts on implementing fiber.
    And this opt out nonsense? Please. These companies know they have a monopoly and they will not care one way or the other, because if anything happens all they'll receive is a slap on the wrist.
    Trump isn't attached to this. This bill is Congressional. This bill is dangerous Neo Con bullshit right here. Let Trump know that you hate this and to veto it.
    [–]LiberalTearsQQ 3 points4 points5 points  (0 children)
    I doubt he will veto. It he doesn't it will be the first (and hopefully only) time Trump disappoints me.
    [–]DrSultanPhDDCA 4 points5 points6 points  (0 children)
    Trump needs to veto this.
    [–]nonameforyou1234 4 points5 points6 points  (0 children)
    This country needs opt-in laws. I'm so fucking sick of this opt-out bullshit.
    If I notice an uptick in junk mail or whatever it's getting stuffed in an envelope and going to my representatives.
    Sick and tired of shit like this.
    [–]bennybugbug 3 points4 points5 points  (0 children)
    Big companies like InfoGroup, Acxiom, Dun & Bradstreet, and countless other thrive with personal information data sets. No doubt they partner with the likes of Facebook, Twitter, etc to maximize advertising dollars.
    This is simply a money grab. Beware the wolf in sheep's clothing.
    PLEASE NOTE: DO NOT FILL OUT WARRANTY CARDS OR SUBMIT THE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS ASKED. If you buy a toaster there is no reason to self submit answers to whether or not you own a dog/cat, your household income, your children's age, if you like magazine subscriptions, etc. They sell this data and cooperatively work with the above companies and credit card companies to target you EVERYWHERE.
    [–]DOUBLE_ANAL_DISASTERVA 5 points6 points7 points  (1 child)
    We should be doing what's best for American citizens instead of advertisers. Ever google or buy something and see ads for it pop up a day later? Ever go into Google's or Facebook's privacy settings and see that it's impossible to turn off targeted ads?
    It's creepy, it's disturbing, it needs to end.
    [–]lager81 8 points9 points10 points  (0 children)
    Nice post, MAGA
    [–]yokehound 4 points5 points6 points  (0 children)
    Congrats on raising this here. It shows transparency and a willingness to discuss the issues.
    That said, in my eyes, this is a highly egregious move and Trump will be forever a sell-out if he does not veto.
    [–]BCSinReversePA 2 points3 points4 points  (5 children)
    No one shoupd be able to sell your data. OP's arguement seems to be that everyone should be able to.
    [–]DragofireheartNH 2 points3 points4 points  (7 children)
    “
    This bill offsets the late-January FCC rule preventing ONLY ISP's from collecting and selling your data. Not the rest of the internet.
    So basically there's a lot of noise over nothing?
    If they want to restrict sharing of data they should apply it to all companies and not just the ISPs.
    Why were only ISPs targeted originally?
    [–]DanWofSocDTOM 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
    I Agree with this
    “
    In my humble opinion, the government shouldn't allow some companies access to your data, while restricting other companies access to that same data. Also worth noting that you can opt out of your ISP's data collection should you choose. The government isn't here to play favorites, nor should it be here to consolidate money and power to companies like Google, Facebook, and Twitter.
    [–]DrinkourwayoutofitPA 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
    Dump the regulation and have Congress pass a bill outlawing the collection and marketing of Internet users' personal information. Let's not have any more of this crap, "Oh, the bureaucracy implemented a regulation and it's up to Congress to herd enough cats to toss out the regulation within 90 days or it's permanent!" No. Congress has legislative authority, not some bureau's full-time intern's summer intern, in charge of drafting something that sounded cool when Steve Colbert said it once.
    [–]jiujiujiuUSMC 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
    I'd prefer no company be able to sell my internet usage history or even keep tabs on that history in any way. If it is part of their terms of use for their service then make it obvious so I can opt-out of using their service. YOU KNOW WHEN YOU RUN FOR OFFICE IN THE FUTURE FUCKERBERG WILL PULL UP ALL THE SHIT YOU'VE EVER TYPED INTO THE INTERNET AND SPREAD IT FAR AND WIDE FOR ALL TO SEE. Privacy is paramount.
    [–]brad1242 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
    I made a long post about this but its hard to get traction here with all the high energy shitposts, so i'll paste what I had written here.
    TL;DR - looks to be swamp legislation to me
    I've done a fair bit of reading over the past 48 hours about S.J. Res 34 (also sometimes called H. Res 34) and was waiting for a topic to pop up here, but given that one hasn't yet, I feel that we need to address it here on T_D. All of the left-wing articles will be heralding the passage of this bill as the apocalyptic, cataclysmic demise of every tenet of freedom, but in reality this is not really the case. The passage of this bill just essentially maintains the former status-quo. This bill is to essentially reverse legislation that Obama passed at the very end of his presidency to no longer let ISP's share your information without directly opting in to allow this service, and it had not gone into effect yet.
    From what I have read, the only difference Obama's legislation would have done would be to make data collection required to be an opt-in type service from ISP's, whereas Google and Facebook and other internet companies have more leniency with not telling you what they do with your information, if they so please. This bill reverses that and keeps it as it was, where ISP's can use and sell your data and web histories the same as non-ISP internet companies.
    So do not buy into the world-is-ending hysteria that will surround this bill-reversal, but make no mistake that this is still not beneficial for any citizen, in any way. An ISP is not like Google - you still have the choice to not use Google, but in a monopoly operated area where Comcast is your only ISP choice, you HAVE to submit to their data collection practices. I'm not sure how easy it will be to opt out and to what level you'll be able to opt out of their data collection. This would be like if when you bought a new car, unless you explicitly said "don't follow me", the manufacturer had the right to track every location you drove to and how long you were parked there, and then sell this information to anyone interested for profit. This is not the same as you swiping your credit card at the store you drove to and parked at - you chose to spend money there and acknowledged your transaction there.
    The conservative public stance for pushing this through is that "it increases competition for ISP's", but I fail to see how that's really the case. Is letting Xfinity / AT&T more easily sell your browser history and internet activity to advertisers really going to create better service, or is it just going to line their pockets further, because I know internet cost isn't going to decrease for me, the end consumer. The main proponent of this bill (Blackburn) received something like $700k in essentially bribe money from the ISP's. This might be an area we want to push back on - this passed the vote with only republican votes, and I know it could be a risky move to alienate republicans in the house and senate if he were not to sign this, but it could be an extremely strong unifying move for the American people if he refused to sign this.
    Am I wrong about this bill? If so please let me know, but I find myself opposing the Republican consensus on this, as I can see no benefit it offers to the public, only to those being bribed by the ISP's and the ISP's themselves. This looks to be the definition of Swamp Legislation Let's let the God Emperor know that we oppose the signing of S.J. Res 34
    [–]6j546h54654 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
    “
    In my humble opinion, the government shouldn't allow some companies access to your data, while restricting other companies access to that same data.
    apples and oranges, you don't have to go through those data collectors, you do have to go through the isp
    [–]MagaMagaChooChooUSA 2 points3 points4 points  (12 children)
    I really don't like this bill. I get what the Republicans are trying to do but it isn't smart or popular. It's a losing issue even this sub is split and we're hardcore to the right.
    I personally don't think it's smart to say "well Facebook gets to fuck over all its users so instead of not allowing Facebook to sell your personal data and search history, we're just going to let Comcast sell the list of porn sites you visit along with your real name and address. There, problem solved!". That's just retarded. We should be protecting our freedoms, not selling them out. This bill is a clear violation of the 4th amendment and anybody under the age of fucking 80 whose ever used a computer could tell you that.
    [–]Hillarysdilddo_2016 2 points3 points4 points  (1 child)
    You're free to NOT use a particular website.
    What are you going to avoid the entire internet now to avoid spying?
    Your ISP is not the same as a website.
    [–]Goldman_BlackzKEK 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
    Trump please drain the swamp and VETO THIS PIECE OF SHIT. I shouldn't have to opt out to not have my fucking internet history sold to the highest bidder.
    [–]ZordlyDTOM 2 points3 points4 points  (3 children)
    I admit to not knowing any of the details regarding this. But my common sense tells me that the Obama rule written after the election is suspicious. And whether there is a problem or not, the Government is never the best choice for fixing it. I think the best is to just rescind Obama's order and be done with it.
    [–]shadowman3001BPA[S] 2 points3 points4 points  (1 child)
    Just like that EPA regulation on coal, it was put in place so that it would have to be reversed and given negative press.
    [–]Asscroft 2 points3 points4 points  (3 children)
    How much would Clinton/Soros pay to have Comcast dox all the people who frequent this sub?
    [–]ITworksGuys -1 points0 points1 point  (2 children)
    Not a dime more than they would have paid the last several years.
    These protections don't exist. If they can do it now, they could do it then.
    [–]Asscroft 0 points1 point2 points  (1 child)
    Oh agreed it should be legal to sell the list it should be legal to buy the list and a it should probably be legal to harass the people on the list so long as you don't break any laws harassing them. I just wondered how much they'd pay. When antifa shows up on my doorstep, as I'm shooting them dead, I'd like to know how much Comcast made.
    [–]ITworksGuys 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    lol
    I don't like the idea, but the fucking hyperbole about this bill is ridiculous.
    [–]DickFeelyCA 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
    ISPs are swamp creatures that spend millions to block competition from the market and screw Americans. Other countries have faster and cheaper internet service. The industry needs more competition, much like the health insurance industry, not less consumer protections. We're already at their mercy due to lack of choice and the difficulty of new entrants into the market, thanks again to their willingness to pay off officials.
    Trump must veto if he wants to signal that he's a trust-buster who will help the average American. He knows how far the deep state will go to keep control.
    Besides, how the hell does this crap get passed before gun rights bills??
    [–]Texas-CentipedeTX 2 points3 points4 points  (1 child)
    ISPs can't collect and sell my data. But websites and apps can? ISPs claim they are at a disadvantage. OK, so ban everyone from selling personal data. I don't support anyone collecting and selling my data. If your company needs to make money, make it in a different way. Selling out privacy should not be an allowable business model.
    [–]MadPreacher1ADDTOM 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
    This right here is winner, winner chicken dinner.
    [–]ZippyTheChickenDTOM 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
    shadowman3001 your thoughts on this subject are political not technology based..
    I have been on the Net since before the first .com way back into the mid 1980's when I had to Telnet to IBM in armonk ny on a IP Address to read their technology files or to the Library of Congress or to a variety of other Labs on the Internet ... and there wasn't much else out there before >I< and many others built a huge chunk of what you kids today call the internet.
    I have over 30 years working with computer networking.. I started before there was TCP/IP available to most people. I HAVE WRITTEN INTERNET PROTOCOL SOFTWARE INCLUDING FTP, HTTP BROWSERS, TELNET AND OTHER SPECIFIC APPS THAT ONLY HAVE ONE USE............
    I am not the know all end all person of knowledge about the internet but at one point I was a contributor to the Linux Document Project and that brought me in contact with a lot of people that are much more informed than I am about how the internet works.
    I have known people that ran the largest ISPs from Philadelphia PA and across our country to past the Mississippi.
    If an ISP collects your data at the port or the router they know everything you do..
    IF GOOGLE COLLECTS YOUR DATA THERE ARE WAYS YOU CAN BLOCK THAT.. you can not use google's services.. you can use methods to block 100% of any beacon pixels or other assets that can track you...
    YOU CAN NOT BLOCK YOUR ISP FROM TRACKING EVERYTHING YOU DO

    It is a completely different animal......

