ISPs Versus a Modicum of Privacy

Discussion in 'The Thunderdome' started by gcbvol, Mar 29, 2017.

  1. gcbvol

    gcbvol Fabulous Moderator

  2. lumberjack4

    lumberjack4 Chieftain

    I think if you want to ban the selling of user metadata, do it completely. Don't cherry pick the industries to apply it to. I do use VPN a lot of the time, not always.
     
  3. dc4utvols

    dc4utvols Contributor

    I use the Tor browser...

    but this is about them being able to sell you to advertisers. Its how google and facebook work. Not that I like this but it makes sense from an internet economics sense.

    We can't seem to have any common sense or true conservative rule out of the district of corruption. On a side note the democrats were going to use net neutrality as a back door to micromanaging the net. On the other side the cronies wanted to allow the ISPs to dishonor their advertising promises and nickel and dime both ends of the pipe. If ISP X says 20mbs@1024GB then dont be [itch bay]ing about Netflix, Hulu etc when your customer paid for the bandwidth. If you dont have the bandwidth dont sell it. Its not time for them to now demand extra just because of the type of service.
     
    Last edited: Mar 29, 2017
  4. NorrisAlan

    NorrisAlan Super Moderator

    If my ISP looks at my browsing history and metadata, I don't think anyone is going to want to buy it. Except NYY.
     
  5. dc4utvols

    dc4utvols Contributor

    Your ISP looks at your traffic in realtime and logs it if they want to or if the spooks/police ask them to do it. Its called sniffing. I used to work at an ISP back in the late 90s early 00s. Some also pro-actively look at what you are doing for DMCA violations. Its the googles and facebooks that look at your cookies/metadata and history to develop a profile on you so as to send you adverts.
     
  6. NorrisAlan

    NorrisAlan Super Moderator

    [​IMG]
     
  7. gcbvol

    gcbvol Fabulous Moderator

    True, but instead of extending the Google/Facebook model and giving ISPs carte blanche with our data we should be doing the opposite. Folks have the option to simply not use Google or Facebook but I'd still like to see consumers have the ability to consent to use of their data. Folks talking about an evening of the playing field have this all wrong.
     
  8. dc4utvols

    dc4utvols Contributor

    It will become an arms race and more and more of the average consumer will start using privacy software...I have been using pop and ad blockers for years and now websites block back or send annoying messages...The adblockers will need to figure out how to work undetected. Stuff evolves. I have several "fake" accounts.

    I use my Davy Crockett moniker for most social sites but use Rex Richard for my fake facebook. The thing with it was not that I was trying to prevent facebook from info gathering but I wanted to separate politics from my real account. On my real account I just want to to see the baby and vacation pics and not talk politics.

    Another issue I had was when my wife used her real account for a nintendo run service. It allowed a teenage boy access to her real info and he began to stalk my daughter and send my wife creepy messages of "concern" for my daughter. So he had my daughters real first name and phished nintendo for the parents name. The he have my daughters whole name some other info that was meaning less without that. Once he had that he was able to tell which school she went to etc.

    I told him to knock off the contact or I was going to go to the law.

    This stuff has real consequences and most of these groups could care less if they are hacked and you are exposed. Heck I have had to replace my debit card 3 times in 2 years.

    The NBC run ISP which has a monopoly and overcharges me for service wanted my social security number so as to do a credit check. I SAID NO and they did not get it. I had to spend an extra 2 hrs on the phone to get service though. I hate them but they are it after Clearwire got bought by Sprint and shutdown. It wasnt the greatest but I averaged 6mbs and it was locked in at 29.99 for life. Now I pay NBC 65/mo and they suck at everything except I do get ~12-20mbs.
     
  9. lumberjack4

    lumberjack4 Chieftain

    https://pi-hole.net/?v=7516fd43adaa

    Its not flawless, but its pretty damn good if you have a raspberry pi laying around.
     
  10. dc4utvols

    dc4utvols Contributor

    According to CNS the current scheme that saw the FCC take over from the FTC was all about cronyism and buttering Googles bread. According to them google had 250 people move into the Obama admin.

    So there is more to the story
     
  11. gcbvol

    gcbvol Fabulous Moderator

    This is a good and fairly easy to digest breakdown of the situation:

    https://techcrunch.com/everything-you-need-to-know-about-congress-decision-to-expose-your-data-to-internet-providers/

    I always get a kick out of ISP defenders wailing about the Google boogeyman (which is sort of true), while their 'victim' is one of the most powerful lobbies in America. A mini-monopoly asserting its power to stifle any and all competition. The fragments of Ma Bell working like mad to pull itself back together.
     
