5 ms·

Well, I was going to respond to this, but it's an account that less than an hour old. Seems the trolls are picking up on tactics from Reddit.

dmix 10y ago
What part of saying privacy/security comes at cost is trolling? It does. Whether you pay money directly or for lost access to features like persistent geolocation, using closed source internet-connect applications, etc, etc. Unless I'm missing something bad the OP said.
- Delmania 10y ago
  The Supreme Court recognized on multiple occasions that we have a right to privacy. In this specific instance, protecting privacy comes at no cost to an ISP, as they simply do not collect or sell your data. They literally have to do nothing, as setting up the systems to collect and opening the channels to sell takes work. This nothnig more than money grab.
  - dmix 10y ago
    > The Supreme Court recognized on multiple occasions that we have a right to privacy. The right to privacy... from the government, not private businesses. There are privacy regulations which affect private business such as HIPAA. But these are not 'rights'. And just because they are regulated doesn't mean they are effective at the intended or worth the significant costs of implementation - which is the critique here. So unlike government where the risks are a certainty (because we give the state a monopoly on violence and other powers), the risks of private companies selling data are not nearly in the same league, regardless if you believe regulations are the way to go. I personally would like to be able to invest money so we don't have to worry about ISPs selling data. TLS/VPNs are a solved problem. Same with the opportunity to use adblockers... ad companies collect as much data and that is entirely unregulated. No one seems to care. We just say 'use an ad-blocker'... a private solution. 'Do not track' regulations were a total failure.
    - Delmania 10y ago
      The first part you're correct about, so no argument there. The second part sounds like a "private, free market" solution, which has had, at best, limited results. What's to prevent an ISP from simply prohibiting customers from using a VPN? If Netflix and Hulu can do this, why not Spectrum or Comcast? Your claims about ad-blocking can be used against you since there are companies that will prohibit you from using an ad blocker. This is exacerbated by the fact that in many areas, there is only one ISP available, so there is no free market. Additionally, these companies will use any means to slow down or stop competition, so that's not an option. In this case, the government is the only organization that can effectively regulate these companies.
      - greedyliberal 10y ago
        There is no right to online privacy. Full stop. If you'd like for an ISP to provide you with an additional benefit, there is nothing stopping you from writing them and asking to pay a premium for them to not track/sell your information. They have a right to offer you a price, and you have a right to accept or deny their offer. You also have a right to cancel their service and switch to a provider who satisfies you as a consumer.
greedyliberal 10y ago
It's amazing how quickly the left dismisses logic and reason. Stay in your bubble.
- dmix 10y ago
  Clearly, government ordained rights is the only way to stop data from being sold to evil marketing companies! To believe other viable options exist is crazy, you must be a troll! /s That's how partisan worldviews work, my ideology is good, to believe otherwise is unfathomable / malicious / the agenda of a conspiratorial paid shill. There's some great literature on this subject, the left is particularly susceptible as their worldview tends to start from a smug all-knowing-esque position. But the right is hardly immune to this either. 45% of the top websites online have TLS by default and growing. Most home internet is shared among various people and most valuable data (ie, identifying data) is almost always encrypted these days. I can't imagine it's very valuable as it is and clearly the value is diminishing as privacy activists like myself push for TLS adoption and better OS defaults. Yet despite previous ISP privacy laws, there's still a massive billion dollar marketing data industry collected from ads, rewards cards, credit card usage, etc, etc. This is like creating a huge fuss about a fly while a jumbo jet gets let through.
  - Delmania 10y ago
    > Clearly, government ordained rights is the only way to stop data from being sold to evil marketing companies! To believe other viable options exist is crazy, you must be a troll You're from Canada, so your government has implemented strong privacy laws. What you may miss out on is that the usual response to this involves either individual responsibility or a free market solution. The problem with both of these is that ISPs in the United States are powerful, and in many cases, hold either monopolies or non-competing duopolies is a region. There is no "free market" solution. Claims there are ignore the reality that ISPs will use any means necessary to slow of halt competition. Google Fiber is an example of that. Individual responsibility would require everyone to set up VPNS. For some people, that is beyond their means or their capability. It also is, as I said, an arms race. An organization can detect if you're using a VPN and either throttle or ban you from their service. If you live in one of those areas with a monopoly, you're of luck.

dmix 10y ago

What part of saying privacy/security comes at cost is trolling? It does. Whether you pay money directly or for lost access to features like persistent geolocation, using closed source internet-connect applications, etc, etc. Unless I'm missing something bad the OP said.

