151–160 of 233 posts
I couldn't find links to the actual bill anywhere so I tracked it down: http://legislature.maine.gov/LawMakerWeb/summary.asp?ID=2800... The summary: "This bill prohibits a provider of broadband Internet access service from using, disclosing, selling or permitting access to customer personal information unless the customer expressly consents to that use, disclosure, sale or access. The bill provides other exceptions u…
I couldn't find links to the actual bill anywhere so I tracked it down: http://legislature.maine.gov/LawMakerWeb/summary.asp?ID=2800... The summary: "This bill prohibits a provider of broadband Internet access service from using, disclosing, selling or permitting access to customer personal information unless the customer expressly consents to that use, disclosure, sale or access. The bill provides other exceptions u…
‘reasonable’
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We should ban collecting tons if info about people, for all companies, period. We won't, because banks and CC companies are very into doing that and the politicians love them, but we should.
No. Because many businesses rely on data available. FAANG would be out of business then.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know what this site has against jokes, but you can have my upvote.
The site guidelines are here https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Jokes aren't explicitly against the guidelines either, but I think the site likes to emphasize high quality content that will not alienate people who don't understand obscure references.
I couldn't find links to the actual bill anywhere so I tracked it down: http://legislature.maine.gov/LawMakerWeb/summary.asp?ID=2800... The summary: "This bill prohibits a provider of broadband Internet access service from using, disclosing, selling or permitting access to customer personal information unless the customer expressly consents to that use, disclosure, sale or access. The bill provides other exceptions u…
I look forward to the day when selling user's data requires the user's opt-in every single time a third party wants to access that data. No more "yes to all" or allowing blanket usage in TOS/EULAs. People who use apps that sell their data should be bombarded with requests to use that data each and every single time, until they either decide the app isn't worth it or the app decides they should try a different busines…
Each and every time? As a user who understands and consents to that request, that would be incredibly annoying.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
AAN actually sell stuff other than hyper-targeted ads. F and G (and AAN) still can sell ads, just less targeted ones. They would suffer a bit (or a bit more), but not outright be forced out of business. And same goes for most if not all other FAANG-tier companies not explicitly included in that acronym. As for the "improving service" angle, e.g. Netflix could ask if it's OK to collect history to improve/personalize r…
Is this a generational thing, or an industry-you're-in blindness thing? Or both? We had an economy, and even advertising (so, so much of it) before spyvertising was such a huge thing. It was fine. The sky did not fall. For some reason there's a set of people who seem to think it'll be the end of the world if we stop letting companies operate private dragnet spy operations.
> It was fine.
To say that "it was better", because there was more competition.
That's a keen insight, that it might be a "generational thing". I remember things, in general, working better before the Shermann Antitrust Act stopped applying to technology companies.
It's all political marketing to make consumers continue to feel good about being screwed over more and more by corporate policy following demands of the very wealthy.
What’s the point of this level of cynical response when a good bill passes? Let’s give some props and do more good things, not sulk.
I couldn't find links to the actual bill anywhere so I tracked it down: http://legislature.maine.gov/LawMakerWeb/summary.asp?ID=2800... The summary: "This bill prohibits a provider of broadband Internet access service from using, disclosing, selling or permitting access to customer personal information unless the customer expressly consents to that use, disclosure, sale or access. The bill provides other exceptions u…
Won’t the customer consent just become a line in the T&C’s and unless you accept it you can’t use their service? This would be a similar situation to the cookie disclaimers.
Why not ban browser companies, operating system companies, computer/phone companies, email providers, etc. too?
This is exactly it. The reason tech companies are so big on supporting regulations against ISPs is because those rules are narrowly carved out to not apply to them, eliminating a large chunk of their competition. Imagine if this law also applied to Google and Facebook, and they couldn't charge more when you opt out of their data collection?
You argument is essentially that it is not right to ban persuasive surveillance on the roads if it is possible for people to use those roads to reach destinations where surveillance is allowed.