Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
President Trump Signs Repeal of U.S. Broadband Privacy Rules
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If you are in the market for doughnuts you can certainly take advantage of the free enterprise system and benefit from the competition among several providers of doughnuts. If, however, you are in the market for a hospital in a rural area, or for electricity, or for water, there's a very good chance that you are dealing with a natural monopoly. When it comes to ISPs in much of the country there is also either a monopoly or near-monopoly. If the single ISP operating in your area, or if all the few ISPs operating in your area, sell your browsing history, buying history, or any other information they can obtain by having your data pass through their hands, you have no bargaining power, no meaningful choice.
And just how is the government going to "prevent monopolies"? Is the government going to anoint an upstart competing ISP to go to war with Comcast? Will it create a government agency charged with going into business against any powerful monopoly that acts in restraint of trade? The United States has had a policy against monopoly for more than a century, a policy formulated in response to, among other monopolies, Standard Oil which at the time controlled 88% of all the refined oil in the country.
In the United States the control of monopolies is entrusted to the Executive branch by a law passed by Congress, notably the Sherman Anti-Trust Act. As it turns out, 100 senators and 435 members of the House of Represenatives do not put their heads together to discuss just what anti-competitive effects a merger might have, or what airlines may be colluding with one another on fares, or whether Google needs to be broken up to bring back real competition to online search. Common carriers (like ISPs) are generally subject to regulation by the FCC and corporate mergers are examined by the Federal Trade Commission pursuant to the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act passed by Congress. President Obama, the chief executive of the United States, had every right, just as his predecessors did, to suggest to executive agencies, like the FCC, that it adopt an order designed to ensure net neutrality, and to safeguard the privacy of the customers of ISPs. President Trump's appointee to the FCC chairmanship reversed that order. The only interesting question is which president supported the better policy for the citizens of the United States.
Those who believe that "the government that governs least governs best" are usually those who possess the power to take unfair advantage of their customers...or those insufficiently knowledgeable to avoid confusing personal liberty with unbridled corporate power.
Last edited:
A man so privileged and self involved doesn't have the ability to know what a normal person needs or wants. Mix that with hard right party and the disconnect with the people is explained. It's hard to believe you've got four more years of it. We have two years of brexit here, but I still think you got the bum deal.
"I do $o£€mn£y $₩€ar (or affirm) that I ₩i££ faithfu££¥ €x€¢ut€ th€ Offi¢€ of ₽r€$id€nt of th€ Unit€d $tat€$, and ₩i££ to th€ b€$t of m¥ abilit¥, ₽r€$€rv€, ₽rot€¢t and d€f€nd th€ ¢on$titution of th€ Unit€d $tat€$."
It's seems that the goal now is to collect as many of those symbols as possible, and feed them to your friends.
It's seems that the goal now is to collect as many of those symbols as possible, and feed them to your friends.
I wonder how many on this forum would actually come out and both admit they voted for this moron and praise his moronic actions up to now......
I wonder how many on this forum would actually come out and both admit they voted for this moron and praise his moronic actions up to now......
Oh there are a few.
So you think since ISPs have illegally monetised from your personal data, the logical progression is to legalise it? Please tell me how that is not foolish.
Maybe, but this also _encourages_ ISPs to monetize "assets" that they may have overlooked before. Think of the executives sitting around a boardroom table strategizing how they can sell their customers' information now that it's basically been legalized to do so.
What's remarkable is how poorly informed many of you are. Force fed hysterical garbage by the media and 'news' that you swallow without even thinking. Not to mention easily triggered and conspiratorial nut jobs. Embarrassing.
Privacy/customer data sharing:
Before:
Google/Facebook/Social Media/Webpages: Opt-in (default)
Internet providers: Opt-out (default)
Now:
Google/Facebook/Social Media/Webpages: Opt-in (default)
Internet providers: Opt-in(default)
Just select opt-out for data sharing with your ISP on your account, just like you have to do with Google or Facebook. They are required by law to provide this.
Treating an ISP differently, while allowing Google and Facebook to do the opposite is what the government 'regulation' wrought you. The government should treat all the same. If you want a different setting, get Congress to pass a law and apply it to all parties, ya know like how fairness works?
