PDA

View Full Version : Warning: Senate votes to overturn Obama's FCC privacy rules......



MMC
03-24-2017, 07:21 AM
More good news.....another BO the peep regulation tossed into the shitter. Trump is slowly tearing apart Obammy's Legacy. Soon the leftness won't have anything to remember the peep by. Other than his stuttering ass.




The Senate passed a resolution Thursday to eliminate the Federal Communications Commission's broadband privacy rules that were finalized in the final months of the Obama administration.


Republican leaders used the Congressional Review Act, which allows Congress to overturn recent agency regulations with a simple majority vote, to undo the FCC privacy rules imposed on service providers. The Senate passed the resolution in a 50-48 vote.


The privacy rules require Internet service providers, like Comcast and Verizon, to obtain permission from consumers before sharing browser history and other user information.


But industry critics have long argued that the regulations are unfair because online companies such as Google and Facebook, which also have access to a mountain of user data, are not held to the same requirements......snip~


http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/senate-votes-to-overturn-obamas-fcc-privacy-rules/article/2618241

Common Sense
03-24-2017, 07:23 AM
LOL...you cheer your right to privacy being thrown away simply because..."duh Obama".

AeonPax
03-24-2017, 07:30 AM
`
`
I guess it depends on ones perspective;
`



Here Are the 50 GOP Senators Who Just Sacrificed Your #BroadbandPrivacy to Corporate Profits (http://www.commondreams.org/news/2017/03/23/here-are-50-gop-senators-who-just-sacrificed-your-broadbandprivacy-corporate-profits)
`
Senate votes to let ISPs sell your Web browsing history to advertisers (https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/03/senate-votes-to-let-isps-sell-your-web-browsing-history-to-advertisers/)

Standing Wolf
03-24-2017, 07:54 AM
The privacy rules require Internet service providers, like Comcast and Verizon, to obtain permission from consumers before sharing browser history and other user information.

This is what you're happy happened? Wow.

MMC
03-24-2017, 07:55 AM
LOL...you cheer your right to privacy being thrown away simply because..."duh Obama".

What part about Faceplate and Google doing it without getting your permission didn't you get. Moreover what Privacy with the NSA and CIA bugging factory fresh phones, TV's, cars and other devices. Is there?

Oh that's Right.....your an Obama ass kisser. So you don't like anything being said about him. Oh well, get use to it.

MMC
03-24-2017, 07:58 AM
This is what you're happy happened? Wow.

So you were accepting the FCC's overreach Right?

Standing Wolf
03-24-2017, 08:03 AM
What part about Faceplate and Google doing it without getting your permission didn't you get. Moreover what Privacy with the NSA and CIA bugging factory fresh phones, TV's, cars and other devices. Is there?

Oh that's Right.....your an Obama ass kisser. So you don't like anything being said about him. Oh well, get use to it.

If two companies are getting away with something like that, the logical, non-Trumpian answer would be to take measures to stop them from getting away with it - not to declare it Open Season on computer-using consumers by letting everybody do it. Duh.

It would be like a driver, stopped for speeding, objecting to the cop, "But look at those other drivers you didn't stop!"...and the cop responding, "You're right" and never stopping anyone ever again.

Standing Wolf
03-24-2017, 08:11 AM
So you were accepting the FCC's overreach Right?

"Overreach", in this case, meaning "Legitimate consumer protection" that I suspect 99.99% of all citizens who don't happen to be spies, corporate shills or marketing types would, if given a choice, thoroughly welcome.

How are Republican leaders selling this to their constituents, by the way? How does one spin a story about legislators selling Americans' online privacy to corporate donor types and lobbyists so that it doesn't stink to high heaven?

MMC
03-24-2017, 08:14 AM
If two companies are getting away with something like that, the logical, non-Trumpian answer would be to take measures to stop them from getting away with it - not to declare it Open Season on computer-using consumers by letting everybody do it. Duh.

It would be like a driver, stopped for speeding, objecting to the cop, "But look at those other drivers you didn't stop!"...and the cop responding, "You're right" and never stopping anyone ever again.