    Choosing to use a Company's Service .. VS choosing to use the Internet at all

    There is no VPN .. No Anyomizer... No HTTPS ... NO NOTHING THAT CAN STOP THE PEOPLE I KNOW FROM TRACKING EVERY LAST THING YOU DO.
    If you use a VPN that VPN has incoming and outgoing traffic
    Lets say you are using the vpn to watch a video on PornHub
    That VPN has External Routers it connects to..
    You click on a video in your browser on pornhub .. the request goes out to your VPN and then your VPN requests the video from PornHub..
    The packets are sent back to the VPN and then to your computer....
    HA AND YOU THINK YOU ARE ANONYMOUS ... THATS INSANE.....
    The easiest way to find out what you are watching is intercept the packets from the video going into the VPN before they are sent through the VPN to your computer..
    THEN ALL YOU DO IS MAKE THE VIDEO STUTTER IN A PATTERN
    THE ROUTER FEEDING THE VPN HOLDS PACKETS AND YOUR BROWSER DOESN'T EVEN NOTICE BUT THE TRAFFIC COMING OUT OF THE VPN IS THE SAME PATTERN
    1 - 5 - 3 - 7 - 8 - 2 - 9 - 2 - 4 GOING IN
    1 - 5 - 3 - 7 - 8 - 2 - 9 - 2 - 4 COMING OUT
    VPN OR NOT YOU JUST GOT BUSTED
    You don't need to worry about encryption or salts or anything .. just measure time.
    so you have skips or holding onto packets and the in and out is compared and they know that the video going into the vpn is being sent to the VPN USER ON A COMPUTER IN ALABAMA...
    They don't have to hack the VPN Encryption because they insert skips by holding packets in a pattern... thousands of packets .. they put a stutter in them.. maybe not even enough for you to see because your browser buffers video before it plays it...
    BUT THE ROUTERS CAN SEE IT...
    People don't know enough about the basics of the internet because they don't care to find out about it.. all this information is out there.
    Although it is important that companies like Facebook and Google get restricted from distributing our information
    It is nothing in comparison to your internet connection being monitored.
    NOW WITH THAT SAID...
    I am not a fool .. I already know that the Government monitors all of this and they have been doing it since dialup ...
    I know they do.. I know an ISP that had the Government come in an put in a system to monitor all traffic...
    It was called Carnivore
    and today they are even better at it.
    AND IF YOU THINK USING OPEN INTERNET AT STARBUCKS IS GOING TO PROTECT YOU .... BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
    your device is fingerprinted .. Google is about to stop requiring you to login with passwords because they are so good at fingerprinting our devices now that you can just go to gmail and autologin without a password because they know you are using IP 127.127.0.0 located in this GEOIP Area and your browser is Firefox 47 and you have these exact plugins loaded in your browser and you are using this specific operating system that has these features...
    This is a bad deal and trump should veto anything that allows ISPs to sell your browsing history
    OR EVERYONE THAT VISITS https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/ .. is going to be on a DNC Database....
    let alone any other personal sites you might visit...
    YOU ARE NOT PRIVATE ON THE INTERNET.. YOU CAN NOT HIDE ON THE INTERNET.. THEY CAN AND WILL FIND YOU ... THAT IS THE TRUTH..
    If you believe otherwise you are a fool....
    but comcast shouldn't be helping the DNC know my political views or if I am shopping at Amazon for a new belt for my clothes washer...
    its a bad deal
    Trump will get a lot of credit if he vetoes it and a lot of hate from the internet if he allows it.
    [–]YouDontSeeMe420 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
    Is there any way we can get god emperor and his advisers to veto this? this is a brutal anti-privacy bill.
    i guess this'll be a test to see if he is a real populist after all.
    [–]ShiveShivu 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
    OP, you support the bill to let all private information be gathered perfectly by ISPs, because other companies already get a little bit of information. This is a crawl-argument. "They did it, so I can do it too".
    This is morally Wrong. It's not a good argument.
    You also state that the government shouldn't play favorites, well this bill does that. An ISP can make a search engine if they want, they can make websites to track information too. They were never stopped from doing that.
    How wrong or how good data-collection in general by other means is a different topic, but this way is brain dead. It surprises me, truly, that this is even a discussion.
    No one in this debate stand to gain anything from this - only lose. This is a lose-situation for million and millions of people, but it helps out 5 companies, who doesn't need it. It's foolish beyond belief. Obvious no to this bill.
    Changing this to an Opt-Out is also absolutely ridiculous.
    You are literally giving up your privacy for no gain. You just...give it up. And you're giving it up on behalf of others as well.
    [–]terribletweets 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
    OP, please post your full name, address, date of birth, place of birth, and log of your browsing history.
    [–]Poinciana_TreeMAGA 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
    I think there's a time to toe the party line, and be a good Republican.
    I also think there are times to stand up to the leadership and assert what's right with regards to OUR REPUBLIC AS OUR FOUNDERS INTENDED. I believe in a right to privacy, as protected under the 14th Amendment.
    If I can't get off of Comcast's e-mail spam list or their affiliates who call me, you think we should trust them not to sell our browsing history after telling them not to? Sorry for my French, but FUCK THAT.
    This bill is an abortion. It must get killed in the HOR.
    [–]flingingpoo 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
    The issue I have is you must pay an ISP to access the internet. Sites like Facespace are free and need to generate revenue somehow.
    I believe that if you pay for the service, then you should have to opt-in to allow sharing of data collected by the provider. If the service is free then the service should provide an opt-out option.
    [–]CcrLyaSrtIatLyVA 4 points5 points6 points  (0 children)
    I oppose this bill, because if there's one thing the Obama administration stood for it's data privacy.
    <sips Kool-Aid>
    [–]invertedwut 5 points6 points7 points  (0 children)
    “
    “Under the FTC’s watch, our internet and data economy has been the envy of the world. The agency’s evidence-based approach calibrates privacy and data-security requirements to the sensitivity of information collected,” Senate lead sponsor Flake wrote in a Wall Street Journal op-ed.
    This guy is a fucking liar, a hack, and a fool. Privacy controls are not at all tuned for the importance of the information as it is, and nothing about our internet is the envy of the world. Our prices and service provider choice have made us the fucking laughing stock of the western world and the only people that appreciate any aspect of our privacy related laws are literal fascists that go around jailing people for tweets and facebook posts demonstrating wrong-think.
    They are only able to do so elsewhere because there are no laws preventing internet applications and service providers from intrusively collecting internet activity information on users.
    “
    “The FCC rules subject all web browsing and app usage data to the same restrictive requirements as sensitive personal information. That means that information generated from looking up the latest Cardinals score or checking the weather in Scottsdale is treated the same as personal health and financial data.”
    That's a strong argument against this bill, lol. browsing history being treated as sensitive private information is a fucking good thing. it's nobody's fucking business what I'm looking up on the internet.
    “
    Why I support the bill, though, is different. As it stands, every website/app/etc that you use has the right to collect and sell your private data (with a few exceptions, medical data and whatnot).
    So put them under the kind of rules the FCC has and bring them up to the ISP's level of required protection of private information. raise the bar, don't lower it.
    “
    Keep in mind that it's neigh impossible to use the internet without websites and apps, and with a relatively small demand for websites that don't collect and sell, a relatively small supply has appeared.
    yeah we're aware, and the exact same thing will happen when selecting an ISP. you won't have any choice if this bill passes. you'll be forced to sign an intrusive EULA to even use the internet now, at all.
    “
    Also worth noting that you can opt out of your ISP's data collection should you choose.
    not when this bill passes you won't.
    “
    The free market has a way of working things out.
    Not when the interests of the service providers are diametrically opposed to the interests of the users. And none of this would a fucking issue if, by the very nature of the medium and technology involved, the information being collected weren't so vulnerable to being stolen or abused. If the government couldn't subpoena (or secretly steal or secretly ask nicely for) that browsing history "being collected for marketing purposes", this wouldn't be a problem. but they can. and thus it's a problem as long as they are collecting it.
    “
    Let me reiterate, because people don't seem to be reading the text that isn't big and bold. ISPs are required to let you opt out (though they make it difficult to find out how).
    That's the case now with the FCC rules, isn't it? Isn't that going out the window if this bill passes?
    [–]kwame_kilpatrick 5 points6 points7 points  (0 children)
    This should be vetoed. The argument that ISPs are somehow at a "disadvantage" vs. online social media sites is very weak at best. I choose not to use Facebook, etc. because I don't want my privacy invaded. I remain as anonymous as possible on pretty much every site I use now. I don't have that option with an ISP. In many cases -- most people have only one option for an ISP (outside of cellular), and they are forced to accept it.
    Selling people's browsing history, etc. is ripe for abuse. With all the leaks we have these days, how long before someone hacks this info and publishes a database of stats with your public real name, and a list of all the sites you've visited in the last year. This is dangerous and we should fight every time to err on the side of restricting people's privacy.
    [–]gwrightivCA 4 points5 points6 points  (0 children)
    I think something important to consider is that we have only had this privacy protection for 2 months. Before January, ISPs were still collecting and selling data.
    [–]wowcheesestick 5 points6 points7 points  (5 children)
    If trump does what he says he will do. Then he will veto it. Drain the swamp. I'll be disapointed. I already know.
    [–]SilverShibe 3 points4 points5 points  (0 children)
    This is a ridiculous post. If I use an app, I expect them to know how I use it. If I get online and buy a 3' vibrating dildo, I expect the company I bought it from to know I bought it. I wouldn't be surprised to get junk mail about giant dildo sales in the future. I don't expect the electric company to know every time I plug it in, then start sending me dildo ads in my electric bill, just as I don't want my ISP to have any idea what websites I visit.
    [–]solsken77USA 6 points7 points8 points  (3 children)
    The GOPe is at it again. I DO NOT SUPPORT the bill that went through yesterday, might I add, universally by house republicans.
    [–]fastmandanTX -2 points-1 points0 points  (2 children)
    the president's signing it...this is reversing a policy that barry did last second in january that hasn't even been in place yet. the FTC already has jurisdiction over violations.
    [–]hamlinmcgill 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
    The FTC doesn't have jurisdiction over ISPs though. See this decision from the 9th Circuit: https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2016/08/29/15-16585.pdf
    [–]PlebeianforLifeUSA 3 points4 points5 points  (0 children)
    Who cares when and why it was signed. It protects your privacy, and Trump is abolishing it while simultaneously complaining about being surveilled. Think about that.
    [–]theS4RGKEK 3 points4 points5 points  (0 children)
    We truly have the best, most objective mods here on the_Donald. Thank you for this fair and balanced analysis since I too have mixed feelings over this bill and to be honest we got much bigger fish to fry; the swamp still needs to be drained some more, sanctuary cities need to go bye-bye, the FED needs to be audited, and we got a nation and a world to uncuck.
    So without further a do, I will not proclaim the ancient /r/the_Donald saying that goes back to the beginning...

