Your privacy for sale.

[adhoc10]

No matter how I spin this, I can find nothing redeeming about this action. If someone can shed something positive about this, please comment. 

The 265 members of Congress who sold you out to ISPs, and how much it cost to buy them

144

They betrayed you for chump change

by T.C. Sottek  Mar 29, 2017, 8:20am EDT

•  

• http://www.theverge.com/2017/3/29/15100620/congress-fcc-isp-web-browsing-privacy-fire-sale TW
•  

Edited March 30, 2017 by adhoc10
Cleaned up some garbage links

[Shabibilicious]

This administration is all about capitalism on all levels no matter the ramifications to mom and pop America.  

GO RV, then BV

[Whatshername]

On 3/30/2017 at 7:24 AM, adhoc10 said:

If someone can shed something positive about this, please comment. 

WHAT THE ONLINE PRIVACY VOTE IS REALLY ABOUT 

By: Phil Kerpen | April 02, 2017

If you've been watching TV or on social media, you've heard that “Republicans are going to let Internet providers sell your browser history.”

It’s not true. Not even close.

What’s really happening is that a corrupt Google power grab from the Obama administration is being overturned.

Here’s the real history.

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) until 2015 was the cop on the beat for Internet privacy, data security, and consumer protection broadly. The FTC had a well-developed framework that treated all the players the same way — Internet Service Providers (ISPs), search, advertising networks, and social media companies.

That all changed when the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) voted on a 3-2 party-line vote to adopt Barack Obama’s plan to regulate the Internet like a public utility.

That vote pre-empted the FTC’s jurisdiction and stripped Internet users of consumer protections — deliberately creating a vacuum which could then be used to shift the focus of the privacy debate to ISPs, taking the heat off Google, which has vastly more access to personal data.

The FCC took this party-line action despite warnings from the FTC that it would no longer be able to protect consumers as it had in over 100 privacy and data security cases and 150 spam and spyware cases.

FTC Commissioner Maureen Ohlhausen warned that “economists (and common sense) tell us that if different sets of rules govern competitors, companies subject to the more onerous or unpredictable regime are disadvantaged compared to those outside that regime.”

That’s precisely what happened as Google — which had an astonishing 250 personnel rotate into the Obama administration — used its stroke to hobble competitors.

Under the proposed FCC regulations, ISPs with limited market share and limited ability to collect user information would be subject to heavy-handed regulation effectively prohibiting running ads without a prior opt-in, while edge providers that have dominant market share and vast databases of user information are exempt.

The FCC claimed ISPs are uniquely situated to collect user information, but the best available data shows otherwise. Steven Englehardt and Arvind Narayanan of Princeton University found that 61 percent of the top million sites on the web use Google Analytics.

The FCC claim that ISPs are uniquely situated to collect and use user information reflects a basic misunderstanding of how the Internet works.

The Institute for Information Security & Privacy at Georgia Tech concluded that ISPs are highly limited in their ability to collect user information because the average Internet user has more than six different devices, encryption is pervasive and employed by all 10 of the largest websites and 42 of the top 50, and users increasingly decline to use DNS services offered by their ISPs. They found companies like Google have far more access to user information.

 

Under the Democratic rules, ISPs can use personal data to tailor advertising or make you special offers — but they need to buy the data from Google first.

 

As Ajit Pai observed in his dissent: “due to the FCC’s action today, those who have more insight into consumer behavior (edge providers) will be subject to more lenient regulation than those who have less insight (ISPs).”

Pai continued, “when you get past the headlines, slogans, and self-congratulations, this is the reality that Americans should remember: nothing in these rules will stop edge providers from harvesting and monetizing your data, whether it’s the websites you visit or the YouTube videos you watch or the emails you send or the search terms you enter on any of your devices.”

Under the Democratic rules, ISPs can use personal data to tailor advertising or make you special offers — but they need to buy the data from Google first. That’s crazy.

The vote in Congress wasn’t about whether privacy should be protected, but rather who should do the protecting — and whether there should be a level playing field or a sweetheart deal for Google; it’s unfortunate that so many “real” news organizations bought into the Obama Administration spin instead of checking the facts.