[doublepost=1491286188][/doublepost]
You've been trained to think 'protection' when politicians say the word 'regulation'.
Government regulations = barriers to entry. Big companies love regulations, because they are guaranteed to stay in business, their market share protected, while the regulations set high barriers to keep smaller companies from entering the market. Econ 101, folks.
Gas, Airlines, Telcos, ISPs, all regulated, all dominated by utterly crappy, government protected companies. You hear 'protection', I see Comcast, AT&T, Exxon, Delta. The cognitive disconnect is with your side of the debate.
Privacy/customer data sharing:
Before:
Google/Facebook/Social Media/Webpages: Opt-in (default)
Internet providers: Opt-out (default)
Now:
Google/Facebook/Social Media/Webpages: Opt-in (default)
Internet providers: Opt-in(default)
Just select opt-out for data sharing with your ISP on your account, just like you have to do with Google or Facebook. They are required by law to provide this.
Treating an ISP differently, while allowing Google and Facebook to do the opposite is what the government 'regulation' wrought you. The government should treat all the same. If you want a different setting, get Congress to pass a law and apply it to all parties, ya know like how fairness works?
[doublepost=1491286188][/doublepost]
You've been trained to think 'protection' when politicians say the word 'regulation'.
Government regulations = barriers to entry. Big companies love regulations, because they are guaranteed to stay in business, their market share protected, while the regulations set high barriers to keep smaller companies from entering the market. Econ 101, folks.
Gas, Airlines, Telcos, ISPs, all regulated, all dominated by utterly crappy, government protected companies. You hear 'protection', I see Comcast, AT&T, Exxon, Delta. The cognitive disconnect is with your side of the debate.
But how is that consistent with what the article read:
"[...] ISPs will not need to get permission from customers [...]" is very different from opt-in/opt-out!
This "Obama-era" rule was put into place in October 2016 right before the election and never enforced. This repeal doesn't actually change anything, but it's funny to see people hop on the VPN bandwagon. VPNs are good and fine, just funny to see their industry blow up instantly.
My money is on Google and/or Amazon being a major lobbyist behind the Obama-era FCC rule change. ISPs stepping on the turf of Google for advertising info/tracking was a big blockade to $$$
My money is on Google and/or Amazon being a major lobbyist behind the Obama-era FCC rule change. ISPs stepping on the turf of Google for advertising info/tracking was a big blockade to $$$
I wonder how many on this forum would actually come out and both admit they voted for this moron and praise his moronic actions up to now......
Sure, because he's only a moron because that's what you're told he is. Mindless sheep don't have the foggiest idea what this new law is or what it repealed. They just blindly attack. Just like the doing away with a wasteful government program that happened to make a small donation to the privately funded, non-profit organization known as Meals on Wheels. "He's defunding Meals on Wheels !!!" and the sheep attacked. And none knew it's only a measly 3.3%. Other private organizations have upped the ante. Even that washed up 49ers quarterback donated $50,000 to the cause.
Not even close...
ISPs have other laws that protect you over what can and can't be sold.
They have come out in the past assuring us that they don't sell data. This law also appeals a law that has gone into effect yet. It's important to remember that. The appealed law had not been active.
Ah you commented while I was typing. Great content. I'd throw Amazon into the bunch too. Funny to see the misinformed yell into echo chambers.
United States President Donald Trump today signed into law a bill that reverses Obama-era broadband privacy rules
Obama was in office for eight years, his broadband policy was proposed last October. That is October 2016. For the previous seven years of his administration the law, and your on-line privacy rights, was exactly the same as it is now. Trump has returned it to the status quo. Did anyone here campaign for greater privacy rights pre-October 2016? I doubt it very much. I'm guessing no-one cared then and are only finding out about it now and are somehow twisting it as something Trump introduced just so they've got another reason to hate him.
Let me reiterate, pre-October 2016 the ISP's could, and did, do all that they can do now. This is not new.
Last edited:
Does anyone doubt that ISPs will not sometime in the future start selling our Data at great profit, despite their sure to follow protestations to the contrary, and their current statements that they have no plans to do so.
