3 ms·

This whole discussion is disheartening. When I first heard about this is came to HN to get the facts and try to actually form an opinion, because honestly I can

by _alias 10y ago

This whole discussion is disheartening. When I first heard about this is came to HN to get the facts and try to actually form an opinion, because honestly I can't figure out what the bill is supposed to change and how. Instead I find people pontificating along party lines like every comments section across the internet. Where's the analysis and insight? Where's the objectivity? I've come to expect more from this site and I know we can do better.

warlox 10y ago
The bill allows ISPs to sell their customers' data, among other things. The article says enough about what the bill does. Your complaints about "people pontificating along party lines" do nothing but reveal your own biases when the vote is so starkly along party lines. In a case like this, the objective analysis is clearly that the Republicans are wrong and the Democrats are right.
eli_gottlieb 10y ago
The party claiming to represent "personal liberty" and "responsibility" has now voted to have your browser history sold on data-markets. Ever looked at anything particular embarrassing? Welcome to blackmailsville. I really hope hackers obtain records of every Republican Congresscritter's creepiest porn viewing.
icantdrive55 10y ago
Yea, I was expecting to find a solution. 1. I would like to see a bill introduced to the house that's similar to the European ePrivacy Act. 2. I would like a bill to go father in scope. I believe a customer should own all their personal information. A delete would permently delete your IP viewing history, and company servers would have to delete all information they have on you in their data bases completely--if you want. It will be completely your decision. No one could trace your IP address. Law enforcement will still have subpoena power, but the data will be gone. Of course, the credit agencies would be exempt, but will have more restrictions on what they can do with that information. Yes--every once in awhile, you might need to re-enter registration/financial information at a website, and certain companies would have to change their ways. Boo--Hoo. 3. Ip tracing, except in extreme cases, would be illegial. Yelp woudn't be happy, but so what. Google, and Bing would go insane, but the time has come. I wouldn't mind anonymous data mining. They would be required to share all annoymous information with with the public--not just "What's trending". IP tracing to individual address, and people would have severe restrictions. Just make it illegial? Maybe government would have the right to IP address history for research purposes, they would have to build their own data centers. (The data centers are alwready there?). Private industry, like Google, and FB have ruined their space at the table, at least in the United States. 4. Google, Facebook, Amazon, etc. would spend more millions fighting this though. Oh--Google would be angry. 5. The time has come.
ajross 10y ago
> Instead I find people pontificating along party lines The vote was along party lines. You are asking for non-partisan insight where there is literally none to be had. There are good guys and bad guys in this issue, and they wear uniforms to tell you who they are.
Kryptor 10y ago
The text of the resolution is very short, it simply says the FCC rule is repealed. You can read the rule here: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/12/02/2016-28006/protecting-the-privacy-of-customers-of-broadband-and-other-telecommunications-services https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/12/02/2016-28... At 73 pages, it's a doozy. I don't know exactly what the effects would have been, but one important thing to note that I did not see mentioned once in any of the reporting about this is that the rule has only been in effect for 84 days. So I wouldn't expect any changes to be too noticeable. Also worth noting is that whatever restrictions on ISPs are removed by this, it doesn't guarantee that ISPs will start doing that thing immediately, if at all. I also haven't seen reporting on what past behavior ISPs have already engaged in that this rule would have stopped.
- zu03776 10y ago
  The first fifth of the linked resolution addresses what is customer personal information (protocols, ports, IP addresses, MAC addresses, contained information, etc.) Paragraph 106 mandates that the information released should not be able to be de-identified, and third parties must be contractually obligated to not de-identify customers from the data. Paragraph 117 says the clause must be transferable to third-parties all the way down the list, but a middle-man can hire a company in a different country to do the necessary work, outside the jurisdiction of the FCC. Paragraph 115 says the ISP can share the IP address, and no other identifying data, and meet the requirements of de-identification. A clause to "revisit this topic later" is present. Damn right you better -- combined with other data sources from social media and search engines, I can trivially combine multiple data sources using the IP address and build a "personal profile" of your entire Internet usage, including those really unique "outlier" destinations. Paragraph 143 says that no periodic reminder is required, so expect the "privacy notice" to be buried in a sea of required checkboxes at point-of-sale, and never seen again. There are provisions that it be available on a website and via other methods, etc., but "available" versus "easily found" are two different things. Most of these rules will take effect in 12 months, not immediately. (The rule of preventing ISP services requiring you waive your privacy to provide service is 30 days (paragraph 295, § 64.2011), data security requirements in 90 days (§ 64.2005), and data breach notifications and requirements in 6 months (§ 64.2006).)