    MODS = GODS

    [–]DrRubotnik 1 point2 points3 points  (1 child)
    I don't think there's a case for "free market" with the ISP thing. You can choose not to use Facebook or Google or whatever. You don't go to them, they don't get your data.
    But your ISP has literally everything. You can't get around that in most cases either thanks to the stupid monopoly thing with cable internet companies.
    Still, it's not for random, unelected government agencies to make laws like this. Congress should do so, and the agencies should simply be enforcing said laws. The FCC was not in the right to just pass an edict.
    [–]SaltmineinspectorDTOM 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
    More of these big issue discussion threads please!
    [–]AverinMIAFRA 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
    I want zero data collection from any company unless I opt-in for a "better user experience" or whatever bullshit lie they feed to get people to drop trow and bend over.
    [–]Papa--Squat 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
    The cognitive dissonance is strong with this one
    [–]Greelys 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
    Very even-handed presentation of the issue, op.
    [–]meinbruder14DTOM 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    thanks for doing PROS v. CONS instead of shilling for one side or the other. i've been all for the repeal, but i understand the other side.
    my argument would be: REPEAL AND REPLACE!!!!! we need protection and privacy, but this is not the way to do it by allowing this FCC resolution to stand. some of the ideas in it are great, but it moves the jurisdiction of oversight from FTC (track record for breaking up monopolies) to the FCC (track record for approving mergers of existing monopolies). i agree we should be able to opt out of data collection, but there are means of combating the ISP from collecting data such as VPN (notice how VPN are taking advantage of this to drum up fear for business???) whereas where is your recourse against ever expanding federal government. my privacy can take a hit to limit the government. i would prefer if the GOP would talk beyond the repeal and into legislating law for FTC to enforce.
    [–]trumpisnowpresident 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
    Simple: MAKE IT OPT-IN INSTEAD OF OPT-OUT. SOLVED.
    [–]IrritatedSquirrel 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
    Can we please have more posts like this? This is fucking great info. Presented both sides and gave his opinion.
    [–]tumbeldrieDTOM 1 point2 points3 points  (1 child)
    This is why we need term limits!
    They can pass this bill but we have the senate the house the presidency and can't pass a fucking health care bill?
    [–]DJT4PRZCA[🍰] 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
    “
    "That means that information generated from looking up the latest Cardinals score or checking the weather in Scottsdale is treated the same as personal health and financial data."
    Whoever said this doesn't understand how little data it takes to uniquely identify a person, that person's political affiliation, etc.
    The 4th Amendment gives a right to privacy in "papers". Today that would include web searches.
    And we don't need this shit to do counter-terrorism. Control immigration from places where there's widespread hatred of our way of life, use regular old policework and warrants, and you won't have a problem.
    [–]b4k4ni 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
    An Opt-Out is always better then an Opt-In. As you said, it's hidden. Do you really believe, that the majority of users KNOW of the logging and selling the data? Imagine a 50 year old woman without hard knowledge and just checks her mails and googles a bit. She wouldn't even know how to disable it.
    And even worse - this is your PRIVATE data, UNFILTERED. ALL what you do. Yeah, facebook logs too, but only the FB stuff, not everything else. And here lies the problem.
    Imagine EVERYTHING you ever browsed / did on the internet was known to a company... and they would sell it. And with your next credit talk in your bank the guy says "hey, your score looks really bad ... ", because those scores calc in ALL data they can get. So if you searched (or your friends) for "file bancrupcy" ... fun times.
    And / or imagine a hacker gets the data and releases the stuff online.
    This is no joke, this is really concerning. And yeah you could protect yourself with a VPN BUT the score will be even worse then "because you don't share and try to hide, so you have something to hide".
    Data proctection should be one of the most important things for all.
    [–]the_clint1 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
    Why are you treating ISP and websites as the same thing?
    You are literally paying your ISP and they know your name and address. Not the same thing with accessing an website. You don't access the website by sending your name, just an IP provided by that ISP
    [–]panzermasterCA 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
    The issue with saying "internet companies do it, why can't we" is that we get thousands of options in those. And only 2-3 ISPs in the area, and only one providing Broadband speeds.
    Wireless companies add more competition, especially with ones like T-MOBILE offering unlimited data. But they have even more power in that they are able to know your exact location, intercept text messages, and intercept calls.
    [–]6000000_DOLLAR_DICKNC 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
    Neither political party understands the web or modern technology.
    The reps who voted for this are hypocrites, conservatives have always been in favor of privacy.
    I will vote against these hypocrites.
    The left is tainting all the issues and polarizing the country with their lies and that is bad because conservatives now presume dems always lie.
    The boy who cried wolf is going to kill privacy online.
    [–]napoleonbonerpartz 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
    Against. Easily.
    [–]Brian4LLPOK 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    I think everybody needs to realize there is a huge push by "internet" and "app" users to curtail anonymous data collection and then wholesaling. On top of that more and more average users are going to adblocking.
    This anonymous usage data has value. If you make it illegal or make the barrier to collection to great prepare to start shelling out more money than you're used to.
    Bottom line the "I don't like them collecting and selling my information." You're talking about them selling data that in no way can be traced back to the individual and making a little scratch which offset's YOUR costs as a consumer. This is a no-cost to you way to lower your real costs to using services. It is smart to let the data flow.
    Lastly, if you're under the impression that this type of information sharing didn't exist before apps and websites... you're nuts. Any consumer business worth their salt has been selling this information for decades.
    [–]PhoBueno 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
    I appreciate your framing of arguments for both sides as well as your input. I realize it can be opted out of as well but here:
    “
    This bill offsets the late-January FCC rule preventing ONLY ISP's from collecting and selling your data. Not the rest of the internet. In my humble opinion, the government shouldn't allow some companies access to your data, while restricting other companies access to that same data. Also worth noting that you can opt out of your ISP's data collection should you choose. The government isn't here to play favorites, nor should it be here to consolidate money and power to companies like Google, Facebook, and Twitter.
    you are overlooking fundamental differences between the service ISPs provide and those provided by Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc. I use the latter three for internet-related services they provide, but not for my actual internet access. And for the most part I use them because I choose to despite other options. Which brings me to point number two: I don't have to use them. If I don't like that Google tracks everything, I can use a different search engine, web-based email, and smart phone. I sure as hell don't need Twitter for my day-to-day life and I'm only on Facebook for the sake of family, so I don't really care if they monitor what pictures I'm tagged in. With my ISP on the other hand (in my case Comcast), I have literally no other options AND I am paying them for the service. What's more, they are monitoring potentially EVERYTHING from porn browsing to online shopping. If Comcast was to say, offer internet access that permits your data to be sold in lieu of a montly fee that would be one thing, but obviously that is not the case. Basically they are double-dipping and they are only able to do it because there is no competition. Allowing ISPs to do gather and sell browsing history in this manner is akin to allowing your electric company to sell information on your electrical usage to eletronics marketers and advertisers. You say the Government shouldn't play favorites and to the extent that it's an industry with lots of competition I agree, but in industries that are prone to monopolies/duopolies etc. IMO the Government absolutely needs to keep companies in check.
    Having said all that, if Trump signs off on this (as I expect he will) I will be disappointed but I will not regret voting for him. He didn't really campaign on privacy (at least not that I can recall) and he has followed through on the issues that earned him my vote. Even during the election there were areas of his platform I disagreed with, and I assumed that during his presidency he was going to support things I disagreed with and vice versa from time to time. At the end of the day it's still politics and just like with any other candidate you have to take the bad with the good.
    [–]highlife64 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)

    VETO!!!!!!!

