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

191–200 of 242 posts

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

#191

Post by scriptkiddy »

mdpopescu wrote: post #161
Latty wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You think that regulation is the relevant barrier to entry to being an ISP? Not the cost of running lines or anti-competitive practices by rivals? Please, this just means no protection for an environment where, right now, we have no competition to move to when our ISP decides to do something shitty.

I've had an ISP willing to put 2km of copper wire to get my 15$ / month fee. (Not in the US.) I don't think the cost of wires is significant anywhere in the US either.

You may live in a country where the government subsidizes the laying of communications infrastructure. Laying fiber or even just coaxial cable is extremely expensive.

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

#192

Post by AtheistOfFail »

greedyliberal wrote: post #91

Just because you call it a right, doesn't make it a right. For instance: I have a right to only be upvoted! Should I call the ACLU on everyone who downvotes this? Recognizing the costs of providing internet service, and then making a suggestion to pay a higher premium for additional service (i.e. privacy) is the logical way to resolve this.

Yeah, you're right, we should make list of people who think their "rights" are important. Let's start with gun owners.

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

#193

Post by icebraining »

Crespyl wrote: post #167
icebraining wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A VPN doesn't actually provide more privacy, it just changes who can snoop on your data.

You're right, of course, but a VPN at least lets you make sure that the service that can snoop on your data doesn't want to snoop on your data, because they know you'll just leave them for another, more privacy conscious, provider if they do. VPN providers have incentive to compete with each other and commitment to user privacy is an important selling point. ISPs have zero commitment to privacy and almost no reason t…

You're right, of course, but a VPN at least lets you make sure that the service that can snoop on your data doesn't want to snoop on your data, because they know you'll just leave them for another, more privacy conscious, provider if they do.

Only if you can tell that they're doing so. If they create two companies with no apparent connections, how would you know that VPN company A was selling your data through Marketing company B?

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

#194

Post by peregrine »

sctb wrote: post #187
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…

A moderator replaced the original title (which was absolutely as linkbait as they come) with a representative phrase from the article. This topic has been discussed extensively already, so this article received many user flags as well as the standard penalty for follow-on posts. Related discussions: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13942345 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13981184 https://news.ycombinator.co…

Thank you for being transparent. It seems nearly everyday I see articles rise to the top of HN only to disappear when I return.

With no explanation or transparency for the reason.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13939514

For example was on the front page for less than 2 minutes before disappearing with zero discussion nor reasoning. Even though it contains extremely Hacker News friendly analysis and discussion.

HN needs to come clean, is the no politics rule continuing? Or are the politics of the moderators or the "politics deemed appropriate" going to continue to rule?

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

#195

Post by greedyliberal »

AtheistOfFail wrote: post #192
greedyliberal wrote: post #91

Just because you call it a right, doesn't make it a right. For instance: I have a right to only be upvoted! Should I call the ACLU on everyone who downvotes this? Recognizing the costs of providing internet service, and then making a suggestion to pay a higher premium for additional service (i.e. privacy) is the logical way to resolve this.

Yeah, you're right, we should make list of people who think their "rights" are important. Let's start with gun owners.

Please point me to the amendment that guarantees a right to internet privacy.

Gun owner's actually have a right: https://constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/amen...

Perhaps you should try to better understand the system of rule of law we have here in the United States before participating in discussion.

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

#196

Post by greedyliberal »

Delmania wrote: post #112
greedyliberal wrote: post #91

Just because you call it a right, doesn't make it a right. For instance: I have a right to only be upvoted! Should I call the ACLU on everyone who downvotes this? Recognizing the costs of providing internet service, and then making a suggestion to pay a higher premium for additional service (i.e. privacy) is the logical way to resolve this.

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.

It's amazing how quickly the left dismisses logic and reason. Stay in your bubble.

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

#197

Post by galacticpony »

Rudism wrote: post #188
galacticpony wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Those of us that do understand the technology have a duty to help the people without that knowledge and experience. No, we don't. The fact that the "common people" don't value privacy enough led to this whole situation. Those that do value privacy, can pay for it with their money (or their time to learn).

I think the problem is not that most people don't value privacy, it's that most are unaware of the privacy issues that affect them, or have been misled to believe that the cost of having the websites and services that they rely on (facebook, gmail, etc.) is necessarily tied to giving up privacy.

This isn't a new problem. We "know" the common people don't care because all attempts at scandalizing this in the media, for years, have not found much resonance.

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

#198

Post by greedyliberal »

Delmania wrote: post #171
dmix wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The Supreme Court recognized on multiple occasions that we have a right to privacy. The right to privacy... from the government, not private businesses. There are privacy regulations which affect private business such as HIPAA. But these are not 'rights'. And just because they are regulated doesn't mean they are effective at the intended or worth the significant costs of implementation - which is the critique here.…

The first part you're correct about, so no argument there. The second part sounds like a "private, free market" solution, which has had, at best, limited results. What's to prevent an ISP from simply prohibiting customers from using a VPN? If Netflix and Hulu can do this, why not Spectrum or Comcast? Your claims about ad-blocking can be used against you since there are companies that will prohibit you from using an a…

There is no right to online privacy. Full stop. If you'd like for an ISP to provide you with an additional benefit, there is nothing stopping you from writing them and asking to pay a premium for them to not track/sell your information.

They have a right to offer you a price, and you have a right to accept or deny their offer. You also have a right to cancel their service and switch to a provider who satisfies you as a consumer.

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

#199

Post by peregrine »

snowpanda wrote: post #158
peregrine wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because none of them received donations or were lobbied?

You're reaching..

I did one google search and found https://www.theverge.com/2017/3/29/15100620/congress-fcc-isp... and is fully sourced by generally reputable data. I'd be just as pissed if Democrats sold us down the river, which I am about Obamacare several years ago.

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

#200

Post by Spivak »

PietdeVries wrote: post #126
bubblethink wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> - Smart VPN bypass for performance-sensitive traffic like streaming video and gaming It is highly error-prone to maintain (or expect a company to maintain) essentially a large filter list. In the end you'll end up with a product that gives you neither privacy nor performance. For a real world example, try using a smart dns. They suck at dns on its own. And they have to keep up with the cat and mouse of content sell…

For the nerds among us this shouldn't be too hard. A Virtual Private Server can be rented for a few dollars a month. I have seen examples that charge less than $4 for unlimited bandwidth. Install VPN software on the server and become your own VPN provider. On your home router you can setup a point-to-point VPN connection and you're done - all traffic encrypted and bypassing your local telco. I assume that network-pro…

There is one issue that your traffic is typically flagged as originating from a VPS provider and you might end up getting denied or have to do annoying challenges.

Still worth it but it's something to consider.

Post reply on HN