Net Neutrality....2.0? 3.0? "All will be decided Dec 14"
#121 Posted 16 December 2017 - 06:04 PM
So the bottom line is - yes the ISP can throttle my connections unless I pay a special fee. And yes they can sell whatever private information about me they want to third parties without my consent - as long as they classify said information as opt-out instead of opt-in. They decide what is sensitive and what isn't.
They can charge me for 10mps service and throttle every site and service on the internet except xfinity.com (their homepage) - which connects at 10mps, and they've met the letter of the "law"
Can and will are two different things, but the opportunity for exploitation shouldn't even be there.
You really should read this:
https://www.ftc.gov/...umer-protection
&
https://www.ftc.gov/...214_final_0.pdf
&
https://apps.fcc.gov...OC-347927A1.pdf
Th FCC & FTC will now "render advice and guidance" to the acts or practices of Internet service providers.
Lots of loop holes, and buried somewhere in there, broadband service from an ISP does not include connecting to the internet backbone (among other interesting tidbits).
(btw, I don't own a cell phone. And I have a bank card, which replaced my checkbook - which I also still have. And I read the contract for it. Funny, because if they violate my contract - I can report them to somebody beside themselves for investigation.)
This post has been edited by Forge: 16 December 2017 - 07:00 PM
#122 Posted 16 December 2017 - 07:41 PM
Consumers privacy is enforced by the FTC for retailers, app developers, data brokers, health companies, financial institutions, third -party service providers, and others.
ISPs should have the same approach.
Should.
Football players should stand for the national anthem too.
#123 Posted 16 December 2017 - 07:58 PM
#125 Posted 17 December 2017 - 05:14 AM
#126 Posted 17 December 2017 - 07:01 AM
because he's so clever
This post has been edited by Forge: 17 December 2017 - 07:07 AM
#127 Posted 17 December 2017 - 01:56 PM
SeeJaneWun, on 16 December 2017 - 03:01 PM, said:
+1000
#128 Posted 17 December 2017 - 10:11 PM
SeeJaneWun, on 16 December 2017 - 04:43 PM, said:
Could be. All I have is a Green Card.
SeeJaneWun, on 16 December 2017 - 04:43 PM, said:
It's not an absolute. I don't expect FAANG to be a supporter of the 1st. But I expect the Internet to be.
SeeJaneWun, on 16 December 2017 - 04:43 PM, said:
Really? By whom?
In Spring Trump allowed AT&T, Verizon to ignor privacy of customers. Is this what no censorship means nowadays? All private information is open and for sale?
switching tracks
Winners and loosers of No-NN
https://www.marketwa...ling-2017-12-15
A lot of dead people supported the end of NN
https://www.fastcomp...-net-neutrality
Apparently everything Obama did was bad, Net Neutrality for one.
Yet, what about Clinton? He was the one giving rise to the current internet, as we know it.
If this is a blue/red issue, I say, Clinton's input was bad, and should be annulled.
This post has been edited by Hank: 17 December 2017 - 11:05 PM
#129 Posted 17 December 2017 - 11:47 PM
Hank, on 17 December 2017 - 10:11 PM, said:
This is irrelevant. Pai didn't consult any outside input of any kind before putting the removal of NN to the vote. Their minds were already made up.
Here's a generic article - there are better, but this one will do in a pinch.
https://arstechnica....net-neutrality/
ISPs should now use businesses such as medical, financial, and data institutions as blueprints for handling people's private information. Should, not must. Opting-out isn't a 100% guarantee of privacy of your information.
Net Neutrality was garbage and needed to go, but the FCC hobbled the FTC in its ability to enforce any kind of regulation on ISPs.
There are only three things the ISPs have to be transparent about - throttling speed, blocking access to content, and paying for prioritized traffic.
All they have to do is put a blurb about speeds not being guaranteed on their service page, and they're free to do whatever they wish with your connection. Including not connecting it to the backbone - they can cache pages and direct your connection to those.
Everything else they're answerable for is basically regulations towards business practices to keep the current major ISPs from being monopolies. (no preventive tactics to stop another isp company from opening in their coverage area)
This post has been edited by Forge: 17 December 2017 - 11:50 PM
#130 Posted 18 December 2017 - 12:38 PM
Forge, on 17 December 2017 - 11:47 PM, said:
Here's a generic article - there are better, but this one will do in a pinch.
https://arstechnica....net-neutrality/
ISPs should now use businesses such as medical, financial, and data institutions as blueprints for handling people's private information. Should, not must. Opting-out isn't a 100% guarantee of privacy of your information.
Net Neutrality was garbage and needed to go, but the FCC hobbled the FTC in its ability to enforce any kind of regulation on ISPs.
There are only three things the ISPs have to be transparent about - throttling speed, blocking access to content, and paying for prioritized traffic.
All they have to do is put a blurb about speeds not being guaranteed on their service page, and they're free to do whatever they wish with your connection. Including not connecting it to the backbone - they can cache pages and direct your connection to those.
Everything else they're answerable for is basically regulations towards business practices to keep the current major ISPs from being monopolies. (no preventive tactics to stop another isp company from opening in their coverage area)
I posted this for laughs.
Net Neutrality is not garbage, the FCC is.
ACLU comments on this
https://www.aclu.org...-net-neutrality
Hank is fighting on