    [–]reactionforceatA 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
    So because we allow other companies to collect and sell our data we should allow the company that has access to ALL of our internet traffic collect and sell our data?! This is the dumbest logic ever. It's going backwards on data collection not forward. This is a lobbyist shill post and mods should remove it.
    [–]give_me_a_chit 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
    It's time. Time Warner/Comcast, anti-trust. Break them up. Break them up. Break them up.
    It's time. NO MORE CRONY CAPITALISM! No more globalism! Fuck Comcast! Fuck Time Warner!
    [–]RS3_TROLLERKEK 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    Obama let 4 companies manage and sell our data. It's blanketed under "privacy act" but it's just a huge invasion of privacy. Globalist bill. Trump wants it to be free market, which in turn will create more competition, lower prices, higher security. If everyone is selling everyones shit, one company can come out and say we wont sell your shit and prove it, they will take over the market. Then they will get so big they will sell shit. Then another company will come along and the process repeats
    [–]gnexuser2424RUS 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
    Thing is I do a lot of sensitive IT work including beta testing... What if a competitor to a product I'm testing wants to purchase my history? I can very in serious trouble if they find that data.. That could possibly happen
    [–]jlange94OR 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
    I just want to know how this will affect computers used in the workplace or government computers. Wouldn't it be illegal for companies to track browsing history in those situations?
    [–]chickwafferOH 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
    I don't think you'll be able to find a single sub other than TD that shares information from both sides of an argument without it becoming an absolute shit show. thank you for the unbiasedness and civility based mod
    [–]Corporal_Cathead 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
    Literally the only place That I could find an honest discussion on this site is a subreddit called the_donald, filled with pepes.
    Alternate timeline
    [–]ISCOREYOURCOMMENTS 1 point2 points3 points  (5 children)
    The shills are using this bills passage as a way to erode support for the GOP and ultimately Trump when he signs it. Don't be a low information Pede.... The "Omg the government is taking away our privacy!" Are likely leftists who have found a subtle way of trolling.
    Do you even know what the details of the bill are?
    [–]Firemaster657 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
    The gop deserves zero support they were against trump the whole way to presidency.
    [–]pm_me_halal_stuff -2 points-1 points0 points  (1 child)
    Nobody should support either party you fucking cunt. They're both apart of the globalist swamp
    [–]ISCOREYOURCOMMENTS 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
    It's ignorant to put the two parties on the same scale and say they are equal.
    [–]ZyramRo -2 points-1 points0 points  (1 child)
    I can be firmly against this and not be a shill. Does it erode my support for Trump? No. Does it make me wish he had more technology knowledge and wish he could see what the ISP are doing? Yes. I mean, how do you think I feel when I looked at something Nancy Pelosi said and it was a rational argument I agreed with? I will be back, I need to vomit.
    [–]ISCOREYOURCOMMENTS 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
    Do you even know what the details of this bill are?
    [–]bloodfist45MAGA 5 points6 points7 points  (3 children)
    Keep note: HUGE amounts of "former" donald trump supporters shitposting
    [–]Jack_CandleNAVY 15 points16 points17 points  (1 child)
    I believe they'll only become former if Trump begins to vote on stuff like this. Are you more Pro Trump or Pro America? This bill is anti American. Data collection on massive levels is anti-american whether it be Comcast or the fucking NSA.
    [–]Firemaster657 7 points8 points9 points  (0 children)
    This is 100 percent anti American. I voted for trump to stop the tpp and drain the swamp. This is creating more swamp and giving more power to the swamp.
    [–]sh2003KEK 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
    Ah yes, the usual CTR tactics in full force.
    [–]ashweiuohsdkjlMeMeMeOkieDoke 4 points5 points6 points  (3 children)
    Here is my libertarian argument for the bill:
    S.J.Res.34 reduces the executive branch's power to interfere in the market, and that's a good thing. Without this bill, a leftist president could use the FCC and executive orders to have too much control over the internet, without the consent of Congress. That would be bad for free speech. Also, President Obama's original order against ISPs shouldn't have been legal in the first place, because the power of legislating belongs to Congress.
    If you don't like the way Internet Service Providers (ISPs) are treating you, then we need to address the root problem. The root problem is that ISPs have government granted monopolies, which blocks out new competition in the market, and allows them to continue to offer terrible user agreements and bad customer service.
    Local governments manage utility poles and lines which were created through the use of eminent domain. When they block new competitors from using those utility poles and lines, it is giving existing ISPs a government granting monopoly. More government regulation only makes monopolistic behavior worse, because compliance is a costly barrier that blocks out new competitors in a market.
    Below are some more links which show that the reason ISP service is bad is because of the government's ongoing interference in the market.
    [–]solsken77USA 1 point2 points3 points  (1 child)
    Will we address these problems in the future though? Because it seems that my party's platform doesn't really give a crap about these incipient issues. We need a new party platform.
    [–]ashweiuohsdkjlMeMeMeOkieDoke 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
    Good point, and I'm not sure. The tricky thing about this is that local governments probably should have the right to regulate utility poles and lines, because it isn't really a federal or state issue.
    I think this might be more of an advocacy/awareness issue, for Republicans and Democrats alike. We need people to put more pressure on their own cities to do the right thing and allow new competitors to use any utility poles or public lines equally. Google has started pushing for "one touch make ready" rules at the local/city government level which would allow them to do all the readying work on each utility pole, and prevent existing ISPs from stalling indefinitely.
    [–]XMAGA_1776XCOAL 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
    Best argument yet.
    [–]Gridorr 0 points1 point2 points  (4 children)
    Instead of REEEEEEEE-ing like most of left Reddit, I just went and got PIA (VPN), issued solved on my end, my day carries on. Orbot and Orfox is great for those wanting to protect.mobile identity.
    [–]DevalidatingDTOM 3 points4 points5 points  (0 children)
    People forget that you can still do this. There are still ways around this. If people really cared about privacy to that end, I guarantee you that we would see a huge rise in the VPN industry, and/or more TOR users. When ISP's sell your data, it's not the end-all be-all for privacy. I doubt it's legal for anyone, including an ISP, to decrypt your data being sent between your computer and a server and sell it.
    [–]whytegirlprKEK 0 points1 point2 points  (1 child)
    Yeah but what about iPhones?
    [–]Gridorr 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    They also have tons of issues. But apple being apple has very limited 3rd party protection. Vault7 showed apple is also compromised. With regards to internet info and the bill. If you have apple your fucked because as far as I know slot of vpns aren't on applestore
    [–]64oz_Slurprise 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    Unless they start to throttle your data down because of the VPN packets they can read.
    [–]aveydeyDTOM 3 points4 points5 points  (0 children)
    Great post! Glad to see the argument for both sides of this issue!!
    [–]Darkred28TX 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
    THANK YOU! Too many concern trolls on here telling us we're going to lose our privacy.
    [–]exertedDTOM -1 points0 points1 point  (2 children)
    Stop making this is an issue. It's honestly not a problem that this happens FFS. It's a leftist wedge issue that's why no democrats voted in favor of eroding those protections.
    Trump needs to be focusing on things like the wall to MAGA. Not damn youtube protections.
    IMO criticism of this bill is a criticism of the right and ultimately Trump's leadership. Don't be cucked into believing sharia blue's lie.
    [–]CaptainTeemoJr 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    I'm not going to be cucked into silence about an issue I think has relevance to my life. God Emperor is fully capable of handing the full workload of the presidency, these types of issues included. I appreciate your passion, but the people need to talk about what they want to, in an open platform.
    And let people criticize the right, because the only way the best ideas and practices will thrive is surviving public scrutiny from supporters and oppesers alike.
    [–]pm_me_halal_stuff 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    You fucking idiot. This affects you more than illegal immigration
    [–]k-doggiePD 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
    There is a major difference between an ISP collecting your data and a service you use collecting your data. You do not have options for your ISP. You do have options for services you use. Internet is becoming similar to basic needs like water and heat.
    This is an awful bill that makes Republicans rich on the side and I will be voting in democrats in 2018 of they keep this up.
    [–]NoStumpoTrumpoTX 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
    Based reasonable arguments
    [–]soskrood 2 points3 points4 points  (1 child)
    Here is the difference.
    When you use Facebook / Google - you pay nothing for their services. Why? Because YOU are the product. YOUR information is what makes them money.
    It is different for an ISP. YOU ALREADY pay them for their service, it is a monthly fee. By giving them permission to sell your data, they are getting paid twice - once directly from the customer and a second time when they sell your data.
    This is exactly the same thing these same ISP's did with cable TV. When cable first started, you paid to get content without commercials. Now you pay double - first for the content, second through commercials.
    All the ISP's are doing is trying to change the deal with their customers by appealing to the state. If you are going to be selling my information, then you had better be giving me internet access for free, just like Facebook and Google do with their services.
    [–]bitchalotCA 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    Yeah aside from the privacy concerns, they are triple dipping. Monthly fees, advertising and they want to make more off our data. They could also demand money from sites, dipping yet again.
    [–]pm_me_halal_stuff 2 points3 points4 points  (2 children)
    How people that support this bill are trying to rationalize it: "We already got fucked in the ass, so getting more fucked in the ass isn't that bad. Chill guys."
    [–]Fatema_Spanky 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    Exactly. I assumed only the Democrats had brain-dead morons.
    [–]VirginiaPlain1USA -1 points0 points1 point  (0 children)
    That's the majority of T_D subscribers, or least the most vocal. Critical thinking is non-existent.
    [–]MrGreggleNY 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
    The only good that can come from this is Trump wins over some libtards with a veto.
    [–]IngratiatingGoblins 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    I'm trying to look up how to opt out from my ISP, but I can't seem to find any info. Obviously the ISP itself is not going to make it easy. Anyone know what I would need to look / search for to opt out?
    [–]MadPreacher1ADDTOM 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    Both ways of doing this is bad for the American people. There is no mechanism to force ISPs to pay the user a percentage for the data collected or a way to avoid the data collected. In either case, there needs to be a clear statement that shrink wrap contracts are illegal as the consumer does not have any way of altering the terms of said contract.
    [–]VirginiaPlain1USA 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    I do think the controversy surrounding the bill is misdirected (deliberately of course, what do you expect?), but we do need some form of protection against private companies selling our data usage on their networks. We're already compromised especially if we use Google's services (I still do, it's hard to break free), but we really don't need anymore compromise.
    [–]AM_Kylearan 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    My two cents:
