Selling out our country - Comcast paid what to whom?

Maybe if the ISPs are providing their services for free, and have access points everywhere, allowing anyone to use it anomalously or not by choice, people would be more ok with less privacy.

 

You may use Google without it ever knowing who you are. Not possible with ISP

 

I can use the internet without relying on a Google account or Facebook account. That's something I willingly opt-in to, and if I need to do something online privately there are still means to do so (with relative ease).

Can I use the internet without an internet service provider?

 

Do you really think a new ISP can just spring up to fulfill that demand?

 

This.

Like electricity helped drive the industrial revolution that occurred in the early 20th century, the internet (telecommunications) is a big part of what's driving this current industrial revolution. Not using the internet in the 21st century will more often than not put you behind.

 

Again, I am against it. But I am just as against Google, Facebook, Yahoo and everyone else doing it. Wake me up when you feel like that is an issue. In the mean time, Ill get a VPN for privacy.

 

Protip: They don't have to.

That's like assuming the Post Office has to break into your house to see what your mailing....

 

Technically speaking, Google doesn't actually know who you are, nor everything you do. Your ISP who gives you your IP address does actually know who you are, and exactly how much time you are online, and exactly what you are doing at every moment on the internet.

The level of info the ISP has on your usage (and linked directly to your account and payment info) dwarfs what Google knows. It's comparing apples to oranges.

 

Incorrect . All of it.

 

Let's say every single place that sells food has now been given the freedom to force you to fill out a form w/ all our personal info every time we make a purchase, and they are able to sell said info everywhere.

Unless you're a farmer who grows your own food, you now have to give out your personal info every time you want to eat, feed your family, etc. Would that be fair?

In fact, that's probably possible right now. But of course groceries wouldn't participate. Because there are so many competitors out there and a much lower barrier of entry for new groceries, they know better than to do that because it would turn away customers.

But with so few ISPs and an incredibly high barrier of entry, they can easily ban together to leave you no choice. And they have incredible leverage over consumers, as internet access is almost a necessity behind electric and water.

Actually, on second thought, what if electric companies were given the freedom to do that? Are they right now?

If it comes to fruition, I wish we could pick out a specific ISP customer, purchase their info, and post it publicly on the internet (the irony) for the world to see. I'd start with the congressmen and people in this thread who support this bill.

 

Nice try, but I've seen that Broadband for America paper...., so you aren't teaching me anything. You don't seem to understand what I said, nor understand that paper you quoted. That paper didn't refute one thing that I said. You must be assuming I meant something else.

I could get into this at a deeper technical level, but only if you first accept the fact that paper was funded in whole by cable/communication companies who stand to benefit the most from putting out such layman BS that they did. It really is like quoting a paper paid for by the Tobacco industry to say cigarettes aren't as bad as other things.

If you want to quote a paper paid for by the NCTA (National Cable and Telecom Association), have at it. But you might want to have a look at who makes up "Broadband for America" and what their goal is. I'm equally knowledgeable on this subject to that Georgia Tech group (it's my job and education to be an expert on this), and much more objective.

While everything in their bullet points is technically correct, it makes laymen like you think that's all there is to it, and thus there conclusions are true. It's not, and their conclusions are wrong. My post above still holds true. They are leaving out a lot, and talking about other things that are irrelevant. Like they even talk about those other companies having the ability to do illegal things ... like reading webmail. If we want to talk about illegal things, I can explain to you how ISPs can render that HTTPS protection useless, too.

"ISPs have neither comprehensive nor unique access to information about users’ online activity." The "nor unique access" is a bold face lie. And the "comprehensive" part is not entirely true. They have some info at a comprehensive level that no one else does.​

bottomline: If HTTPS was such a foolproof way to protect what we are doing, then why do they want to change the laws so badly, and get into selling our usage data?

btw: nothing in that paper explains what happens if these absolutely HUGE communications companies eventually buy up some of the content companies and social networks to have a view of us from both sides​

 

Shame those same companies throttled municipal wifi.

 

"Free market" and "that's a slippery slope" are two of the most common Republican bromides.

 

Just capitalism DD. Why do you oppose their FREEDOM to sell your info and make a buck?

 

Which they are almost always on the wrong side of

 

Stop pretending you know what you're talking about.

Since Google is the certificate holder of their HTTPS, they know exactly what you're looking for. For advertisement purposes, this is much much more powerful than anything else. One can go on and on how a person doesnt have to use Google, but the fact remains search engines are free because they sell your information.

ISP's can't legally get around encryption. End of story. The value is the meta data. One can argue meta data is more powerful than the actual data behind the encryption.

Here is my frustration of the topic: Misinformation.

Secondly: The relevance. If anyone truly cares about privacy, they would be much more concerned with Googles all seeing eye.

 

https://www.teamupturn.com/reports/2016/what-isps-can-see

 

I try to keep an open mind and see things from other people's point of view, but this one is a head scratcher.

 

You are repeating what I said. ISP's are going to sell the metadata.

You have those like Sweet Lou who think ISP's can see the details of all your internet traffic, such as CC info, bank account info, ect ...

 

Why do I want them seeing the meta data? Why do I want them figuring out what domains I look at? Why do I want them figuring out what web sites I visit? And, why do I want them selling that information?