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

Senate Guts Privacy Rules. Will House Follow Suit?

eff.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 85 posts

Re: Senate Guts Privacy Rules. Will House Follow Suit?

#71

Post by forgotmysn »

maxxxxx wrote: post #65
forgotmysn wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

think of elected representatives as beholden to shareholders, rather than voters, and it might make more sense to you.

You can easily attribute it to laziness. They don't research a topic themselves so whoever makes the best presentation gets the vote. Usually that's lobbyists because they have more money and time and are hired as excellent communicators. Dinner invitations and paid flights in private jets help too.

Right, and the lobbyists are hired, not because the corporations that hire them are inherently evil, but because they are mandated by their shareholders to change costly laws rather than comply with them. I'm not blaming our elected representatives, they are just part of a failing system.

Re: Senate Guts Privacy Rules. Will House Follow Suit?

#72

Post by DrScump »

brantg wrote: post #62
rrggrr wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(1) Don't bet on many of them understanding their vote. It was billed as a removal of an unfair restraint on the free market. (2) Oddly silent were folks like Google, Microsoft, etc. I fully expect to have to pay for privacy, or to have to choose whom I trust with my data: Comcast or Google. Its a shitty time for privacy, period.

I also don't fully understand this. Jumping in to see if someone can clarify. Here's the text of the bill (it's pretty short): https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-joint-re... It looks like all this does is undo an FCC rule from Dec 2, 2016. My understanding is that if this passes, our internet privacy will be the same as it was on Dec 1, 2016. Am I wrong? Why is this so bad?

Actually, privacy rules continue to be the same as before Trump (since Obama pulled the FTC's authority over broadband, anyway).

No element of that rule change, implemented weeks after the election, could possibly have taken effect before next December. (There are complex notification requirements that could push parts of it out even longer).

Re: Senate Guts Privacy Rules. Will House Follow Suit?

#73

Post by maxxxxx »

forgotmysn wrote: post #71
maxxxxx wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can easily attribute it to laziness. They don't research a topic themselves so whoever makes the best presentation gets the vote. Usually that's lobbyists because they have more money and time and are hired as excellent communicators. Dinner invitations and paid flights in private jets help too.

Right, and the lobbyists are hired, not because the corporations that hire them are inherently evil, but because they are mandated by their shareholders to change costly laws rather than comply with them. I'm not blaming our elected representatives, they are just part of a failing system.

Actually you should blame the representatives. They should be there for ALL citizens and have the greater good in mind not just the narrow interests of some.

Re: Senate Guts Privacy Rules. Will House Follow Suit?

#74

Post by brantg »

DrScump wrote: post #72
brantg wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also don't fully understand this. Jumping in to see if someone can clarify. Here's the text of the bill (it's pretty short): https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-joint-re... It looks like all this does is undo an FCC rule from Dec 2, 2016. My understanding is that if this passes, our internet privacy will be the same as it was on Dec 1, 2016. Am I wrong? Why is this so bad?

Actually, privacy rules continue to be the same as before Trump (since Obama pulled the FTC's authority over broadband, anyway). No element of that rule change, implemented weeks after the election , could possibly have taken effect before next December. (There are complex notification requirements that could push parts of it out even longer).

Good point. So if this passes, nothing changes.

Re: Senate Guts Privacy Rules. Will House Follow Suit?

#75

Post by trendia »

js2 wrote: post #29

I won't be surprised if AT&T revives its "Internet Preferences" targeted ads program[1]. Most customers apparently didn't care and were willing to put up with it for a $29/mo discount. AT&T never indicated why they canceled it, but my money is that it was due to the FCC regulations that were put in place. [1] https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/09/att-t...

Reminder that you can use a VPN with many cell phones. (I know it can be done with Android, not sure about iPhone)

Re: Senate Guts Privacy Rules. Will House Follow Suit?

