Troubling ISP Privacy Repeal: The Data Will Be Breached

Discussion in 'Off-topic Political' started by frankr, May 18, 2017.

  1. frankr

    frankr Active Member

    1,122
    0
    36
    Today the FCC just voted 2-1 to begin to unroll net neutrality protections, but I want to remind people about last month's repeal of important privacy protections. With a green light from Congress & President Trump, your ISP may begin some really creepy business practices that endanger your family's privacy and security.

    Troubling ISP Privacy Repeal: The Data Will Be Breached
    https://rietta.com/blog/2017/05/18/isp-privacy-repeal/

    I'm meeting with my State Senator tomorrow to discuss these issues. Please be informed and know that while some will frame a tradeoff between privacy and security, what is really at stake is your personal security vs insecurity.

    Frank
     
  2. Craftsman

    Craftsman Well-Known Member

    2,973
    241
    63
    Awww. You think there is privacy on the internet. Bless your heart.
     

  3. Clark

    Clark Well-Known Member

    1,001
    83
    48
    So what? If enough people do something illegal enough, we should legalize it?
     
  4. moe mensale

    moe mensale Well-Known Member

    12,603
    1,702
    113
    Most of those "creepy business practices" are already being done by some of the major ISPs. So what? Do you think your life on Facebook is private too?

    The biggest problem with Obama's net neutrality BS is that the major content providers like Netflix and YouTube get to deliver their product to you on the backs of the big ISPs without having to pay extra for their bandwidth usage. That cost is passed on to the ISPs' customers even if they don't use the Netflix service. How net neutral is that?

    I sincerely hope Ajit Pai gets this net neutrality BS removed. If Netflix wants to sell you a service and you want to buy that service, then Netflix needs to pay for the underlying infrastructure (their own or someone else's) to deliver it to you and you need to pay a realistic cost to purchase it. I, as a non-Netflix user, should not be required to subsidize Netflix and its customers.
     
  5. phantoms

    phantoms Senior Mumbler

    6,203
    183
    63
    :screwy:What about the poor guy that only sends a couple emails a month. Your incessant forum use is riding on the backs of the ISPs and he's having to pay for it.

    ISPs are not the only ones that pay for building the backbone, and in fact many ISPs do none of it. ISP are by definition, Internet Service Providers. If they are worried about amount of traffic they already have a solution and that's charging for bandwidth used. This has nothing to do with bandwidth, it's about control of the internet and ISPs getting to direct and control your internet usage. Getting to be content providers instead of ISPs.

    As you can tell, I'm all for net neutrality. In fact, I believe that any company that wants to provide internet service and also content, should be split in two. Having ISPs that only provide access to the Internet keeps the Internet free. Free for mom and pop to set up shop and not be blocked out because a ISP/Content provider is in bed with a big corp and that corp has a non-compete clause in their agreement, free for me to watch Netflix at the same d/l speed as someone that gets their movie from their ISP/Content Provider or free to get my news from a internet presence of my choice instead of being locked into a big news outlet.

    As I said, this has nothing to do with bandwidth constraints and the fact that ISPs don't charge for bandwidth used or have very high limits proves that. It's all about monetizing the internet and controlling what you watch, from who, etc.
     
  6. AtlPhilip

    AtlPhilip Proud GCO member.

    7,948
    100
    48
    Really? So who is building that backbone?

    You cannot regulate yourself to freedom.

    This. Like most regulation, it's goal is exactly the opposite of what it states, and it's supporters are those you have been lead to believe it would harm.

    And that assumes that I'm for using the police power of the state to make capitalism fair, which I absolutely am not.
     
  7. 45_Fan

    45_Fan Well-Known Member

    7,958
    42
    48
    Netflix and Youtube are literally paying tens of millions per month for the bandwidth they're using and you're saying they're not paying for what they're using. That just fails basic fact checking and you assert a logical fallacy (proof of a negative) as a basis for your argument?

    What am I missing? What do I not understand here?
     
  8. AtlPhilip

    AtlPhilip Proud GCO member.

    7,948
    100
    48
    They are paying for bandwidth by the Mb at the source and nothing more, which isn't an accurate representation of their financial impact to a network. It doesn't include the additional backbone bandwidth necessary (to all destinations) to ensure low latency and jitter. It doesn't include the impact of RTP and/or compression on WAN links, which may be compressed.

    To provide a good user experience, a video source requires a much different infrastructure than file sharing, even if they are both the exact same bandwidth and number of connections.
     
