Trump signs internet privacy repeal
thehill.com
Trump signs internet privacy repeal
1–10 of 12 posts
Re: Trump signs internet privacy repeal
#2FTA: "...the backlash was overinflated given that the FCC rules never went into effect and that popular websites not covered by the regulations also use customers’ data for advertisements."
Re: Trump signs internet privacy repeal
#3FTA: "...the backlash was overinflated given that the FCC rules never went into effect and that popular websites not covered by the regulations also use customers’ data for advertisements."
"AT&T, Comcast and Verizon — put out blog posts on Friday decrying what they saw as a misinformation campaign against the bill.
They argued that..."
Re: Trump signs internet privacy repeal
#4Is there any thing positive about repealing this bill?
From the article's claims, everyone wanted this bill and Trump just tore it up because he hates Obama so much.
That may very well be the case but I believe there are three sides to every story. (Eg. The Reporters side, Trumps side, and finally somewhere in between is the truth).
So I would ask again, does anyone feel brave enough to face the wrath of the mob and provide a legitimate reason why Trumps choice in repealing this bill might have some merit?
Possibly stopping internet bullies, phisisng schemes, pedophiles, mass shootings or terrorists? Anything at all?
Re: Trump signs internet privacy repeal
#5[2017]
Re: Trump signs internet privacy repeal
#6FTA: "...the backlash was overinflated given that the FCC rules never went into effect and that popular websites not covered by the regulations also use customers’ data for advertisements."
"AT&T, Comcast and Verizon — put out blog posts on Friday decrying what they saw as a misinformation campaign against the bill. They argued that..."
I intentionally omitted that bit because I didn't want to prejudice the bit I did quite. If something is true, does it matter who stated it?
Re: Trump signs internet privacy repeal
#7[2017]
I had a "I feel like this already happened" moment reading the article. This clears it up.
Re: Trump signs internet privacy repeal
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
"AT&T, Comcast and Verizon — put out blog posts on Friday decrying what they saw as a misinformation campaign against the bill. They argued that..."
I intentionally omitted that bit because I didn't want to prejudice the bit I did quite. If something is true, does it matter who stated it?
True that people shouldn't be upset because they repelled a bill sooner than it could be implemented? How does that change anything if people wanted the bill.
Re: Trump signs internet privacy repeal
#9Is there any thing positive about repealing this bill? From the article's claims, everyone wanted this bill and Trump just tore it up because he hates Obama so much. That may very well be the case but I believe there are three sides to every story. (Eg. The Reporters side, Trumps side, and finally somewhere in between is the truth). So I would ask again, does anyone feel brave enough to face the wrath of the mob and…
Well, we'd have to read the bill. As we know, politicians like to add all kinds of BS into bills that have nothing to do with the bill.
Also, the article says companies like Facebook and Google don't have the restrictions that this bill would impose so maybe that has something to do with it.
What really come to mind is China, and their quest to become the Saudi Arabia of Data (term coined from Robert Spalding - look up his videos on YouTube). So, the US needs to be strategic and protect Americans data, while allowing freedom, from countries like China and Russia who are gathering our data and using it against us.
This is a very interesting topic. I'm no expert on anything but just my thoughts to your question.
Re: Trump signs internet privacy repeal
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
"AT&T, Comcast and Verizon — put out blog posts on Friday decrying what they saw as a misinformation campaign against the bill. They argued that..."
I intentionally omitted that bit because I didn't want to prejudice the bit I did quite. If something is true, does it matter who stated it?
Where is the true part? I see the subjective word "overinflated" and a misdirection about what "popular websites" do.
This is more a case of a press release being a press release no mater who says it.