0
21

[–] mamwad 0 points 21 points (+21|-0) ago 

He's going to sign it.

0
3

[–] heretolearn 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

buy their internet history then.

https://searchinternethistory.com/

0
1

[–] 8594478? 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

I don't doubt it.

4
4

[–] The_Penor_Kangaroo 4 points 4 points (+8|-4) ago 

He is a traitor in the end, but at least we avoided world war 3

0
0

[–] Doomking_Grimlock ago 

Most people are traitors when they have a loaded gun to their head.

0
1

[–] The_Penor_Kangaroo 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

I don't know. I am not sure Trump really values internet freedom, since he has appointed a guy that hates freedom of information in the FCC. I can justify not fighting every stupid battle that comes your way, but I think Trump strategy on the internet could destroy even the good work he has done until now for the US and the work he will do in the future. After all if he is the president it's thanks to internet freedom.

0
11

[–] WanderingMitten 0 points 11 points (+11|-0) ago 

I'm not a fan of these ads because they are using fearmongering tactics. They have all that ad space, they could properly inform people with it, but instead it's like "IF YOU DON"T DO THIS YOU WILL DIE!' "BE AFRAID IT"S EVIL YOU"LLLL DIE DO YOU WANT TO DIE!" and the ad sadly has the opposite affect on me, granted I get the safety of wanting your internet history to be private but I just don't approve of these tactics to show support for a cause.

0
10

[–] MaraAcoma 0 points 10 points (+10|-0) ago 

Some background on it.

from kia

Up until that December 2, 2016 rule was introduced, ISPs had as few regulations against their collecting of data as companies like Facebook and Google (that is, basically zero regulations). The rule was to enforce an opt-out system, among other things, to keep user's data private from ISPs, while not doing anything against Facebook/Google. Most importantly, this rule was never actually put into action. Literally nothing changes if Trump signs this bill. The rule was flawed to begin with, as it had a "one rule for me, another for thee" tone to it, where ISPs would be barred from selling their customer's data when every other company (again, Facebook and Google are the biggest offenders) routinely do it. Now, I'm not saying that I like the fact that my data is collected and sold, nor do I think it should be allowed. But not only is the passage of this bill through the House and Senate not actually changing anything, even if Trump signs it, it's a severely flawed rule anyway that punishes the "bad" ISPs while leaving the "good" companies completely alone.

from h8chan

it's to repeal Fed. Reg. 87274. I haven't read the whole text for the regulation because it's really fucking long but some anons on /pol/ are saying it gives censorship powers to the FCC. But that's besides the point, the regulation was introduced just a few months ago and never implemented, so at worst nothing is going to change, but everybody is losing their shit as if ISPs will suddenly be allowed to fuck you over in some way they weren't allowed before.

1
4

[–] lucifirius 1 point 4 points (+5|-1) ago 

Exactly, these "privacy rules" have only been in place for 3 months! In the long run, it makes no difference.

0
4

[–] hypercat 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

People are generally stupid. Give them a scare and they react. Give them data and they skim or ignore.

0
2

[–] TrueAmerican 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

And this is by design/social engineering.. being stupid is a choice now though in this new age of information, we are no longer at the mercy of the powers that be

0
4

[–] SirDigbyChikenCaesar 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

Yeah, it's very emotional add, they aren't trying to reach Trump but edgy teens. The "%#(&" swearing really makes it look childish.

1
0

[–] 8596253? 1 point 0 points (+1|-1) ago 

Have you seen Trump's twitter? This is exactly his language.

0
4

[–] Ghetto_Shitlord 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

People don't want to be informed, if they had started trying to explain it, most people would go, "technical crap I don't understand," and not even paid it any mind. Many, many people as soon as you say something "technical" about a computer or networks they just shut down and wait for you to finish talking.

Helping out our desk when my workload is slow, most people don't even know what an address bar in a browser is. Technologists NEED TO UNDERSTAND, just how illiterate most people still are.

0
3

[–] movebackward 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

The ad conflates the recording & dissemination of content with something that is not that. I hate that kind of sophistry. There are reasons to veto this law, but being dishonest about it is not going to impress me. He would be better off encouraging dig once polices so that we can choose our ISPs for this and many other reasons.

2
-1

[–] HWY__395 2 points -1 points (+1|-2) ago  (edited ago)

/u/http404 Did you really have to submit this post twice?

0
2

[–] Feeldaberm 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Facebook paid for these ads because they don't want ISPs cutting in on their data selling marketshare they've been dominating for 7 years unopposed.

0
0

[–] YourDumbWhat ago  (edited ago)

Fine by me. It's a lot more inconvenient to opt out of the internet than to just never using facebook. I don't like facebook, but common enemies can make for some strange bedfellows.

0
0

[–] JulyMoonbeam ago 

This should have been put on Fox & Friends or Brietbart. Think he reads the NYT?

0
0

[–] Firevine ago 

Dear Mr. President plzz don't do to us what we did to u kthnx bai

load more comments ▼ (6 remaining)