    I think the policy on internet privacy should be reviewed in total. I'm personally leery of any attempts to dismantle privacy protections. It can be justified to treat ISPs differently than other online companies (such as google or facebook) because you have to opt-in to using facebook, i.e. you can choose not to use it. You are less able to choose not to use your ISP. Competition at the local ISP level is reminiscent of a water/power utility rather than a typical free-market company (it's not really fair to compare cable internet to DSL or satellite). As such, there are two options - allow other ISPs to operate over existing network infrastructure, or regulate the local monopoly like any other utility.
    [–]fastmandanTX 0 points1 point2 points  (1 child)
    thanks for this sticky! can we have these as the midday secondary stickies everyday instead of memes? i dig the memes of course but the best memes are the ones that organically/gradually become amazing and viral like the race bannon = mike pence ones.
    this is a legit good topic that has great pros and cons and we can talk about it. we should have done this with the healthcare fiasco that happened last friday also. it would have gotten heated, sure. but it's what makes our community the best.
    [–]shadowman3001BPA[S] 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    It's an interesting idea, and we'll talk about it!
    [–]jay_b00gieDTOM 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    thanks fo r this
    [–]BernieSitsWhenHePees 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    Can I just point out how refreshing it is to be able to view a political post with both sides of the argument summarized and fairly represented?
    Kudos to you, u/shadowman3001
    Can you imagine the immature shitshow this post would turn into over at r/Redacted? For all their bitching and moaning about how biased this sub is, it's clear to anyone with an IQ over room temperature which sub is actually more conducive to open dialog.
    [–]Kirkin_While_WorkinRUS 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    Solid post
    [–]TripAcez 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    Does this apply to history from the bills effective date on wards or does it apply to past history since the start?
    [–]HEY_GIRLS_PM_ME_TOESUSA 0 points1 point2 points  (9 children)
    Soooooo help me out. This bill will allow websites to collect our data ( what we look at ) and sell it to companies so those companies can advertise to use?
    [–]DrinkourwayoutofitPA 1 point2 points3 points  (3 children)
    No, they already do that and this regulation/the bill removing the regulation, will do nothing to change that. All it does is allow your internet service provider to stand on the same footing as Google, Facebook, Amazon and Netflix, for example.
    [–]HEY_GIRLS_PM_ME_TOESUSA 1 point2 points3 points  (2 children)
    So nothing is going to change really?
    [–]LuckyBucky21 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    Drinkyourwayoutofit is wrong. You can not use facebook. You can delete the app and it cannot track you anymore. They are free services that make money off your data to turn profit. You pay them in data. You are paying ISPs to be able to send data. Now they want to use that data for more money. Nothing is going to change tomorrow, but they can now do some market research on all of our data collectively.
    This leads to you being offered the social media Internet package for an extra 49.95 a month for fast lane access to ther choice of providers like reddit, facebook, etc. Or a smaller package littered with ads and slower for 29.99. Of course there will be Special exemptions to "lifelong" customers who have paid the $399.99 golden vip package for more than 5 years and you will be granted Internet access just like we all have today .
    [–]maga_lyagushkaRUS 1 point2 points3 points  (3 children)
    • Websites already collect your data.
    • Some websites have terms that allow them to sell your data.
    • Some websites have third party tools (Google is a big example) that also create tracking data about you
    • ISPs also "see" what you do in a lot of ways
    • ISPs see more, since all of your traffic goes through your ISP
    • ISPs are presently prohibited from monetizing this data
    So Google already knows tons about you, even if they are not your ISP. Comcast, potentially your ISP, wants the same access to your raw activity feed. For money, and here's a token statement about how it will be for your benefit, too.
    It is so much more than mere advertising.
    [–]HEY_GIRLS_PM_ME_TOESUSA 0 points1 point2 points  (1 child)
    So this bill gives ISPs the ability to see more of what we do online?
    [–]maga_lyagushkaRUS 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
    No, it gives them the ability to sell it to other companies. That can mean a lot of things. Again, this is already done by plenty of companies, ISPs were classed as special by the FCC.
    [–]LuckyBucky21 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    This mindset is wrong.
    Your barber has some of your info. Your job has some info on you. Social security has certain info on you. The chili's down the street from your house has some info on you. Where you get your car tires has some info on you. This Bill is letting Ford collect every piece of data from ever place you go to in your car and use it anyway they want.
    Not tomorrow but soon you may have toll lanes to go see your barber and have to pay for parking at that chili's even if you decide to walk to it
    [–]sh2003KEK 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    It will allow ISPs to collect our data and do whatever they want with it.
    [–]MedikPacPA 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    This is a very strange predicament.
    I watch a channel called InRangeTV, who laid out the bill in a very neutral way. It's normally a gun channel.
    But some hardcore leftists came out of the woodwork just to bash Republicans. Which NEVER happens on channels like these.
    Tbh we need to keep the regulation just to shut the cucks up. I don't think it's bad if we lift the regulation, but I would rather it stay, and certainly don't want those assholes to get cocky again.
    [–]Chewies_MomTX -1 points0 points1 point  (0 children)
    OP: can you add in the Argument For section a little blurb about how Google and FB and Amazon, etc. are against this bill because it creates competition in the marketplace of search history advertising sales, in which Google dominates and FB and Amazon are 2nd and 3rd.
    People are also not aware that their phones are listening, so if you have an Android phone, that conversation you had about a cruise to Jamaica all of a sudden shows ads in your next FB viewing or Chrome viewing for Jamaican cruises.
    [–]ZSSGaming 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    Great, now congress is gonna know I google Gushin' Grannies every friday night.
    [–]GuyWithNoName67CAN 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    Thanks for this!
    [–]TeyanisGA 0 points1 point2 points  (2 children)
    I haven't followed this nearly as closely as I should have, but here's my opinion anyway.
    The main difference between netflix getting my info and and ISP getting my info, is that netflix only sees what I do on netflix The ISP can track anything, anywhere, and sell it to anyone. That's bullshit. What's even more bullshit is ISP's blatantly buying a bill into existence with "donations" on excess of $693,000. THAT is bullshit.
    I'm not some "zomg muh privacy" shill, I get that people are gonna get my data and sell. Just don't make it this fucking easy for them too, and don't do it by being bought out. Makes me sick.
    [–]ITworksGuys 0 points1 point2 points  (1 child)
    I bet 90% of people in this thread have no idea about them.
    [–]TeyanisGA 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    Yeah, its scary stuff if you read into it a little.
    [–]DevalidatingDTOM 0 points1 point2 points  (2 children)
    Simple solution. Use a VPN. As long as we see net neutrality (you can't slow down access to certain ip's/servers) then you're good. Pretty sure that you can't legally decrypt your customers data and sell it, including the data sent to the VPN. If people cared about privacy, then they would pay a couple extra bucks a months for a premium VPN. No competition between the regional monopoly system that is the ISP industry necessary.
    [–]SenorFreddyBlock 1 point2 points3 points  (1 child)
    “
    "VPNs are flawless and they totally never leak, guys."
    How about we use VPNs and we also stop our Government from allowing corporations to steal our data? The answer to companies like Google, Twitter, and Facebook being able to sell our shit isn't to allow everyone to sell our shit, it's to stop Google, Twitter, and Facebook (which are utilities) from selling our data.
    [–]ITworksGuys 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    That is a completely different piece of legislation and isn't really related to this at all.
    I am on board, don't get me wrong, but being upset today doesn't make much sense.
    [–]Pbleadhead 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    Thanks. goodness thanks. great post.
    I have been arguing the conservative position seemingly alone the past week. Glad at least someone else shares my view.
    [–]JustInTime2_ 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    Apps are contained to a specific area, the app. ISP are not, which makes their ability to data mine ur information without limits. It should be an opt in or out option. Allow the user to choose, not bureaucrats.
    [–]daswebmastriVA 0 points1 point2 points  (3 children)
    “
    ISPs are required to let you opt out
    Once folks find a way to do it with their ISP, they should share here. Currently trying to figure out how to opt out w/ Comcast.
    [–]brad1242 0 points1 point2 points  (2 children)
    exactly. I'm glad this issue brought the fact that they were CURRENTLY collecting data to the forefront of discussion, but you KNOW they're not going to make it easy to opt out.
    [–]daswebmastriVA 0 points1 point2 points  (1 child)
    I'm chatting w/ Comcast now. I made a formal request to opt out of any form of any information pertaining to me from being shared or sold in any form. Their first response: "...we will not share your account information to anybody."
    Notice, they said "we will not share your ACCOUNT INFORMATION to anybody". They cleverly choose their wording.
    [–]bookybooksKEK 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    What happened then? Did they let you?
    [–]MichealR24OK 0 points1 point2 points  (1 child)
    I love how the agency says our internet is the envy of the world when our speeds aren't even close to china/japan
    [–]shadowman3001BPA[S] 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    I would assume they mean the content, rather than the speeds. But hell if I know.
    [–]WowStrongArms 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    I saw that Jeff Flake is for it, and if that Gang of Eight RINO supports it, then I either need to extremely cautious and extreme vet whatever it is that he's supporting, or just be against it.
    Anything coming from McCain, Flake, Graham, Sasse, or Ryan makes me extremely wary.
    [–]TheRealRobMontyGA 0 points1 point2 points  (3 children)
    I for one seriously hope President Trump calls the Dems bluff on this bill and uses it to force them to either support Gorsuch or look spineless to their constituents.
    [–]DangerChips 0 points1 point2 points  (2 children)
    The Dems all voted against this bill. It was the Republican Congress Critters that pushed this through.
    [–]TheRealRobMontyGA 0 points1 point2 points  (1 child)
    Disregarding how moronic your comment is, I'll point out that I mean he'll offer them a simple choice: support Gorsuch and he vetos this, or the alternative, which makes them look bad.
    [–]DangerChips 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    Why would it make the Dems look bad? They all voted against this. This is you putting a gun to your own head and demanding that they give you what you want "or else".
    [–]TRUMPIS4US 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    It's in Trumps hands now , i know he will make the right decision and support the Americans who got him in office .
    [–]OverkillengineUSA 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    I am against allowing ISP's to collect user data on anything other than an opt in basis. We can avoid or mitigate most of the app based privacy threats online, but one cannot avoid using an ISP.
    I am also against the current regulations that allow ISP's to have a de facto monopoly within a region.
    Having both dynamics present is horrifically abusable; just imagine what would happen if they cross referenced your ISP meta data with "leaked" voter registrations to figure out who is likely to vote for what party and candidate and use that to fuck with registrations right before the primaries.
    Oh wait, that already happened in the 2016 Democrat primaries. They just used other means of data collection. But that does not mean we should make it any easier for these jackholes to pull off.
    [–]hamlinmcgill 0 points1 point2 points  (1 child)
    Do you have a source on ISPs being required to let you opt out? The bill is literally just one sentence and repeals the FCC rules. It doesn't put any new restrictions in place. The FTC, which regulates web companies like Facebook and Google, is barred from regulating ISPs (see this 9th Circuit Court of Appeals case). So where's the requirement that they let you opt out? I mean, I guess you can always just live off the grid and not use the internet...
    [–]Congress_Bill_Bot 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)