- See more at: https://www.conservativereview.com

[Jaxinjersey]

"The vote in Congress wasn’t about whether privacy should be protected, but rather who should do the protecting..."

Thanks for the REAL story. WHN!  

[Muleslayer]

1 hour ago, Whatshername said:

What’s really happening is that a corrupt Google power grab from the Obama administration is being overturned.

10-4 good buddy!

[divemaster5734]

Here are some links that may blow your mind.

I published price lists put out by every telecom that were sent to every law enforcement agency, and every three letter department in the US Government two or three years ago here on DV.

They detailed the cost associated with the private information of every customer.

The prices increased from "one day surveillance", to one week, to active survival with GPS tracking, to complete call logs, to all phone, text, gps, and email, browsing history, and social media.

These lists were first created during Bill Clinton's administration.

Did anyone actually think those GPS apps on their smart phones were actually "free"?

The government has successfully removed the active price lists, however, the format outline is still available online.

Forget Wikileaks, they are part of the game.

There are other sites, some accessible from the dark web only, that some of you will refuse to believe are even actual government documents.

I am only going to share information available on the www, as I do not want to start any legal issues here.

Here are links to the latest leaked telecom "compliance guides", dated 2009, along with some court documents that were obtained through a FOIA suit.

ATT
Sprint

Cox Spy

Cingular

 

Google is one of the wealthiest corporations in the world because they sell every search by every human on the planet.

It's called a "keyword" auction. Every time you do a search, there is an instant war, a computerized auction, that will determine what results get top placement in your results.

Internet "privacy" has been a joke since 1997.

Everyone here should know every email account is "monitored" to "personalize" advertising directed at you.

If you do not use a SSL VPN, with an additional redirect service, and a TOR browser, every moment of your online activity has been recorded, hobbies, interests, friends, family, and all their interests, along with browsing history, has all been recorded, logged into several databases, and has already been analyzed by multiple algorithms to determine everything from products you are likely to buy, services you are likely to utilize, and potential threats you are your friends may present.

 

 

I have copies of the actual price lists on a hard drive, unfortunately a crypto virus was successfully planted on my computer two days before Christmas in a obviously targeted attack. I lost two hard drives in the process of rebuilding, and have not yet had time to fully restore and catalogue my data.

 

There are in fact "forces" out to get you, far more nefarious than you can imagine, and you interface with some of them on a daily basis.

I have both an everyday service to check news, browse DV, and for certain research.

Also have a completely different set up for the dark web. Think of an iceberg. The part that is sticking up above the water is about 10% of the amount that is underwater.

That is the same as the internet.

The part you see in www is only the tip, the dark web has the rest.

Including, all acidemia, US government, and military. The gov and military should be left alone unless you are authorized.

Most universities have their entire libraries digitized and freely available on the dark web, for free, along with unrestricted access to the Library of Congress.

Unless you have your own server, a personal INS assigned by ICANN, you have never had privacy, the only difference is they have been at it so long they now believe it is their right to use you in whatever ways benefit their agenda.

 

Edited April 2, 2017 by divemaster5734

[divemaster5734]

17 hours ago, Whatshername said:

this is the reality that Americans should remember: nothing in these rules will stop edge providers from harvesting and monetizing your data, whether it’s the websites you visit or the YouTube videos you watch or the emails you send or the search terms you enter on any of your devices.”

You are 100% correct about the bill, it was nothing short than obama paying back google for their "creative" editing and campaign support.

The loss of internet privacy is one of my "pet peeves", and I just use every opportunity to rant and hopefully educate a little. 

It's really too bad too, there's some tracking apps I use daily.

Everywhere I go with my company phone is tracked, every picture I take is instantly uploaded with date/time/location.

I love it. What I don't love is not only all the obviously tailored ads that get shoved down my throat, but the telemarketers who have received my cell number from Google in order to sell me something I never wanted, but miraculously are related to either a company I just visited, or a topic in an email chain with a customer. 

The only reason they get away with it is because the privacy laws are intentionally tailored to protect the large corporations who make all those generous donations to our "representatives" every couple years.

[bostonangler]

They been selling your privacy since long before there was an internet.

 

B/A