  9. psrumors

    psrumors Well-Known Member

    4,871
    47
    48
    Content providers are paying at the source to be on the net and accessible....why should they pay on the user end? If the user wants enough speed / bandwidth to access the content error free the user should pay for it.
     
  10. moe mensale

    moe mensale Well-Known Member

    12,603
    1,702
    113
    Do you really believe it costs only $8-$12 per month for Netflix to deliver their content? The only reason it does is because Netflix isn't incurring any costs for final delivery to the customer. Those costs are borne by Comcast, AT&T, etc. customers whether they use the Netflix service or not. If a Netflix customer wasn't getting a subsidized rate, his real monthly subscription costs would probably be ~$50 per month. On top of his normal internet costs. That's the business plan that Netflix runs on - subsidized content delivery cost. Without it, they probably wouldn't be a viable business.
     
  11. Groundhound

    Groundhound Active Member

    1,294
    15
    38
    Netflix already has a peering agreement with Comcast that dates back several years, net neutrality rules notwithstanding: https://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/24/...netflix-reach-a-streaming-agreement.html?_r=0

    It does concern me that Comcast has been buying up content providers while owning the duopoly (or in some cases monopoly) status of data pipeline provider for many areas. Perhaps Comcast will soon be able to slow data rates for content they didn't create. Unhappy consumers can just buy their Internet access from somewhere else - except they often can't. Maybe the Southern Company will start buying up HVAC companies, then for those AC units they didn't sell to the consumer, they could suspend power periodically to keep excess load off their system.
     
  12. AtlPhilip

    AtlPhilip Proud GCO member.

    7,948
    100
    48
    That's not how the internet works.
     
  13. jsaund22

    jsaund22 Ninjaneering Computers

    2,570
    182
    63
    Ultimately, everything on the internet is just a data packet. Whether it is your email, your Bea Arthur porn, or your 4k NetFlix movie - it's all just data packets. The only difference is of quantity.

    So here's how the internet works: NetFlix pays a contracted amount to send out its data packets. The customer pays a contracted rate to receive said data packets. That's it.

    Net Neutrality is the concept that your ISP cannot throttle certain data packets. They must treat all packets equally. Without this concept, your ISP can essentially become a web filter. Imagine if Comcast all of a sudden decided that they want to severely de-prioritize data packets from any site related to guns. You could still stream your HD Bea Arthur porn, but this site would load like it was on a 56k modem.

    Basically, it is telling the ISPs that they are in the business of delivering data packets, and that all data packets must be treated equally. Netflix is not being subsidized - they are paying what they have negotiated with their backbone providers. Customers are not picking up any slack, because they are paying their agreed-upon rates for their internet service.
     
  14. AtlPhilip

    AtlPhilip Proud GCO member.

    7,948
    100
    48
    False.

    Br'er Fox, please don't throw me into that net neutrality patch.....
     
    Last edited: May 25, 2017
  15. phaed

    phaed Active Member

    9,360
    2
    38
    all packets aren't created equal. an ISP should be able to do whatever they want with them, granted it's part of the agreement with the customer. and the customer should be able to choose whatever ISP they want, in a free market.
     
  16. jsaund22

    jsaund22 Ninjaneering Computers

    2,570
    182
    63
    OK, 'splain it for me.

    https://www.publicknowledge.org/issues/net-neutrality

    How is that so different from what I said?
     
  17. Mrs_Esterhouse

    Mrs_Esterhouse Swollen Member

    11,831
    503
    113
    What should internet consumers do when they are not in a free market, when they have few to no competitive options for internet? In most of the U.S., consumers can only choose 1 or 2 internet providers. So, at worst, there's a regional monopoly, and at best, there's a duopoly.

    I would be completely against net neutrality if the internet marketplace had a minimum of three provider choices throughout most American markets, but that is not the case. I'm personally on the fence over net neutrality because of the lack of consumer choice.
     
  18. AtlPhilip

    AtlPhilip Proud GCO member.

    7,948
    100
    48
    That situation is created, and perpetuated, by government regulation.

    Because it pretends the realities and intricacies of operating an internet backbone and countless interconnection points and agreements can be distilled down to one sentence.

    When you understand why this is false you will understand why your argument doesn't hold water.
     
    Last edited: May 25, 2017
  19. jsaund22

    jsaund22 Ninjaneering Computers

    2,570
    182
    63

    You're going to have to explain better. "When you understand it, you'll get it" is a statement, not an explanation of your position.
     
  20. CoffeeMate

    CoffeeMate Junior Butt Warmer

    46,427
    9
    0
    I guess the Republic did not in fact last 700 years as Our Founders had hoped.