  12. dc4utvols

    dc4utvols Contributor

    Not a fan of either big ISPs or the goog. I like the idea of net neutrality but it was used as a trojan horse by the dems for the beginnings of a takeover. All I want is a "pipe" to the net at a cheap price ( less than $30 like I had with clearwire) that can stream my sling, netflix and youtube videos. I am tired of comcast and google both.
     
  13. IP

    IP Grusader Knight Errant of the 8th Order

    Oh hell, he knows about the takeover?
     
  14. fl0at_

    fl0at_ Humorless, asinine, joyless pr*ck

    I make 85 fake web requests to real places for every real web request.

    The fact that I have ads for a banking core, Mature Connection, Russian mail order brides, Miter Saws and fire place grates, at the same time, says they can't sift through the noise.
     
  15. VolDad

    VolDad Super Moderator

  16. IP

    IP Grusader Knight Errant of the 8th Order

  17. dc4utvols

    dc4utvols Contributor

    Ha ha I worked in IT for years...dont currently...I worked at a small ISP back in the days of dialup ISDN and DSL. I have an MSCE in NT4.0. I have used a packet sniffer on a network. I have captured user names and passwords. I could see every site people were going to. Porn was number 1. Ive been out of the arena for over a decade, have the humility to say I dont know everything but I can say I speak with some knowledge in this area.

    ISPs throttle because they oversell their service. They spy out of fear of lawsuits or due to the law. They want to charge more for streaming services because it cuts into their near monopolies over entertainment and/or because they oversold their service. The answer is tough sh*t to the former and build out your infrastructure to the latter. Its not to allow targeted throttling of the "pipe."

    All democrats had to do when in charge was to disallow discrimination between types of users or services on the "pipe." Instead they moved it to the FCC from the FTC and began "taking over." That had nothing to do with net neutrality as it would have been a simple fix with a simple law and there was not a need for a bureaucratic change or expansion of regulatory authority.
     
  18. IP

    IP Grusader Knight Errant of the 8th Order

    Yes, previous attempts at preserving net neutrality failed. Probably because the ISPs pay well for them to fail. Not really a dem vs republican issue. Tiered bandwidth is coming.
     
  19. dc4utvols

    dc4utvols Contributor

    D*mn it! I dont understand defeatism. People need to demand that the correct thing happen instead of accepting things like sheep. The pipe needs to be neutral, the FTC needs to be put back in charge and the net needs the minimal amount of regulation possible. There needs to be no tiering, no taxing and very little regulating going on. The d*mn crooked b*stards in congress and the regulatory state need to be reigned in for once.

    As it matures people are able to become net entrepreneurs and free themselves from the corporate grind. IMHO this is a good thing and we need more of it not less. An open pipe will eventually break the cable monopoly and we are just at the beginning of the process with services like Netflix and Slingtv. We need more providers like Clearwire and such activity should be encouraged by congress.

    You do this and people will eventually have real ala carte programming and high speed internet for less than $30 each.

    I dont want monopolies or loyalty in these markets. I want a cutthroat race to the bottom.

    I also like how Netflix has original programming. This too is in the infancy and with its set low fees and the popularity of its shows it may begin to squeeze the content providers of other services/networks and allow access providers to say NO to increases.

    Cost of entry keeps going down with things like Roku, youtube etc. Now if we could figure out how to break ESPN/Disney, I would be happy with some sort of competition/market force to drive down their cost per household.

    One thing is for sure, once the kids are out of the house and if slingtv is still around I wont be subscribed to anything except my usenet service until football season. I dont even need Netflix as the kids use that more than I and the wife.

    Most "entertainment" is crap. Heck we hardly even use Redbox as the 1 or 2 movies a year we care about we go see at the theater.

    We usually go to the latest cartoon,superhero, or scifi movie.

    During football season I will get slingtv and the SEC network upgrade. Its about $32/mo. SEC network is $5/mo. upgrade. I wish I could get that and ESPN for ~10 for that 6 month window. Anything else i might watch live I can get with my OTA antenna.

    I am ready to move to the woods with my wife and for us to become hermits.
     
    Last edited: Apr 3, 2017
  20. fl0at_

    fl0at_ Humorless, asinine, joyless pr*ck

    How can I help you pack?
     

Share This Page