Even the FCC chairman said consumers still would have privacy protections. Which fall back on consumers and their Right to choose.

As it stood.....BO peeps rule gave Faceplate, Google, and Twitter the ability to harvest more data than internet service providers and thus dominate digital advertising.

So again.....picking winners and losers.


The vote was seen as a critical step towards re-establishing a balanced framework that is grounded in the long-standing and successful FTC privacy framework that applies equally to all parties operating online.


Shouldn't it be equal for all. Oh and as Noted, privacy protections would still be implemented as they were before BO the peep and his meddling.

Standing Wolf
03-24-2017, 08:18 AM
Even the FCC chairman said consumers still would have privacy protections. Which fall back on consumers and their Right to choose.

As it stood.....BO peeps rule gave Faceplate, Google, and Twitter the ability to harvest more data than internet service providers and thus dominate digital advertising.

So again.....picking winners and losers.


The vote was seen as a critical step towards re-establishing a balanced framework that is grounded in the long-standing and successful FTC privacy framework that applies equally to all parties operating online.


Shouldn't it be equal for all. Oh and as Noted, privacy protections would still be implemented as they were before BO the peep and his meddling.

One major difference is that in many parts of America, consumers have no choice of service providers, whereas they can always refrain from using services like Facebook, Google and Twitter.

MMC
03-24-2017, 08:19 AM
"Overreach", in this case, meaning "Legitimate consumer protection" that I suspect 99.99% of all citizens who don't happen to be spies, corporate shills or marketing types would, if given a choice, thoroughly welcome.

How are Republican leaders selling this to their constituents, by the way? How does one spin a story about legislators selling Americans' online privacy to corporate donor types and lobbyists so that it doesn't stink to high heaven?

They had legitimate privacy protections before. The overreach was picking those that privacy didn't apply to. Saying its okay for Faceplate, Google, and Twitter to sell your info without your consent. While gathering even more data on you.

MMC
03-24-2017, 08:21 AM
One major difference is that in many parts of America, consumers have no choice of service providers, whereas they can always refrain from using services like Facebook, Google and Twitter.

And not even knowing that Faceplate, Google, and Twitter were still selling info on them.....Correct?

Even the Television Association praised the ruling for advertising outside of Web Connection or Internet providers.

del
03-24-2017, 08:23 AM
"Overreach", in this case, meaning "Legitimate consumer protection" that I suspect 99.99% of all citizens who don't happen to be spies, corporate shills or marketing types would, if given a choice, thoroughly welcome.

How are Republican leaders selling this to their constituents, by the way? How does one spin a story about legislators selling Americans' online privacy to corporate donor types and lobbyists so that it doesn't stink to high heaven?
it happened under *bo peep*

that's how they spin it as they cash the checks from comcast and verizon

Crepitus
03-24-2017, 08:25 AM
This is what you're happy happened? Wow.

He doesn't care, it's something that happened undo President Obama so it must be bad.


Buncha dumbass partisan hacks.

MMC
03-24-2017, 08:29 AM
Uh oh, the BO peep partisan ass slurpers are upset that BO peep attached his name to the Regulation.


Yet can't figure out what an uneven playing field is. Nor how his ruling increased the complexity of the rules over privacy. Nor how it affects the market, innovation, infrastructure investment. While discouraging competition.


Of course, I don't see Wolfman and Aeon as Partisan Obama Ass slurpers. Which just leaves our resident illiberals.


TBed for vulgarity.

Archer0915
03-24-2017, 08:40 AM
Simply put, one needs to look at revenue structure. Google and FakeBook provide a service and it is paid for by collecting and selling/sharing information! The ISProviders are structured differently and they are a pay to play item.

This being the case they need to provide services for free and collect data or charge the fee and collect no data. This is simple. It is a business matter and those morons up in DC are clueless, both sides! Clueless.

MMC
03-24-2017, 08:51 AM
Simply put, one needs to look at revenue structure. Google and FakeBook provide a service and it is paid for by collecting and selling/sharing information! The ISProviders are structured differently and they are a pay to play item.