    🏛 Here is some more information about S.J.RES.34 - PDF

    A joint resolution providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Federal Communications Commission relating to 'Protecting the Privacy of Customers of Broadband and Other Telecommunications Services'.
    Subject: Science, Technology, Communications
    Congress: 115
    Sponsor: Jeff Flake
    Introduced: 2017-03-07
    Cosponsors: 24
    Committee(s): Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee
    Latest Major Action: 2017-03-28. Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
    Versions
    No versions were found for this bill.
    Actions
    2017-03-28: Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
    2017-03-28: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 215 - 205 (Roll no. 202).
    2017-03-28: Considered as unfinished business.
    2017-03-28: POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on S.J.Res. 34, the Chair put the question on passage and by voice vote, announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Doyle demanded the yeas and nays and the Chair postponed further proceedings on the question of passage until a time to be announced.
    2017-03-28: The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.
    2017-03-28: DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on S.J. Res. 34.
    2017-03-28: Rule provides for consideration of S.J. Res. 34 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Measure will be considered read. Bill is closed to amendments.
    2017-03-28: Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 230.
    2017-03-28: Rule H. Res. 230 passed House.
    2017-03-27: Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 230 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of S.J. Res. 34 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. Measure will be considered read. Bill is closed to amendments.
    2017-03-23: Held at the desk.
    2017-03-23: Received in the House.
    2017-03-23: Message on Senate action sent to the House.
    2017-03-23: Passed Senate without amendment by Yea-Nay Vote. 50 - 48. Record Vote Number: 94.
    2017-03-23: Considered by Senate.
    2017-03-23: Passed Senate without amendment by Yea-Nay Vote. 50 - 48. Record Vote Number: 94. (text: CR S1955)
    2017-03-23: Considered by Senate. (consideration: CR S1942-1955)
    2017-03-22: Measure laid before Senate by motion.
    2017-03-22: Motion to proceed to consideration of measure agreed to in Senate by Voice Vote.
    2017-03-22: Measure laid before Senate by motion. (consideration: CR S1925-1929, S1935-1940)
    2017-03-22: Motion to proceed to consideration of measure agreed to in Senate by Voice Vote. (consideration: CR S1925)
    2017-03-15: Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 16.
    2017-03-15: Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation discharged by petition pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 802 (c).
    2017-03-15: Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation discharged by petition pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 802(c).
    2017-03-07: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
    Votes
    Chamber Date Roll Call Question Yes No Didn't Vote Result
    House 2017-03-28 202 On Passage 215 205 9 Passed
    Senate 2017-03-23 94 On the Joint Resolution 50 48 2 Joint Resolution Passed
    [–]AMERICA_No_1 0 points1 point2 points  (1 child)
    Political discussion on reddit? GTFO!!!!
    [–]PlebeianforLifeUSA 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    Lol. This isn't a political discussion; it's a PR job to save face. Political dialog violates T_D policy, but this issue is killing the populist image that Trump sold to the public, so the plebeians are now allowed to voice their meager opinions. This rings a lot like Trump's promise to prosecute Hillary. Or are we not allowed to discuss that?
    [–]Immo406USA 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    Cool so my internet company can continue to FUCKING RAPE ME WITH BILLS AND FUCKING SHIT SERVICE just to sell my browsing history to the highest bidder? That's bullshit. If Comcast wants to collect data on users then they need to purchase a company who's platform is collecting and selling user data instead of doing it through their ISP. It's amazing the OP supports something that erodes his privacy even further cause he "doesn't think government should pick losers and winners" which is a terrible analogy when you're talking about user data. It's all about money, plain and simple. If there was no monetary value in this info they wouldn't even be pursuing this.
    Not to mention alot of these entities are fucking MONOPOLIES in the community!!!
    [–]Tybalt734MI 0 points1 point2 points  (1 child)
    If there is an opt out provision in the law, then there is no controversy. If collection of your data offends you, opt out.
    [–]PlebeianforLifeUSA 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
    The Senate Resolution is a one sentence repeal, which includes a repeal of the opt-out provision. OP never posted "the bill" he claims to be referencing.
    [–]ClintonscackleFL 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    Nobody is mentioning the increased internet cost that would happen if this regulation stays in effect. Increased regulation and compliance means more expenses for the IP. They would also receive less revenue from marketing non sensitive information. Internet bills are already expensive, this would increase our internet bills dramatically.
    [–]LuigiDude16VA 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    If it's to display advertisements I have no problem, I have uBlock.
    [–]DangerQAOH 0 points1 point2 points  (1 child)
    People that use GoogleAmazonFacebook for everything in their waking life, and then are mad at this, make me chortle.
    Chortle I say.
    [–]PlebeianforLifeUSA 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    I am very privacy oriented, so I don't use Google, Amazon, Facebook, et al, but my job requires that I access the internet. not the same thing. You are comparing apples to oranges.
    [–]Dey_Tooker_Jerbs 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    There are very few problems in this country which require new laws.
    I don't think we need more bills and laws fucking with the internet. These bills always seem to turn into turd sandwiches in committee anyway.
    [–]GdottNY[🍰] 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    Not happy. We should shut it down.
    [–]clooneyKarmaTN 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
    When will it get to President Trump to veto or not?
    [–]VictoriousDeplorableUSA 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    If you want privacy on the internet one big step forward is getting with a good Virtual Private Network provider. Preferably one that doesn't keep logs of what users do.
    [–]skulk 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    I work in ad ops. From what I understand his bill is just to allow ISPs to enter into the cookie data market and compete against the big vendors. Right now ISPs can't sell your data but internet services companies like google / Facebook can.
    [–]HeyThatsAccurate 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    The Donald needs to mobilize on this issue and let Trump.know we are not for this. He doesn't veto this and it is the first serious strike one against him for me. Our privacy is already under strain. Anything that helps it out then I am for it until they want to sit down and talk.about a serious revamp.
    [–]PepeFirstofHisNameKEK 0 points1 point2 points  (4 children)
    I just want to reiterate so I better understand this:
    The bill that just passed just lets all companies to sell your history, and not just a select few? Or have they prevented all companies from selling our data?
    Thank you for making this, it's better than reading various biased sources online.
    [–]shadowman3001BPA[S] 1 point2 points3 points  (3 children)
    It gives ISPs access to your data (which is how it currently stands, with a new rule Barry put in place in December just to cause this shitshow), the same way that websites access your data, essentially.
    [–]PepeFirstofHisNameKEK 0 points1 point2 points  (2 children)
    Oh ok, I honestly thought ISPs already had access to it to be honest.
    How does this benefit us as citizens?
    [–]shadowman3001BPA[S] 1 point2 points3 points  (1 child)
    They already do have access.
    [–]PepeFirstofHisNameKEK 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    Then I'm confused as to why this is a controversy if they had access this entire time.
    [–]DoerOfStuffAndThingsNE 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    Guess what - they will collect and sell the data anyway.
    [–]FallencrazyCT 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    What is stopping your ISP from putting the opt in inside of your contract?
    [–]Doctorbeer2044USA 0 points1 point2 points  (3 children)
    I find it funny that people are outraged about this of all things. Facebook has been around for what... 13 years? You're now worried about ISP's tracking data???? Guess what, even with a bill, if you're connected to the internet, you're being tracked, there is no way around it.
    [–]SenorFreddyBlock 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    There's a difference between corporations and intelligence agencies tracking you without explicit Government permission, and them tracking you and being given permission to profit off your data.
    [–]vinelodgeTN 0 points1 point2 points  (1 child)
    Thats true but .. I can chose not to use facebook while I can't really chose not to use an ISP.
    What if electric companies kept track of the devices plugged in at your home? That certainly doesn't seem 'right' to me...
    [–]Doctorbeer2044USA 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    Sure you can, you can stop using the internet, You can use a VPN, tor browser, you can even call your ISP to fuck off with the tracking. If you use the internet, any search engine, youtube, facebook, porntube, whatever, you're being tracked, and they are selling your data to marketing companies. Why ISP's being allowed to do this is an outrage to people who hate massive corporations blows my mind. ISP's could undercut monopolies like Google when selling data. I don't agree with data selling or tracking, but if there is gonna be any of that, let's fucking level the playing field. Then we can work on stopping it all together.
    [–]TRUMPIS4US 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    Are you sure you can just "opt out" ? Everything I have read said before the isp had to have your permission and now they don't . That doesn't sound like you can just opt out . Can I get a source please ?
    [–]KingamongBeastsMI 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    Two questions:
    1. If this was something important to the Obama admin., why did he wait till the end of his 8 year term to implement it?
    2. When your ISP data is sold to 3rd parties, is it sold specifically with your name attached to it, or is it sold in bulk with others?
    [–]broscientologistGA 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    If I can't have what I want, then the second best option is to stop the Feds from interfering with what the market does.
    If...
    [–]futurestormsKEK 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
    I'm glad if there's an opt out.
    Other have said this as well: we've been tracked for years, so the base of this thing has already been in the market.
    [–][deleted]  (1 child)
    [removed]
      [–]the_mcgee 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
      I think the way it went down is perfect. Ultimately those developing your software are the ones who will know how to best secure it. Paintin the practice of gathering our history as "ultimate evil" will hopefully motivate the security minded among us to fix the holes that leak our habits in the first place.
      Not something that will happen quickly (looking at you DNS), and some may never be patched but at least we're operating under the assumption that this shit is happening, instead of pretending it's not because some limp dick FCC restrictions.
      [–]Edweird_ 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
      Can someone ELI5 the opt in/out? It seemed to me that option was part of what was repealed?
      [–]YepYepYeahYep 0 points1 point2 points  (1 child)
      Is there a way to circumvent this? like using .tor browser?
      [–]ShiveShivu 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
      Make your own internet, or send only encrypted information.
      [–]ADHD-FrontalLobe404 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
      I highly recommend that EVERYONE gets on a VPN provider that does not maintain logs / records. I happen to use Private Internet Access but any provider will do, assuming they respect your privacy.
      [–][deleted]  (1 child)
      [deleted]
        [–]Xalitus 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
        ISPs dont need to collect your browsing data. If you do something illegal online it generally goes like this:
