Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Disapproval of FCC regulations a significant blow against privacy protection

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 242 posts

Re: Disapproval of FCC regulations a significant blow against privacy protection

#131

Post by dragonwriter »

tzs wrote: post #116
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they would pass legislation to correct the law on which the court relied striking down FTC regulatory authority in this area The FCC rule is being struck down using the Congressional Review Act [1]. CRA provides "an expedited legislative process" [2]. Giving the FTC authority in this area would require passing a real law. (That said, I agree with you regrind the explanation of motive.) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/…

It's not clear to me how the CRA actually makes anything faster in this case. The "real law" approach would only need a simple law, which surely could be drafted quickly. Both a "real law" and a CRA action require the same simple majority in the House and Senate, which they have.

CRA actions can't be filibustered, regular legislation can. OTOH, while Democrats might filibuster repeal of the FCC action if they could, I can't imagine a clear positive grant of regulatory mandate to the FTC on this issue would be opposed by Democrats, so if that were really the majority's concern, I don't see how the procedural distinction between CRA action and regular legislation would be a real issue.

Re: Disapproval of FCC regulations a significant blow against privacy protection

#132

Post by pdkl95 »

edraferi wrote: post #68

I want a privacy first router. Does such a product exist? Key features: - I pay a subscription for maintenance (so I'm not the product) say $10/mo - Automatically routes all traffic over a VPN. - Smart VPN bypass for performance-sensitive traffic like streaming video and gaming - Provides non-logging DNS service - Automatic advertisement blocking For VPN, DNS, and adblock I want the option to use servers & block list…

> VPN

This is a political problem. Technology like a VPN or alternative DNS is little more than a placebo. With the ISP as a permanent MitM, modern deep-packet inspection, etc, you are probably still leaking a lot of information.

Worse, you're only moving the problem to a different location. Even if you were able to hide your traffic from your local ISP, your VPN host or DNS service becomes your ISP de facto. Also, if any of your online accounts can be tied back to you on their own, you might not get a choice in the matter; the server's ISP can also sell information. What about TLS? Unfortunately far too many websites are only encrypted to CloudFlare.

However, the real reason that VPNs/etc are not a solution is that privacy shouldn't be limited to people with a technical background. Those of us that do understand the technology have a duty to help the people without that knowledge and experience.

Re: Disapproval of FCC regulations a significant blow against privacy protection

#133

Post by lloyd-christmas »

valine wrote: post #125

What I want is a way to tie my own VPN to something like my Apple id and have it auto configured anytime I move to a different device. Right maintaining VPN clients on a range of devices is a pretty big hassle. I'm not saying I want Apple to run vpn services, I just want an easy way to manage vpn configurations on personal devices.

https://betterspot.com/ was a Kickstarter project I funded. They haven't shipped yet, but look to be this month.

Re: Disapproval of FCC regulations a significant blow against privacy protection

#134

Post by Delmania »

dmix wrote: post #122
Delmania wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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.

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.

Re: Disapproval of FCC regulations a significant blow against privacy protection

#136

Post by williamle8300 »

pdkl95 wrote: post #132
edraferi wrote: post #68

I want a privacy first router. Does such a product exist? Key features: - I pay a subscription for maintenance (so I'm not the product) say $10/mo - Automatically routes all traffic over a VPN. - Smart VPN bypass for performance-sensitive traffic like streaming video and gaming - Provides non-logging DNS service - Automatic advertisement blocking For VPN, DNS, and adblock I want the option to use servers & block list…

> VPN This is a political problem. Technology like a VPN or alternative DNS is little more than a placebo. With the ISP as a permanent MitM, modern deep-packet inspection, etc , you are probably still leaking a lot of information. Worse, you're only moving the problem to a different location. Even if you were able to hide your traffic from your local ISP, your VPN host or DNS service becomes your ISP de facto . Also,…

Tell people to use the Opera browser. It has VPN built-in.

Re: Disapproval of FCC regulations a significant blow against privacy protection

#137

Post by peregrine »

Brendinooo wrote: post #117
peregrine wrote: post #102

The Hacker News mods should comment why this post has been 'bumped' from the top spot and why it's title is no longer the original title of the article. From the https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html : > Otherwise please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait. The title is the original, it wasn't misleading and it isn't 'linkbait'. Its the premise of the article and it's the truth. dan…

The headline isn't true. Congress voted to remove regulations, they didn't complete a financial transaction with ISPs.

Because none of them received donations or were lobbied?

Re: Disapproval of FCC regulations a significant blow against privacy protection

#138

Post by dragonwriter »

0xfeba wrote: post #21

> In 2016, the F.C.C., which I led as chairman under President Barack Obama, extended those same protections to the internet. Oh how nice of Tom Wheeler to play the good-guy now. It took a lot of public outcry for him to change his tune about Net Neutrality.

> Oh how nice of Tom Wheeler to play the good-guy now. It took a lot of public outcry for him to change his tune about Net Neutrality.

Tom Wheeler was the driving force behind all of the FCC net neutrality efforts, including early case-by-case actions, the 2010 Open Internet Order and the 2015 Open Internet Order. The idea that he was somehow an opponent of net neutrality mostly comes from ab unfair set of hit pieces in popular outlets (including, notably, Jon Oliver's Last Week Tonight) based around some groups (legitimate) concerns that the first public draft of the 2015 order (written to address the court decision striking down the 2010 order) was an insufficiently strong instrument.

Re: Disapproval of FCC regulations a significant blow against privacy protection

#139

Post by shawnee_ »

Brendinooo wrote: post #99

I am a strong advocate for privacy, please understand that before you continue reading this. I don't want ISPs to sell my browsing history, and I am continually disappointed in the Republican opposition to net neutrality and online privacy. I'm even working on an open source project involving cryptography and secret protection, so I have skin in the game. However, this headline is patently false, right? Congress didn…

However, this headline is patently false, right? Congress didn't sell anything. They removed protections that were put into place late last year and hadn't gone into effect as far as I know.

It's nearly impossible to find even one constituent who wrote to their Congresspeople asking for this law to be axed. It was a handful of lawmakers in Congress who accepted bribes, payments[1], and other kinds of lobbying from telecoms to push this through... that is the definition of "selling". And yes, the votes did happen almost exactly down party lines.

The headline was taken directly from the NYT article, and it is indeed accurate. That HN changed it to appease ??? is really disconcerting.

[1]http://www.vocativ.com/415350/house-rep-pushing-to-set-back-...

Re: Disapproval of FCC regulations a significant blow against privacy protection

#140

Post by icebraining »

williamle8300 wrote: post #136
pdkl95 wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> VPN This is a political problem. Technology like a VPN or alternative DNS is little more than a placebo. With the ISP as a permanent MitM, modern deep-packet inspection, etc , you are probably still leaking a lot of information. Worse, you're only moving the problem to a different location. Even if you were able to hide your traffic from your local ISP, your VPN host or DNS service becomes your ISP de facto . Also,…

Tell people to use the Opera browser. It has VPN built-in.

So you trust the company involved in the WoSign debacle with your data?
Post reply on HN