4 ms·

It's a feature. If they're allowed to disclose it, and you agree to the terms of service, what expectations of privacy do you have?

by 1001101 10y ago

techsupporter 10y ago
And that would be awesome if we had meaningful competition (and, in this case, I mean more than even two providers) from local Internet providers. It is not out of the realm of possibility, if ISPs and mobile providers start putting in "you agree by subscribing to our services that we can harvest, sell, package, and distribute your access history to any company we deem suitable" their terms of service, that I wouldn't have any choice of provider who doesn't do this. If both Comcast and CenturyLink do this, I'm SOL for wireline broadband. If T-Mobile, Sprint, AT&T, and Verizon all do this--and why wouldn't they all, as a group?--I'm SOL for wireless service. So that's six companies to completely foreclose having a choice.
- drdaeman 10y ago
  By the way. What are the obstacles for new ISPs in the US? Is it municipality-related issues (cities disallow building any new networking infrastructure and no fibers/lambdas available for rent, or availabe only at prohibitive prices), or peering issues (peering prices are impossible or no one even wants to accept you as a peer unless you're a big telco) or something else? I just worked for about ten years for various ISP companies in Russia (in a relatively small town), including one "start-up" ISP where I was a first and only software engineer until we had grown up. While I haven't dealt with actual physical aspect, or legal issues, I had an impression that white things were sort of unpleasant, it wasn't prohibitive. So, curious how things are in US and why there are regions with almost monopolistic ISPs. Thought US must've had a freer market than our post-USSR legacy with all the licensing and regulations.
  - techsupporter 10y ago
    There are two big obstacles: 1) Building a last-mile network is very expensive. There is a lot of backbone-style fiber in the ground but getting end customers connected to that network is a complex maze of permits, digging, pole attachments, and so on. Just the manpower alone is staggering. Verizon spent years and billions on it and all they have to show for it now is a disgruntled former CEO and having fobbed off 2/3rds of their former wireline territories off onto Frontier and Fairpoint. 2) There is a lot of people-based inertia to overcome. As individuals, people object to having streets dug up, new equipment boxes planted in places, and all of the general dust and noise that construction of any kind creates. Plus your competitors will try to throw up roadblocks and, let's face it, they have more money and influence than you do. And if you want to do more than serve single-family houses and townhouses, you will have to negotiate with building owners for access. Even when the residents are the owners, like condominiums, there's still a process to gain access to walls. Then you have to consider how you get your wires from A to B; do you go above ground (easier but then you have to get access to the poles, which may be privately owned, and then you contend with the owners of the poles and the people who consider any new wires on poles to be unsightly) or do you bury (digging up streets, sidewalks, and utility easements has gotten a lot easier but you are still bound to disturb something and Woe Betide You if you accidentally hit a natural gas line)? And then, if you want to serve an "area" instead of "a city," what do you do when you need to cross city or county borders? Or a major highway (that's likely owned by the state government)? Not all cities are compact; take Dallas, it is both large and contains three separate municipalities inside of its general area. So, yeah, it's really hard and it gets harder the more people you have in a space, though the subscriber possibilities are much greater.
- sundvor 10y ago
  The only way to use the Internet in such a scenario would be through VPN tunnels. The privacy implications of your history being shared are mind boggling. Political parties, tax optimisation searches, anything related to sexual health, mental issues ... crazy. I'm glad I'm in Australia. This would never, ever pass here. And we've got ISPs like IINet who actively oppose this kind of crap.

It's a feature. If they're allowed to disclose it, and you agree to the terms of service, what expectations of privacy do you have?

by 1001101 10y ago

It's a feature. If they're allowed to disclose it, and you agree to the terms of service, what expectations of privacy do you have?

techsupporter 10y ago

And that would be awesome if we had meaningful competition (and, in this case, I mean more than even two providers) from local Internet providers. It is not out of the realm of possibility, if ISPs and mobile providers start putting in "you agree by subscribing to our services that we can harvest, sell, package, and distribute your access history to any company we deem suitable" their terms of service, that I wouldn't have any choice of provider who doesn't do this. If both Comcast and CenturyLink do this, I'm SOL for wireline broadband. If T-Mobile, Sprint, AT&T, and Verizon all do this--and why wouldn't they all, as a group?--I'm SOL for wireless service. So that's six companies to completely foreclose having a choice.

drdaeman 10y ago
By the way. What are the obstacles for new ISPs in the US? Is it municipality-related issues (cities disallow building any new networking infrastructure and no fibers/lambdas available for rent, or availabe only at prohibitive prices), or peering issues (peering prices are impossible or no one even wants to accept you as a peer unless you're a big telco) or something else? I just worked for about ten years for various ISP companies in Russia (in a relatively small town), including one "start-up" ISP where I was a first and only software engineer until we had grown up. While I haven't dealt with actual physical aspect, or legal issues, I had an impression that white things were sort of unpleasant, it wasn't prohibitive. So, curious how things are in US and why there are regions with almost monopolistic ISPs. Thought US must've had a freer market than our post-USSR legacy with all the licensing and regulations.
- techsupporter 10y ago
  There are two big obstacles: 1) Building a last-mile network is very expensive. There is a lot of backbone-style fiber in the ground but getting end customers connected to that network is a complex maze of permits, digging, pole attachments, and so on. Just the manpower alone is staggering. Verizon spent years and billions on it and all they have to show for it now is a disgruntled former CEO and having fobbed off 2/3rds of their former wireline territories off onto Frontier and Fairpoint. 2) There is a lot of people-based inertia to overcome. As individuals, people object to having streets dug up, new equipment boxes planted in places, and all of the general dust and noise that construction of any kind creates. Plus your competitors will try to throw up roadblocks and, let's face it, they have more money and influence than you do. And if you want to do more than serve single-family houses and townhouses, you will have to negotiate with building owners for access. Even when the residents are the owners, like condominiums, there's still a process to gain access to walls. Then you have to consider how you get your wires from A to B; do you go above ground (easier but then you have to get access to the poles, which may be privately owned, and then you contend with the owners of the poles and the people who consider any new wires on poles to be unsightly) or do you bury (digging up streets, sidewalks, and utility easements has gotten a lot easier but you are still bound to disturb something and Woe Betide You if you accidentally hit a natural gas line)? And then, if you want to serve an "area" instead of "a city," what do you do when you need to cross city or county borders? Or a major highway (that's likely owned by the state government)? Not all cities are compact; take Dallas, it is both large and contains three separate municipalities inside of its general area. So, yeah, it's really hard and it gets harder the more people you have in a space, though the subscriber possibilities are much greater.
sundvor 10y ago
The only way to use the Internet in such a scenario would be through VPN tunnels. The privacy implications of your history being shared are mind boggling. Political parties, tax optimisation searches, anything related to sexual health, mental issues ... crazy. I'm glad I'm in Australia. This would never, ever pass here. And we've got ISPs like IINet who actively oppose this kind of crap.