This being the case they need to provide services for free and collect data or charge the fee and collect no data. This is simple. It is a business matter and those morons up in DC are clueless, both sides! Clueless.

Yet it does stop the FCC from unilaterally restricting constitutional rights, correct?

del
03-24-2017, 09:05 AM
Yet it does stop the FCC from unilaterally restricting constitutional rights, correct?
there's a constitutional right to personal data?

lol

MMC
03-24-2017, 09:15 AM
there's a constitutional right to personal data?

lol

Duh....let me know when you figure out Business does have Constitutional Rights.

del
03-24-2017, 09:15 AM
Duh....let me know when you figure out Business does have Constitutional Rights.

let me know when you have something resembling a point

Common
03-24-2017, 09:19 AM
I dont like this in effect your ISP can sell your browser history and infringe in other ways on your online privacy. Thats one of the good things obama did

MMC
03-24-2017, 09:21 AM
let me know when you have something resembling a point
Let me know when you can finally show some intelligence. Although, I know its very difficult for you. You can at least try, rather than show just how much you lack.

Green Arrow
03-24-2017, 10:42 AM
Ah, yes, let's destroy everything Obama had a hand in. Including allowing corporations to sell the privacy of Americans to the highest bidder.

Standing Wolf
03-24-2017, 12:16 PM
One of the first things we need to do is get back all those Medals of Honor that he handed out. No doubt all the recipients were Dimocrat Illiberals who falsified records and slipped Obama some cash and cocaine, anyway.

:smiley-char092:

Newpublius
03-24-2017, 12:26 PM
I dont like this in effect your ISP can sell your browser history and infringe in other ways on your online privacy. Thats one of the good things obama did

Well right now say you are shopping for a minivan. You google up a Chrysler/Dodge Caravan. Now, let's say Honda wants to sell advertising. Right now google has adwords where it can dekiver ads to users based on what the context of their searches reveal no matter what website you're on. Ultimately this is what we are talking about here. Likewise, google is starting to dominate onkine search. We need nore conpetitors to drive down the price of advertising because trust me, the price is in the price of the products that we buy.

Right now there is a war between the google/fa ebooks of the world and the Verizons and the Verizons are actually the small guy (I know hard to have any sympathy for Verizon.

Net neutrality, this rule....these are pro-GOOGLE rules, they sell it as 'privacy' of course but it really isn't.

jimmyz
03-24-2017, 12:56 PM
I'd love to see NSA annalist's reports on tpF and its membership. What members would make their surveillance list?

Archer0915
03-24-2017, 02:20 PM
Yet it does stop the FCC from unilaterally restricting constitutional rights, correct?
Well... The internet is becoming a utility more than a service. Try having kids in school with no internet! Try holding some positions in business without having internet access. Try so many things.

So now we have to ask, is the internet a utility? Well it is regulated so pretty much, yes. It should be treated just like other utility providers and you have a reasonable expectation of privacy with your utilities. Still the state can sell some of your information so it is a big question that I believe the SCOTUS needs to evaluate.

At this point in time I believe the business structures need to be looked at and how revenues are generated. So ISPs should not be allowed to profit from information gathering and sales. There is a reasonable expectation of privacy.

You do not have to use google or FacePalm. There are free browsers out there that are private and secure.

DGUtley
03-24-2017, 02:21 PM
Ah, yes, let's destroy everything Obama had a hand in. Including allowing corporations to sell the privacy of Americans to the highest bidder.

No, let's not destroy everything Obama did, just b/c it was Obama. Let's fix what should be fixed and keep what should be kept b/c well, elections have consequences HE said.

As an aside -- I can't find a clear answer on this and I've been in court all day. Can someone direct me to a non-partisan viewpoint of what happened -- what this change really means.

MisterVeritis
03-24-2017, 02:22 PM
I'd love to see NSA annalist's reports on tpF and its membership. What members would make their surveillance list?
As a former member of the second oldest profession, I am confident I am surveilled.