by _alias 10y ago

warlox 10y ago

The bill allows ISPs to sell their customers' data, among other things. The article says enough about what the bill does. Your complaints about "people pontificating along party lines" do nothing but reveal your own biases when the vote is so starkly along party lines. In a case like this, the objective analysis is clearly that the Republicans are wrong and the Democrats are right.

eli_gottlieb 10y ago

The party claiming to represent "personal liberty" and "responsibility" has now voted to have your browser history sold on data-markets. Ever looked at anything particular embarrassing? Welcome to blackmailsville. I really hope hackers obtain records of every Republican Congresscritter's creepiest porn viewing.

icantdrive55 10y ago

Yea, I was expecting to find a solution. 1. I would like to see a bill introduced to the house that's similar to the European ePrivacy Act. 2. I would like a bill to go father in scope. I believe a customer should own all their personal information. A delete would permently delete your IP viewing history, and company servers would have to delete all information they have on you in their data bases completely--if you want. It will be completely your decision. No one could trace your IP address. Law enforcement will still have subpoena power, but the data will be gone. Of course, the credit agencies would be exempt, but will have more restrictions on what they can do with that information. Yes--every once in awhile, you might need to re-enter registration/financial information at a website, and certain companies would have to change their ways. Boo--Hoo. 3. Ip tracing, except in extreme cases, would be illegial. Yelp woudn't be happy, but so what. Google, and Bing would go insane, but the time has come. I wouldn't mind anonymous data mining. They would be required to share all annoymous information with with the public--not just "What's trending". IP tracing to individual address, and people would have severe restrictions. Just make it illegial? Maybe government would have the right to IP address history for research purposes, they would have to build their own data centers. (The data centers are alwready there?). Private industry, like Google, and FB have ruined their space at the table, at least in the United States. 4. Google, Facebook, Amazon, etc. would spend more millions fighting this though. Oh--Google would be angry. 5. The time has come.

ajross 10y ago

> Instead I find people pontificating along party lines The vote was along party lines. You are asking for non-partisan insight where there is literally none to be had. There are good guys and bad guys in this issue, and they wear uniforms to tell you who they are.

Kryptor 10y ago

The text of the resolution is very short, it simply says the FCC rule is repealed. You can read the rule here: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/12/02/2016-28006/protecting-the-privacy-of-customers-of-broadband-and-other-telecommunications-services https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/12/02/2016-28... At 73 pages, it's a doozy. I don't know exactly what the effects would have been, but one important thing to note that I did not see mentioned once in any of the reporting about this is that the rule has only been in effect for 84 days. So I wouldn't expect any changes to be too noticeable. Also worth noting is that whatever restrictions on ISPs are removed by this, it doesn't guarantee that ISPs will start doing that thing immediately, if at all. I also haven't seen reporting on what past behavior ISPs have already engaged in that this rule would have stopped.

zu03776 10y ago
The first fifth of the linked resolution addresses what is customer personal information (protocols, ports, IP addresses, MAC addresses, contained information, etc.) Paragraph 106 mandates that the information released should not be able to be de-identified, and third parties must be contractually obligated to not de-identify customers from the data. Paragraph 117 says the clause must be transferable to third-parties all the way down the list, but a middle-man can hire a company in a different country to do the necessary work, outside the jurisdiction of the FCC. Paragraph 115 says the ISP can share the IP address, and no other identifying data, and meet the requirements of de-identification. A clause to "revisit this topic later" is present. Damn right you better -- combined with other data sources from social media and search engines, I can trivially combine multiple data sources using the IP address and build a "personal profile" of your entire Internet usage, including those really unique "outlier" destinations. Paragraph 143 says that no periodic reminder is required, so expect the "privacy notice" to be buried in a sea of required checkboxes at point-of-sale, and never seen again. There are provisions that it be available on a website and via other methods, etc., but "available" versus "easily found" are two different things. Most of these rules will take effect in 12 months, not immediately. (The rule of preventing ISP services requiring you waive your privacy to provide service is 30 days (paragraph 295, § 64.2011), data security requirements in 90 days (§ 64.2005), and data breach notifications and requirements in 6 months (§ 64.2006).)