Delmania 10y ago
The Supreme Court recognized on multiple occasions that we have a right to privacy. In this specific instance, protecting privacy comes at no cost to an ISP, as they simply do not collect or sell your data. They literally have to do nothing, as setting up the systems to collect and opening the channels to sell takes work. This nothnig more than money grab.
- dmix 10y ago
  > The Supreme Court recognized on multiple occasions that we have a right to privacy. The right to privacy... from the government, not private businesses. There are privacy regulations which affect private business such as HIPAA. But these are not 'rights'. And just because they are regulated doesn't mean they are effective at the intended or worth the significant costs of implementation - which is the critique here. So unlike government where the risks are a certainty (because we give the state a monopoly on violence and other powers), the risks of private companies selling data are not nearly in the same league, regardless if you believe regulations are the way to go. I personally would like to be able to invest money so we don't have to worry about ISPs selling data. TLS/VPNs are a solved problem. Same with the opportunity to use adblockers... ad companies collect as much data and that is entirely unregulated. No one seems to care. We just say 'use an ad-blocker'... a private solution. 'Do not track' regulations were a total failure.
  - Delmania 10y ago
    The first part you're correct about, so no argument there. The second part sounds like a "private, free market" solution, which has had, at best, limited results. What's to prevent an ISP from simply prohibiting customers from using a VPN? If Netflix and Hulu can do this, why not Spectrum or Comcast? Your claims about ad-blocking can be used against you since there are companies that will prohibit you from using an ad blocker. This is exacerbated by the fact that in many areas, there is only one ISP available, so there is no free market. Additionally, these companies will use any means to slow down or stop competition, so that's not an option. In this case, the government is the only organization that can effectively regulate these companies.
    - greedyliberal 10y ago
      There is no right to online privacy. Full stop. If you'd like for an ISP to provide you with an additional benefit, there is nothing stopping you from writing them and asking to pay a premium for them to not track/sell your information. They have a right to offer you a price, and you have a right to accept or deny their offer. You also have a right to cancel their service and switch to a provider who satisfies you as a consumer.

greedyliberal 10y ago

It's amazing how quickly the left dismisses logic and reason. Stay in your bubble.

dmix 10y ago
Clearly, government ordained rights is the only way to stop data from being sold to evil marketing companies! To believe other viable options exist is crazy, you must be a troll! /s That's how partisan worldviews work, my ideology is good, to believe otherwise is unfathomable / malicious / the agenda of a conspiratorial paid shill. There's some great literature on this subject, the left is particularly susceptible as their worldview tends to start from a smug all-knowing-esque position. But the right is hardly immune to this either. 45% of the top websites online have TLS by default and growing. Most home internet is shared among various people and most valuable data (ie, identifying data) is almost always encrypted these days. I can't imagine it's very valuable as it is and clearly the value is diminishing as privacy activists like myself push for TLS adoption and better OS defaults. Yet despite previous ISP privacy laws, there's still a massive billion dollar marketing data industry collected from ads, rewards cards, credit card usage, etc, etc. This is like creating a huge fuss about a fly while a jumbo jet gets let through.
- Delmania 10y ago
  > Clearly, government ordained rights is the only way to stop data from being sold to evil marketing companies! To believe other viable options exist is crazy, you must be a troll You're from Canada, so your government has implemented strong privacy laws. What you may miss out on is that the usual response to this involves either individual responsibility or a free market solution. The problem with both of these is that ISPs in the United States are powerful, and in many cases, hold either monopolies or non-competing duopolies is a region. There is no "free market" solution. Claims there are ignore the reality that ISPs will use any means necessary to slow of halt competition. Google Fiber is an example of that. Individual responsibility would require everyone to set up VPNS. For some people, that is beyond their means or their capability. It also is, as I said, an arms race. An organization can detect if you're using a VPN and either throttle or ban you from their service. If you live in one of those areas with a monopoly, you're of luck.