6 ms·
arstechnica is one of the few sites that is accurately stating that these privacy exposures exist now and stem from during the Obama administration (in 2015).
by masonic 10y ago
arstechnica is one of the few sites that is accurately stating that these privacy exposures exist now and stem from during the Obama administration (in 2015). It's implied in the wording of this article, but their linked article from 24 March spells it out better:
"So what has changed for Internet users? In one sense, nothing changed this week, because the requirement to obtain customer consent before sharing or selling data is not scheduled to take effect until at least December 4, 2017. ISPs didn’t have to follow the rules yesterday or the day before, and they won’t ever have to follow them if the rules are eliminated."
Instead of just implementing the late-term Obama rule that was to take effect in December or later, we should be pushing for a more broad replacement rule that also encompasses major content providers such as Amazon, Netflix, Hulu, and Google/Youtube.
- pitaj 10y agoWe should be pushing for legislation, on all levels of government. Not regulation at purely the federal level. These Dem legislators ho so opposed the changes should push for a law in their own state which affords their citizens the same protections.
- bussierem 10y agoLike in MN! Yay, go my home state.
- shawn-butler 10y agoIn Alaska, the right to privacy is enshrined in the State Constitution... § 22. Right of Privacy - The right of the people to privacy is recognized and shall not be infringed. I think only Alaska and Hawaii have such state constitutional rights explicitly listed.