Slashdot Mirror
Activist Starts a Campaign To Buy and Publish Browsing Histories of Politicians Who Passed Anti-Privacy Law (searchinternethistory.com)
On Tuesday, Congress sent proposed legislation to President Trump that wipes away landmark online privacy protections. In a party-line vote, House Republicans freed Internet service providers such as AT&T, Verizon, and Comcast of protections approved just last year that had sought to limit what companies could do with information such as customer browsing habits, app usage history, location data and Social Security numbers. Now call it a poetic justice, online privacy activist Adam McElhaney has launched an initiative called Search Internet History, with an objective of raising funds to buy browsing history of each politician and official who voted in favor of S.J.Res 34. On the site, he has also put up a poll asking people whose internet history they would like to see first.
Update: The campaign, which was seeking $10,000, has already raised over $55,000.
Update: The campaign, which was seeking $10,000, has already raised over $55,000.
https://www.gofundme.com/buycongressdata
just like every other law congress passes, it doesn't apply to them.
they'll justify it because of terrorism. you're all idiots.
God damn politicians need a taste of their own medicine.
Just because a company CAN sell something does not mean they will.
I think it will be pretty interesting to see what they can actually end up buying.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
"The lesson here is that it is insufficient to protect ourselves with laws; we need to protect ourselves with mathematics. Encryption is too important to be left solely to governments." -- Bruce Schneier
Proud neuron in the Slashdot hivemind since 2002.
Not directly related but something similar perhaps, 2012 in Canada:
https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2012/02/15/ministers_tawdry_divorce_details_published_to_protest_bill.html
My prediction - the telecoms companies won't be willing to sell the data, because it's worth more to them to keep it, and not have the Obama era law reinstated.
That's what they say, but it's misguided..you can block data from Google or Facebook. You can't from your ISP.
Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in AT&T v. FTC that the FTC has no authority over common carriers. This FCC rule that Republicans got rid of filled the gap from that court decision. After that court decision a bill was introduced to give the FTC that authority to reverse the court decision, but most Republicans voted against the bill and it failed.
So Republicans argument is:
FCC shouldn't regulate privacy because that is the FTC's job.
FTC shouldn't regulate common carriers because that is the FCC's job.
So who regulates common carrier's privacy? Now, it's no one.
In addition, congress only gave the FTC the authority to pass actual regulations if there "unfair or deceptive acts" and they can prove the regulation prevents harm. Some Republicans argue there is no harm from companies spying on you because you save money or get services for free. Some also argue that seeing ads tailored to you is in your benefit.
This bill wasn't about doing what was right though. It was all about money. ISPs and mobile providers stand to make a lot of money by invading our privacy. They had no problem paying off politicians to pass this bill:
http://www.theverge.com/2017/3...
This message is encrypted with Quad ROT-13 to protect the author's copyright under the DMCA.
This was NOT a party line vote. The following Republicans voted NO and should be congratulated for standing with the People, not the ISP $$$.
If five more Republicans had switched to a NO vote, the resolution would NOT HAVE PASSED!
A thank you phone call to their offices today will be noted and WILL make a difference in future efforts to enact comprehensive privacy legislation.
Brooks, Mo AL 5th
McClintock, Tom CA 4th
Coffman, Mike CO 6th
Yoder, Kevin KS 3rd
Graves, Garret LA 6th
Amash, Justin MI 3rd
Zeldin, Lee NY 1st
Faso, John NY 19th
Stefanik, Elise NY 21st
Jones, Walter NC 3rd
Davidson, Warren OH 8th
Sanford, Mark SC 1st
Duncan, John TN 2nd
Herrera Beutler, Jaime WA 3rd
Reichert, David WA 8th
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/115-2017/h202
FACTS MATTER
Umm... the "explicit user opt-in" was what was just KILLED by Congress.
From ArsTechnica:
The rules issued by the FCC last year would have required home Internet and mobile broadband providers to get consumers' opt-in consent before selling or sharing Web browsing history, app usage history, and other private information with advertisers and other companies. But lawmakers used their authority under the Congressional Review Act (CRA) to pass a joint resolution ensuring that the rules "shall have no force or effect" and that the FCC cannot issue similar regulations in the future.
Republicans argue that the Federal Trade Commission should regulate ISPs' privacy practices instead of the FCC. But the resolution passed today eliminates the FCC's privacy rules without any immediate action to return jurisdiction to the FTC, which is prohibited from regulating common carriers such as ISPs and phone companies.
If Trump signs the resolution to eliminate privacy rules, ISPs won't have to seek customer approval before sharing their browsing histories and other private information with advertisers.
Take it easy, Charlie, I've got an Angle...
The API bits can be mostly replaced with local versions by installing Decentraleyes.
For the rest, Smart Referer lets you block tracking that doesn't include explicit tokens. And Request Policy axes crap that you don't need with a default-deny.
The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
> I'm still waiting on someone to tell my why I should care about someone purchasing my browsing history.
Yes, you're so very open with everyone that you post as Anonymous Coward instead of even a pseudonym. Your super openness doesn't merely not track back to your real name, it doesn't even track back to a fake name.
AC claiming privacy doesn't matter. Sheesh.
WTF do you think people are going to do with your browsing history??
The potential for predatory marketing practices and discrimination is huge. Your search for "funerals" and then "airfares", and presto! airline tickets just got more expensive for you, and you alone. You visit an Alcoholics Anonymous site and then GEICO and presto! car insurance rates just went up for you, and you alone. You visit the DNC website and then presto! your favorite news site can tailor the news it delivers to you to maximize manipulation. The possibilities are horrifying and endless.