        Someone who has flagged your IP contacts the ISP assigning that IP. The ISP knows who they assigned the IP. ISP takes action against you.
        If an ISP can sell your data, you will have little privacy online unless you know what your doing. What you search on google can be used by google. Im somewhat ok with that, because I have other options and I can make a choice. ISP choice can be very limited depending on where you are. Not sure I want the party selling me my internet also selling how I use it. Who I use their service to communicate with is, imo, my business. Imagine a phone company (which already keeps general logs like an ISP) starts collecting what your saying and texting and sells that information. I think its different if, for example, im texting or calling facebook and facebook collects it. Its just a slippery road I'd rather avoid.
        [–]ReasonableIndividual 0 points1 point2 points  (1 child)
        Can you show me how to opt out for cable one?
        [–]shadowman3001BPA[S] 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
        Call your ISP is the easiest way
        [–]FocusedNoiseCA 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
        I agree with OP's 2 cents. This is also the first I heard that there is an option to OPT OUT. Unfortunately Google also has Google Fiber which has been scaled down.
        Credit Cards have done this sale of your personal purchase history for at least 2 decades and they balance it by giving us 1% to 5% cash back (incentive to use THEIR credit card over others). Naturally we also have the option to withdraw cash.
        [–]Edariz2012 0 points1 point2 points  (1 child)
        Question. While yes opting out is an option does opting out really stop all data collection from the ISP? I k ow in Charters Privacy statement when you go to opt-out it never clearly says "we will no longer collect your data" it just says "advertisement and other related items will no longer be tailored to your specifications" or something close to that. So what does that mean?
        [–]Fatema_Spanky 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
        It means they're still going to sell your data, just not to advertisers. Use a VPN. But since the GOP is going to fuck up Net Neutrality, your ISP will know that you're connecting to one and just throttle your bandwidth to udder shit when you do.
        [–]Johnnyrckt 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
        I'm against but im also super paranoid. So like, my job(if i had one) could contact my isp and buy my browsing history or anybody else?
        Not to mention the 1st, 3rd, 4th and 5th amendment protects us from this. there's also the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
        [–]KingWolfeiKEK 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
        DELETE DELETE DELETE (MY HISTORY)!
        [–]Fatema_Spanky 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
        ISPs do not operate in a competitive marketplace. They are MONOPOLIES. Thus any argument stating that they should be provided relief a business operating in a free market is invalid.
        Second, ISPs have a huge advantage here, hence the reason why they lobbied so hard for it. They capture ALL your web traffic, the whole thing. You simply cannot compare a web site with a telecom giant. There's simply ZERO comparison and blatantly misleading to assume that whatever happens to a fucking website should happen to the ISPs.
        The GOP has stated many times that they are against Net Neutrality and are willing to provide the cable lobby a blank fucking check. This, in essence, provides the Democrats the sword to which the GOP will fall upon.
        WHY NET NEUTRALITY IS IMPORTANT
        Net Neutrality PREVENTS ISPs from discriminating data THEMSELVES. So this myth that Net Neutrality will allow the FCC to "fine websites" is irrelevant because the only fining the FCC would do is against Verizon for throttling Milo Yiannopoulos' website, not websites themselves.
        Problem is that the ISP industry is an essential monopoly. You cannot have free market values in a market where no competition can enter. The reason why no new competition can enter is over regulation and bureaucratic red tape at state and federal levels, that I don't see the GOP fixing any time soon, let alone attempt.
        If the GOP is really worried about the FCC over-regulating the internet, then they have to pass legislation to that effect, ensuring that ISPs cannot discriminate data packets by law. But if they are unwilling to do so(and they are), then our only method of relief is through the FCC.
        The ISP monopolies have a vested interest in preventing any type of competition, to which they have successfully managed due to massive lobbying campaigns. Furthermore, since the cable companies are regional monopolies, then there is ZERO incentive for them to develop and invest in technology and infrastructure. So the GOP argument that ISPs need more profit for infrastructure, is a bullshit argument.
        The ISPs won’t reinvest their “protection money” in infrastructure. They already have incredible monopoly profits. Here’s their net income (after-tax profits) from 2016:
        • AT&T: $16 billion
        • Verizon: $13 billion
        • Comcast $8 billion
        • Charter $8 billion
        Net Neutrality is, it is a concept to which Internet Service Providers (ISPs) cannot:
        • Block content from legal websites
        • Slow down content from legal websites
        • Accept money from websites to speed up their content
        WHY IT WILL BITE US IN THE ASS
        We all know that Shareblue and Reddit are in a mutually beneficial relationship with each other and as a result Reddit has been less of a free speech platform and more of a machine to control and suppress our movement.
        Take that concept and apply it toward a macro level.
        George Soros, or any large, heavily funded organization could approach ISPs in order to wage war against any blog or website that supports our cause all while the ISPs is giving them priority access to the world wide web. It's a double edge sword, one we will fall upon if Trump does not fire Ajit Pai, a former lawyer for Verizon and current FCC chair. This will happen should Trump allow Pai to destroy Net Neutrality.
        Ajit Pai served at the behest of Verizon Communications, a company who donated the MOST of their campaign contributions to HILLARY FUCKING CLINTON
        Quincy Larson of Free Code Camp, has written an extensive expose' on how Net Neutrality is the only thing holding free speech together on the web and how the internet is a shining example of free market capitalism.
        But somehow... the GOP is fucking themselves in the ass.
        [–]PedictDTOM 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
        Nobody or everybody, not just some political favorites.
        [–]toohightocomply 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
        Friends don't let friends run Raid-0
        [–]Alomikron 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
        Opt in. OTOH it would be fabulous documentation of the great meme wars.
        [–]j-throw -1 points0 points1 point  (0 children)
        See, this is why I love T_D.
        As much as we're a bunch of fanboys of the Trump administration, we have no problem voicing our disagreement and defying expectation. We make posts celebrating diversity. Women and Sikh culture and Black culture and Mexican culture and White culture.
        This fucking community, despite what the rest of the world may claim to believe, is one of the last bastions of true leadership and real, honest diversity.
        I'm proud of T_D.
        [–][deleted]  (1 child)
        [deleted]
          [–]NotDiabl0 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
          So realistically speaking, are we expecting Trump to veto this?
          [–]10_Ds_DroppedRUS 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
          Step 1: Hack an ISP
          Step 2: Collect everyone's browsing history
          Step 3: Call Julian Lasagna
          Step 4: Watch Ashley Maddison V2.0 Ensue
          Step 5: Repeal
          Step 6: ?????
          Step 7: Profit
          [–]xtra_spicyTX 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
          I despise the ISP situation in this country and the government-sanctioned monopolies that got us here. But a government mistake should not be fixed with new government regulations. I need to read the details more, but from what I can tell, this bill is mostly about rolling back new regulations because the market can fix them on its own.
          It's easy to jump on the "Online tracking is evil!!" train because of the feels. But the reality is that as consumers we get access to a lot of awesome tech for free because of tracking, and if you "Dont stop with ISPs, just ban all the tracking!!" just realize that you are going to have to start paying for all the shit you use now for free.
          I'm a developer and would love it if the industry as a whole switched back to the "buy a license" model from the "Give it to me for free and sell my data" situation we have now. My apps are sold that way, and I don't farm user data. But you should realize that the pricetag of the apps on your phone is significantly more than what you paid for them, largely because the market is able to track/collect information on users. If that goes away, you have to fill the gap with your own money. Or you could ask Bernie to pay for them.
          5g internet is coming soon, and with it, hopefully a lot more competition in the ISP space (wireless = no more utility pole or mainline monopolies). If a new ISP company wants to offer TOTALLY FREE internet, with the clearly stated stipulation that your data will be collected and sold, I think there is a viable market for that and the government shouldn't stop it. Other ISPs will create privacy-centered solutions and there will also be customers for them.
          [–]Richo262 -1 points0 points1 point  (0 children)
          If Obama wanted it, I don't.
          In all seriousness, I think the Government should stay out of business as much as possible. Best way to get rid of dubious ISP's is to increase competition, destroy the monopolies. Each ISP has divided up their territories and don't compete in eachothers region and have State law on their side. OUT OUT OUT!!!
          [–]senpai_circlejerkTX 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
          Here's the way I look at this. Say there is a monopoly on ice rinks in a small town. The town imposes a minimum wage on the operators of the ice rink. Years later the town rescinds the minimum wage order, but the ice rink is still a monopoly. Ultimately, it's a good thing if a business can be more profitable, but it is the artificial restriction of competition that is bad. Getting rid of the wage regulation is still a good thing because it allows costs to go down which should lead to a decrease in price. Alternatively, imposing privacy rules is a barrier to competition as well as the rules that make ISP's regional monopolies. For example, if the town got rid of the ice rinks monopoly it's possible that other regulations would still lead to really high costs.
          [–]crackpnt69NAVY 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
          I'd veto it just to piss of the house Republicans for fucking away the Healthcare situation.
          [–]coupdetacoUSA -1 points0 points1 point  (0 children)
          Free markets could solve it if monopoly-protective laws didn't mysteriously keep getting propped up:
          TLDR: telecom lines aren't like plumbing pipes and can be routed with much more 'sway' in path. They want to break-up utility collusion and encourage competition by discouraging exclusive use/access to 'rights of way space'.
          [–]DerekNOLA -1 points0 points1 point  (0 children)
          the issue here is that fzcebook google etc now have an advantage one that these very liberal minded companies are using to make more money. so if they can do this isps should be allowed to. there is a reason google facebook and twitter are pushing backlash against this bill so hard ; its because they dont want the competition ..
          [–]MikeL413 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
          I was hoping you guys would have a post on this, good work. I'm a Bernie guy but good job on this one, now I understand both sides and I didn't know that the opt-out option is required. The liberal side is just trying too hard to sell this as "your privacy is gone" and it smelled fishy to me.
          [–]Babytoad81 -1 points0 points1 point  (2 children)
          As we all know Google collects your information all the time... Your searches, email, what you do online, ect Myself I only give Google as much info as they need on me... Since Trump is able to work with the FCC now I know he's got a plan to fix things like this. If we need better simpler rules Trump will get it done. WARNING: DemandProgress & Fight For The Future are not aboard the Trump Train! They read and watch fake news and easily accept it as fact! Sad truth they don't support Trump which is sad. I know this because I've been keeping a close eye on them and they don't favor what we want. (Like I said Trump will get it done.) Let's MAGA!
          [–]TrumpTrain-botUSA -1 points0 points1 point  (1 child)