And the most troubling aspect of this Repeal is that line: ..... "the resolution contains language preventing the FCC from enabling similar privacy rules in the future". This may be progress for big business, but definitely not for privacy-minded consumers.
I wonder how many on this forum would actually come out and both admit they voted for this moron and praise his moronic actions up to now......
Unfortunately you 'other' political team guys are triggered on garbage hype issues like this without even bothering to understand them. The smart people want nothing to do with those who self-flagullate themselves anytime they hear the word 'trump'.
The media is largely with you, because the media is the lowest common denominator out for nothing but ratings and popularity. Both incredibly ******, totally corrupting motivators for actual knowledge. You need to do your own work, and stop parroting quickly ingested nonsense.
And now this hysteria has destroyed your credibility to address actual issues with Trump. Keep it up, pat yourselves on the back over the same inaccurate polls and crap media opinion pieces, and he'll just win another term.
This might be the stupidest thing I have ever read on macrumors.
Close but... They are still subject to the same laws requiring user privacy opt-outs. All this changes is the default position for ISPs, like you pointed out, was only a few months of default opt-out.
If team Democrat had integrity they'd have pushed for policy/law requiring default opt-out across the board, but that's not their bag... "emote first, think never, corrupt as ever". Obama had too many Google folks on the team, so of course his internet privacy policy was crippled and functionally toothless against the worst of privacy violators. The phony outrage now is pathetic and laughable, sad clowns them all.
The policy change Trump signed is hardly benevolent, but it's up to Congress to pass the necessary laws for real internet privacy protection. Privacy is Constitutionally protected, as are ALL rights not enumerated (listed) in the Bill of Rights. In reality a law for this shouldn't even be required, the burden of passing law should be required to allow government more rights. But the team Democrat and Republican idiots, unfortunately have superstitious belief in benevolent government power, which has lead us all down a very dark path.
Trump is the ultimate clown. I've never encounter a person being able to make a joke about himself and his surrounding each single day. I can understand that Hillary Clinton didn't appeal for many American voters, but to choose an unqualified, uneducated and an average businessmen instead is quite bizar, unless you take some time to study history. Because it's not the first time that lying demagogues have been put in power.
I hope for America and especially for the rest of the world that the family Trump, that is operating like a skilled maffia family, will be send home before the end of this year so the nepotism, damaging the environment, the growing lack of political knowledge, can be stopped.
I hope for America and especially for the rest of the world that the family Trump, that is operating like a skilled maffia family, will be send home before the end of this year so the nepotism, damaging the environment, the growing lack of political knowledge, can be stopped.
Now it is even more important, that Apple and other companies design their products and services with Encryption as first design rule!
I expect iCloud Drive with full end2end encryption soon.
Also Apple should encourage users by giving them free S/MIME certificates to use end2end encryption for Mail.
I expect iCloud Drive with full end2end encryption soon.
Also Apple should encourage users by giving them free S/MIME certificates to use end2end encryption for Mail.
It's highly ignorant to think you know someone, let alone know what they think, based on limited dialogue.
So big companies love regulations, except when they don't. Big companies sure seem to be against regulations when it hurts their bottom line. Which kind of goes against the idea of loving it.
Again regulations can have overreach but that in no way equates them to not having their place.
I would be surprised if Comcast were able to sell my search history. They can hardly even load my search engine results.
[doublepost=1491293698][/doublepost]
[doublepost=1491293698][/doublepost]
It's true that protections are barriers to entry. I know farming has all kinds of screwed up regulations. But when it comes to things like ISPs or other utilities where one company tends to take over a region with difficult-to-install cables or something, that's called a "natural monopoly" and, as the name suggests, happens without regulation. Actually, things can get quite bad without regulating utilities.
What a sad country America is so rapidly becoming.
Big business! etc.
What would be good is to find out how Trump manipulated idiotic voters so easily. I mean, can you imagine ever trusting that chap? Some did!
Big business! etc.
What would be good is to find out how Trump manipulated idiotic voters so easily. I mean, can you imagine ever trusting that chap? Some did!