Republicans vote to remove privacy protections

[Póg mo 1,749]

This might back fire on Republicans when people find out about their porn habits.

 

US politicians voted Tuesday to kill privacy rules meant to prevent internet service providers (ISPs) from selling users’ web browsing histories and app usage histories to advertisers.

The planned protections, proposed by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and scheduled to take effect by the end of 2017, would have forced ISPs to get people’s consent before hawking their data. Continued on link.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/mar/28/privacy-protection-sell-web-browsing-history-data 

[IAMX 3,055]

Very important part:

 

So how can users protect their browsing history?

You need to encrypt all your internet traffic. Some websites (like the Guardian) are already encrypted – marked out with HTTPS at the beginning of the URL – but ISPs would still be able to see which websites you have visited, just not the individual pages.

To mask all of your browsing behavior you can use a VPN service (which incurs a subscription cost) or try using Tor.

 

I use a VPN regularly on my desktop and mobile devices. I'd advise the same of others. 

 

Republicans are rather wishy washy on privacy matters, so I don't depend on them or Democrats. Good to arm yourself.

[Dashinka 26,025]

10 hours ago, SRVT said:

Very important part:

 

 

 

 

I use a VPN regularly on my desktop and mobile devices. I'd advise the same of others. 

 

Republicans are rather wishy washy on privacy matters, so I don't depend on them or Democrats. Good to arm yourself.

I agree, relying on the ISPs or the Government to protect privacy is a bit naïve. 

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

The new challenge is the overlapp of isp/phone/television technologies. 

You probably don't have TOR on your tv.  Can Comcast take those browser details , combine it with a list if shows you watched and sell it to a third party?

[Póg mo 1,749]

6 hours ago, Bill & Katya said:

I agree, relying on the ISPs or the Government to protect privacy is a bit naïve. 

You certainly can't rely on the government of Donald J Trump. At least before if companies stole your private data, you could sue in the courts, if it came to it. Now they don't have any such worries. Can't wait for VPNs to made illegal when someone decides they are a danger to national security. 

[Póg mo 1,749]

6 hours ago, Bill & Katya said:

I agree, relying on the ISPs or the Government to protect privacy is a bit naïve. 

Slippery slope, bit by bit, we can succumb to corporate power and control. The same people who complained so loudly how Hillary Clinton was corrupt, are completely silent about Donald J. Trump's completely corrupt administration, being filled with Goldman Sachs allumni.

[Amica Nostra 4,803]

Remember when you move to VPN you are simply moving the data collection point from the regulated ISP to the unregulated VPN.

[Póg mo 1,749]

2 hours ago, ccneat said:

Remember when you move to VPN you are simply moving the data collection point from the regulated ISP to the unregulated VPN.

Better hope the unregulated VPN doesn't get hacked I suppose.

[spookyturtle 9,466]

Be careful lemmings, Uncle Donald is watching you.

[Ebunoluwa 6,136]

Another important thing undone.

What's next ?

[Dashinka 26,025]

19 hours ago, Póg mo said:

Slippery slope, bit by bit, we can succumb to corporate power and control. The same people who complained so loudly how Hillary Clinton was corrupt, are completely silent about Donald J. Trump's completely corrupt administration, being filled with Goldman Sachs allumni.

I always love when both sides use the slippery slope argument.  It shows that both the MDR and MDL think the same.  As to this, I still am not one to rely on government to protect my privacy.  Sure, ISPs have access to a wealth of information from a great many people, let them use it and make money from it, and just like the junk snail mail, I will ignore any advertisements that result in it.  If the argument is Big Brother will be watching, heck, that is already here, and it did not start with Trump.  From my personal experience, Google and FB (and probably others) are already making a lot of money off of this.  I see it all the time when my last Google search becomes an advertiser on my FB at my next visit.  Like I said, I just ignore it.

[CaliCat 3,957]

On 3/28/2017 at 7:21 PM, Póg mo said:

This might back fire on Republicans when people find out about their porn habits.

 

 

 

 

Apparently they don't resort to the Internet anymore, preferring the more rewarding tapping of feet under bathroom stall partitions.

[OriZ 3,165]

12 hours ago, Bill & Katya said:

I always love when both sides use the slippery slope argument.  It shows that both the MDR and MDL think the same.  As to this, I still am not one to rely on government to protect my privacy.  Sure, ISPs have access to a wealth of information from a great many people, let them use it and make money from it, and just like the junk snail mail, I will ignore any advertisements that result in it.  If the argument is Big Brother will be watching, heck, that is already here, and it did not start with Trump.  From my personal experience, Google and FB (and probably others) are already making a lot of money off of this.  I see it all the time when my last Google search becomes an advertiser on my FB at my next visit.  Like I said, I just ignore it.

I completely agree. It happens to me too, whether searches, or purchases made on amazon or elsewhere...will end up as ads for similar or related stuff. Doesn't really bother me. Like you, I just ignore them.

[spookyturtle 9,466]

24 minutes ago, OriZ said:

I completely agree. It happens to me too, whether searches, or purchases made on amazon or elsewhere...will end up as ads for similar or related stuff. Doesn't really bother me. Like you, I just ignore them.

Is that why I keep getting all those sheep ads? 

[OriZ 3,165]

10 minutes ago, spookyturtle said:

Is that why I keep getting all those sheep ads? 

Something you wanna tell us?