#76

Post by mikeyouse »

brantg wrote: post #62
rrggrr wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(1) Don't bet on many of them understanding their vote. It was billed as a removal of an unfair restraint on the free market. (2) Oddly silent were folks like Google, Microsoft, etc. I fully expect to have to pay for privacy, or to have to choose whom I trust with my data: Comcast or Google. Its a shitty time for privacy, period.

I also don't fully understand this. Jumping in to see if someone can clarify. Here's the text of the bill (it's pretty short): https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-joint-re... It looks like all this does is undo an FCC rule from Dec 2, 2016. My understanding is that if this passes, our internet privacy will be the same as it was on Dec 1, 2016. Am I wrong? Why is this so bad?

> Am I wrong? Why is this so bad?

Prior to August 2016, the FTC regulated all aspects of consumer protections. Unfortunately, the FTC has a specific call-out ceding authority to the FCC for certain parts of the regulation of 'common carriers', which ISPs fell into.

AT&T sued and said that the FTC carve-out for common carriers means that the FTC can't regulate any part of their business, not even consumer protections like data privacy. In August, the US Court of Appeals ruled in favor of AT&T, which meant that the FCC would have to enact new rules and would have responsibility for consumer protection with regards to common carriers.

The FCC passed consumer protection rules in October (which came into force in December). The FCC has authority on rulemaking unless there's an explicit congressional action saying otherwise. So along comes the new Republican Senate and they pass this bill to nullify the FCC rules. It's written ambigiously enough that you'll likely need another act of congress to undo it, which would require a Democratic congress / senate / President.

In summary: before August, the FTC protected your data. Since last winter, the FCC was protecting it. If this passes, nobody will be protecting it.

Re: Senate Guts Privacy Rules. Will House Follow Suit?

#77

Post by DrScump »

brantg wrote: post #74
DrScump wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, privacy rules continue to be the same as before Trump (since Obama pulled the FTC's authority over broadband, anyway). No element of that rule change, implemented weeks after the election , could possibly have taken effect before next December. (There are complex notification requirements that could push parts of it out even longer).

Good point. So if this passes, nothing changes.

If the bill becomes law, the existing Obama-era rules stay in place, but the one difference is that the limitation is encoded in statute law as opposed to just an administrative rule... so another act of Congress (another passed and signed bill) would be necessary to override it.

Re: Senate Guts Privacy Rules. Will House Follow Suit?

#78

Post by pdkl95 »

rayiner wrote: post #68
pdkl95 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Are most of these representatives just willfully corrupt? Yes, but they prefer the terms "lobbying" and "campaign contributions". While theoretically they are concerned with their constituency so they can keep their job, the big problem with our system is the expense of running campaigns. While serving in congress, our representatives a massive amount of time is spent "dialing for dollars". The parties even require…

It's illegal for corporations to make campaign donations. McDonnell has nothing to do with that.

If the corporation is donating directly, it should be possible to show that the legislation was quid pro quo.

I'm sure you're familiar with the numerous ways corporations (and others) add indirection when donating. Especially in the era of "Super PACs".

Re: Senate Guts Privacy Rules. Will House Follow Suit?

#79

Post by [deleted] »

wnevets wrote: post #70
ignoramceisblis wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You appear to be another victim of "divide and conquer", and like many of them, perpetuate it. Life is not as simple as you like to believe: Trump/republican supporters may not necessarily think this is a good thing.

/r/iamverysmart

[deleted]

Re: Senate Guts Privacy Rules. Will House Follow Suit?

#80

Post by 2xlbuds »

extra88 wrote: post #41
ccrush wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have a source for this? Not arguing. Just looking for data.

Vote tallies are posted online. Here's the URL for S.J. Res. 34 [0]: https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_... Grouped By Vote Position is most useful for this question, they don't offer a by-party grouping but it's pretty easy to scan all 50 YEAs and see every one is followed by an "R." All the NAYs are from Democrats or independents. Senator Isakson (R) didn't vote because he's recovering from…

Rand Paul cosponsored the bill, so he was an effective yes. I don't know all of the rules of the senate, but apparently it is common to abstain on your own bill.
Post reply on HN