          WE JUST CAN'T STOP WINNING, FOLKS! THE TRUMP TRAIN JUST GOT 10 BILLION MPH FASTER!

          CURRENT SPEED: 85,769,385,117,000 MPH!

          At that rate, it would take approximately 19.547 years to travel to the Andromeda Galaxy (2.5 million light-years)!
          A bot by /u/BotsByLiam. Please use this form or visit /r/BotsByLiam to report errors or make suggestions!
          [–]Babytoad81 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
          Billions of life years!
          [–]CocoaNutCakeryNV -1 points0 points1 point  (0 children)
          This is pointless. Everything about it is pointless. Literally nothing about this actually matters one way or the other.
          [–]TipsycowsyNC 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
          How do I opt out like is it every website I go too I have to opt out? I don't understand this process.
          [–]heldericht 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
          Thank you for a balanced, insightful post.
          [–]Marksk8ter11 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
          This post is why this subreddit is so much better than others. Links the fucking bill straight up, provides opinions for or against, let's the reader come to their own conclusions... doesn't push a narrative.
          Bravo. Wtf happened to this type of stuff on other websites/subreddits?
          I'm personally against the bill. I feel it was rushed with very little publicity. It's amazing how things can pass so easily when enough corporate money is behind it. Sigh.
          [–]Oldschool1964NE 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
          THANK YOU FOR PRESENTING BOTH SIDES OF THE ARGUMENT. If you go to /r/all, you'll only see one side of the argument, and they'll demonize this subreddit saying that it's all one-sided, yet here I see a succinct summary of both sides of the argument. Hmmmm, who is biased in that regard?
          [–]thinktank001 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
          These arguments are completely irrelevant. People choose to go and use those sites. We don't have a choice to not use an ISP to gain access to the internet. Not to mention, this also allows ISPs to sell people privacy packages, since they are no longer required to provide it.
          [–]lnclincoln 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
          If Trump doesnt veto this im done.
          [–]LouRedditUSA 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
          Trump needs to veto this bill. This is more abuse of our 4th ammendment. We know Trump or his team checks this sub. We need to let this be known that we want this bill vetoed.
          [–]RandyContractorKEK 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
          Keep in mind this bill was something Malik's brother pushed through on his last 20 days in office. You know, that time frame where he was trying really hard to burn down America and start WW3? As I understand it, the rule isn't even enforced yet so after it's pulled, literally nothing will change for us.
          Now think; what do we know about Malik's brother? I think its fair to say at this point that he wants Trump to fail at all costs. How does this rule, denying ISPs this data, help his cause?
          There are several big customers nation wide that buy data from almost all ISPs. This would hurt local markets when competing with the likes of Amazon but I don't think it would put any of them down. What else would it hurt? Something Trump has promised to go after...
          Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines - all armed forces recruiting brigades buy these lists and rely heavily on them for marketing. There are multiple departments, applications and specialists in play that utilize the fuck out of this data to refine leads for recruiting potential.
          Trump has promised to rebuild our military. I am convinced this move was designed to hamper/delay his ability to do so.
          [–]KALOWG 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
          Here is how I summarize it.
          1. If I'm paying to use your services I'm the customer, not the product.
          2. If I'm using your service for free, I do so knowing I'm the product, and am subject to giving up some personal information to access that product.
          The ISPs want to have their cake and eat it too. I'm paying them to use the internet. They can just go fuck off with trying to sell information about me on top of it.
          And for those interested here is a good article providing some information about how you can go about preventing your ISPs from knowing what you do on the internet.
          [–]xerr 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
          "That means Google, Facebook, that farming app on your phone, all legally allowed to collect and sell."
          There is a big difference between selling your history with one site and selling your entire internet history ever.
          [–]mokacoffayAL 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
          Can we just go Teddy vult on the ISPs already? They are one of the biggest blights on the entire country; strangling the citizens for money from the infrastructure the taxpayers paid for.
          [–]catvideos22CA 0 points1 point2 points  (3 children)
          I don't want my ISP telling everyone I'm into "Lesbian Watersports".
          [–]shadowman3001BPA[S] 1 point2 points3 points  (1 child)
          You...uhhh....Probably shouldn't have said that on Reddit.....
          [–]catvideos22CA 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
          That's what I'll admit here. You don't want to know about the really kinky shit I'm into.
          [–]FallencrazyCT 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
          But you put in on your tumblr, it's already out there.
          [–]Mige_Bence -1 points0 points1 point  (0 children)
          High quality post. While I have absolutely no sympathy for ISP companies, it does seem like a double standard to allow some companies to collect personal data and not others. It should either be okay to collect personal data or not, not depending on what type of company is collecting the data.
          Also, doesn't a VPN protect against this type of data collection? I am no privacy expert, but if so, I see no reason why there should be any data collection double standards if a means to browsing the internet with privacy is still available.
          [–]Drewcifer419 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
          Friggin awesome, love this Dom. The only place to get it all.
          [–]Hillary-is-a-Dike 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
          Fault here falls on the Politicians that betray their citizens and create legislation that stifle competitions and allow these mega corps to create monopolies.
          [–]Keiichi81 -1 points0 points1 point  (0 children)
          I have a hard time caring one way or the other. I see people losing their shit about it "destroying our privacy" but, provided I'm understanding things correctly, repealing this bill puts us right back where we were 3 months ago. If I wasn't freaked out of my mind about my internet privacy 3 months ago, why should I be now? At the same time, I support anything that makes it harder to sell my personal information and invade said privacy.
          So I would appreciate having more protection, but at the same time I'm not losing sleep over this. And frankly, seeing how so many people are foaming at the mouth over "Trump selling our privacy" makes me thing that much of the feigned outrage on reddit is simply Trump Derangement Syndrome as usual.
          [–]ksKESUSA -1 points0 points1 point  (0 children)
          No matter what ISP's and websites sell your shit, this bill isn't going to change anything.
          [–]senpai_circlejerkTX -1 points0 points1 point  (0 children)
          So I'm in favor of the bill, but just I don't really know that much about it. Were the privacy regulations actually ever in effect? Or is this basically just taking us back to the status quo.
          [–]drseus127 0 points1 point2 points  (1 child)
          I think what is so frustrating from this whole situation is like always the issue has been politicized by the media rather than presented in an informative, neutral fashion.
          The opening sentence for each article about this should let you know that we are going back to pre-January rules, and that you can opt out of selling private data
          Instead, the articles make it seem like the repulicans are making some radical departure to sell all of our data.
          Congratulations, biased media. You now made me support an anti-privacy bill, something I never thought I would do, just because I don't want to support this kind of insane bias.
          [–]Fatema_Spanky 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
          Instead of opting in to the cable company fucking you. You have to opt-out. And most people dont even know what the hell is going on. Which is why the cable lobby pushed this hard. Congrats.
          [–]RulerOfSlidesNJ -1 points0 points1 point  (0 children)
          I think the assessment in the OP is generally right. Banning ISPs but letting companies run free is putting a band-aid on the issue, and is in fact more harmful in the long run than either letting everyone run free or clamping down on companies and ISPs alike.
          The time is right for a national conversation on privacy, and rolling back this regulation is the ideal way to do it. It's not going to make or break my opinion of the Trump administration, because we have 3-7 years to come up with something much better and get it passed through Congress.
          We have two jobs - one as consumers, and one as citizens. Our job as consumers is to make it clear that what we want is privacy. (Or that we don't care, or whatever). Our job as citizens is to push Congress to enact proper, functional legislation to support such protections as promised under the Constitution while also encouraging ISP giants and tech giants alike to be broken up under antitrust rules. A capitalist democracy like ours only works if we fulfill both of those roles.
          EDIT: The opt-out factor is important, thank you for making that more clear. It doesn't change my opinion of it, but it should be more widely known.
          [–]DreamingfalcoSVN -1 points0 points1 point  (0 children)
          As mentioned before, entry level VPN plan from top providers is less then 50 per year. Use it for whatever you don't want your ISP to know about.
          You will run in some problems, like for example Hulu won't let you watch anything with VPN, but they are more of an exception then a rule and not watching Hulu is good for you anyway.
          [–]Asscroft -2 points-1 points0 points  (0 children)
          No I've changed my mind and I think all companies should be able to sell all data that they collect on anyone.
          Like if I'm a Dairy Queen I should be able to sell your eating habits to your health insurance company so they can raise your rates. Why shouldn't I be allowed to do that? It's my data, it's my sales data.
          If I'm a car company I should be able to sell speed history to car insurance companies. It's data I'm collecting from my vehicles. Yes, I sold it to you, but because of DMCA I legally own the data collected from the car, just like apple owns the iPhone data and Microsoft owns the data collected from Windows 10. It's my data and I should be able to sell it.
          He'll, going to an extreme example, if I own a private investigator company, I should be able to sell data I collect legally on people. So I should be able to film your daughter in public places, leaving school, going to school, getting dropped off at gymnastics, playing in the park, etc. All legally obtained videos. I should be able to sell those and the government shouldn't restrict me from doing so. It feels creepier to be sure, but the concept is the same. Should the Federal Government regulate what personal information I, as a company, sell about you.
          Now I know you're thinking but wait, this isn't a customer. Well, if you are a cable company customer and you visit my website -- and I'm not a cable company subscriber -- that is information about me that they are selling when they sell Information about you. Either way, it's their data. They gathered it.
          Same with the PI case, if someone pays me to investigate your daughter, then that's my customers information that I acquired. It's my data and I can sell it same as an ISP.
          If this becomes an issue people will hire other PIs to spy on your daughter -- PIs who respect your privacy a bit more.
          Okay, so it's an extreme example, but I need to go there to see if I stand by the logic. And I do. ISPs gathered that data fair and square and they can sell it to whoever they want. Same for DQ. Same for Ford. Same for the creepy PI.
          No new regulations required.
          [–]PhillyNekimPA -2 points-1 points0 points  (0 children)
          I would rather see all forms of electronic spying be made legal and then companies start producing products that simply can't be hacked. However this seems more like just giving more powers to the top not the people. It also opens the door for ISPs to even have tracking equipment in the first place. It not only opens the door but incentivizes it.
          Another thing is exactly HOW can they sell it? Can I / ME buy my neighbor's traffic specifically? Can I as an individual citizen buy it at all? Also if it is for sale, is it affordable to average people or just those who can print their own money or have CIA backed drug running etc. Can foreign countries / anti american organizations buy it to track our citizens?
          [–]RichandlerCA -3 points-2 points-1 points  (4 children)
          This idea is no different than buying stuff from a store and advertisers buying ad space in the weekly ad. Most in particular it is no different than the targeted direct offers they give. That free coupon you get that happens to be related to the products that frequently purchase isn't a coincidence. This is such a non-issue unless you're ashamed of what you do on the internet.
          [–]PlebeianforLifeUSA -1 points0 points1 point  (3 children)
          The "nothing to hide" argument? Really? I'm an attorney. Read my response above. I have seen firsthand how the government misuses small amounts of data. If you give them access to a person's entire internet history, they can portray them as whatever they want. I once had a client who was into BDSM. The police relentlessly attempted to entrap him as a pedophile simply because they assumed that someone into consensual BDSM activities as an adult would also be into fucking kids. You put way too much trust in government. I hope you never fall into the death grip of its cold, boney clutches.
          P.s. Most state prosecutors are 26-year-olds who got such bad grades in law school that they have no other choice but to make $20 an hour prosecuting traffic tickets. Do you really want to place your entire fate in their hands?
          [–]RichandlerCA 0 points1 point2 points  (2 children)
          You're one of the worst lawyer ever if you start a debate with not even talking about the same thing in anyway at all.
          [–]PlebeianforLifeUSA 0 points1 point2 points  (1 child)
          Or maybe you're just too stupid to understand when intelligent people speak. You don't even know what the LSAT is much less be able to pass it. Lol. As you were.
          [–]RichandlerCA 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
          It's too bad you weren't speaking. Just typing out of your ass.
          [–]GimmeTendiesNow -4 points-3 points-2 points  (5 children)
          I actually think data collecting is a good idea. It allows companies to target ads for each consumer, so instead of useless ads, it shows ones I'm actually interested in.
          For example, I like to buy computer parts, and the other day I was browsing a website and an amazon ad came up with products I actually would buy.
          The only thing I'd have a problem with is if I was applying for a job, and they were able to pay for my internet history. I'm not saying I'm the perviest guy in the world, but there may be a couple naughty sites in there lol.
          [–]vinelodgeTN 0 points1 point2 points  (2 children)
          How would you feel about the electric company keeping track of what devices you plug into the wall?
          [–]Fatema_Spanky 0 points1 point2 points  (1 child)
          ISPs are a fucking monopoly. At least give yourself a choice of who fucks you in the ass.
          [–]GimmeTendiesNow 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
          Only for high speed internet. I can name 5 dial up providers just off the top of my head. AOL has 2 million people still.
          Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy. © 2017 reddit inc. All rights reserved.
          REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.
          π Rendered by PID 68009 on app-170 at 2017-03-29 17:51:29.441498+00:00 running b1be701 country code: NL.
          Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies.  Learn More
          0%
           
          10%
           
          20%
           
          30%
           
          40%
           
          50%
           
          60%
           
          70%
           
          80%
           
          90%
           
          100%