Slashdot Mirror
In an Accidental Email To TechDirt Editor, Telco Lobbyists Outline How They Intend To Shift The Blame For Privacy, Net Neutrality and More To Internet Companies (techdirt.com)
Technology news outlet TechDirt on Thursday published a hell of a story about the ways telecom lobbyists are going to try shifting the blame for a range of recent developments -- including net neutrality, competition, privacy, and cybersecurity -- to internet companies. The outlet cites talking points that it received in an accidental email that was supposed to go to a different Mike. Here's an excerpt from the story, which shares the privacy section: MESSAGE: Here is the modern reality of consumer protection: the greatest risks are posed by companies on the internet's edge. Privacy is a shared responsibility -- and the burdens and obligations can not rest solely with ISPs and must be applied equally across the internet ecosystem.
The increased scrutiny of Facebook and other edge provides offer a significant opportunity for Congress to implement clear and consistent rules that apply equally to all companies in the internet ecosystem. And when they begin the process of establishing best practices for privacy, they will need to look no further than broadband providers.
For years, our members have embraced strong consumer privacy policies, because they understand the success of any digital business depends on earning their customers' trust.
Consumers and companies alike deserve one set of protections and rules of the road. This is the best way to ensure consumer protection while also providing the necessary flexibility for a competitive and innovative marketplace. TechDirt editor Mike Masnick writes: There's a brief section later in the document, suggesting that they play up Trump now fighting with Google, and suggest that's a good point to drop in the "same rules for edge" providers meaningless argument:
Trump/Google Drama: People have spent years clamoring for ISP net neutrality. We need same rules of the road for edge. On net neutrality: MESSAGE: Our nation's broadband providers strongly support net neutrality -- without 1930's-era regulations -- and with consumer protections that are consistently applied across the entire internet ecosystem. Read the full story here.
The increased scrutiny of Facebook and other edge provides offer a significant opportunity for Congress to implement clear and consistent rules that apply equally to all companies in the internet ecosystem. And when they begin the process of establishing best practices for privacy, they will need to look no further than broadband providers.
For years, our members have embraced strong consumer privacy policies, because they understand the success of any digital business depends on earning their customers' trust.
Consumers and companies alike deserve one set of protections and rules of the road. This is the best way to ensure consumer protection while also providing the necessary flexibility for a competitive and innovative marketplace. TechDirt editor Mike Masnick writes: There's a brief section later in the document, suggesting that they play up Trump now fighting with Google, and suggest that's a good point to drop in the "same rules for edge" providers meaningless argument:
Trump/Google Drama: People have spent years clamoring for ISP net neutrality. We need same rules of the road for edge. On net neutrality: MESSAGE: Our nation's broadband providers strongly support net neutrality -- without 1930's-era regulations -- and with consumer protections that are consistently applied across the entire internet ecosystem. Read the full story here.
This is really awesome. Kudos to Mike for publishing it.
Because you don't have to use the content platforms, but you have to use the ISP as there is only one in the area. We need GDPR equivalent to apply to all the platforms and content providers and all companies you interact with on the internet
It's like, the pipes are the ISP. As long as Facebook isn't sending corrosive liquids down the pipes, what business is it of the ISPs?
Populus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur...
"Force shits upon Reason's back." - Poor Richard's Almanac
I don't have time to explain the finer points of weasel words and controlling the narrative. But the simple answer is that the story has been deliberately crafted to sound good and reasonable to everyone. You have to look closer to find the manipulation.
You notice how some of the worst people in the world are now using Trump's antics to excuse the most dishonest and despicable behavior? Everything from white supremacists and jackoffs with swastikas tattooed on their necks are crawling out from under rocks and trying to claim their rightful place atop the dung heap. There are bunches of openly white supremacist candidates running as Republicans this election, some with open nazi connections. Cops are throwing up gang signs and shooting into cars filled with black kids. Neo-nazis demonstrate in front of the White House. If you need an excuse to be shitty, you just have to point to Trump and expect a pass.
Remember when people were saying that Trump would "Drain the Swamp"? Those people have had to fully retreat from reality into some #qanon insanity just to try to keep their fragile worldview from falling to pieces, and now there's no way back for them. All because, as the noted philosopher Lao Tzu once said, "You never go full retard".
You are welcome on my lawn.
Ah sweet, you're conflating privacy and security, issues that nobody really thinks every handler of data on the internet should be responsible and accountable for, with content issues for two entirely different segments of service and function on the internet. Waters sufficiently muddied, false dichotomy suggested! Telcos pleased!
Net neutrality doesn't have shit to do with what kind of data is published on websites anymore than the owner of the only road in town should be able to say that because a store can kick somebody off their property, the road owner should be able to as well.
"Old man yells at systemd"
A competitive ISP market doesn't guarantee that at least one provider will offer reasonably priced, net-neutral service. We need net neutrality mandated by law even if there are multiple high-speed, low-latency ISPs serving every area.
Because there's a huge difference between the two? I can have ISP service and avoid using these platforms, but I can't access anything on the Internet without an ISP. If you can't see how the two are not even remotely comparable then you must be brain damaged or an industry shill. One of them is literally the gatekeeper to access anything on the Internet which grants them far more power than any of these platforms have.
This is great stuff if you're looking for your telecom stock to go up.
This stuff is PR foam and goo and reality distortion if you're anyone but a telecom stockholder.
Utility regulation in the US was made for a very good reason, which is that utilities will turn into monopolistic snakes in lieu of being forced to act even reasonably human. They are snakes and toads and lizards.
These distractions are designed to take concern away by a makeover of the worst, most misleading kind. It smacks of the propaganda campaigns so moneyed in current western world politics.
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
Really?
And when they begin the process of establishing best practices for privacy, they will need to look no further than broadband providers.
You want congress to go ask the top 5 major ISP companies for how to make rules for privacy? The people who have been caught violating your privacy for profit. You really think that's a good idea?
For years, our members have embraced strong consumer privacy policies, because they understand the success of any digital business depends on earning their customers’ trust.
The telcoms have success at business because they're monopolies. Most people believe them to be untrustworthy.
People have spent years clamoring for ISP net neutrality. We need same rules of the road for edge.
Most network neutrality issues pertain to those controlling the pipes. But hey, sure, I too have to admit that sounds like a good idea. So it shouldn't matter where you're requesting a video from Youtube and there should be no "restricted due to your countries IP laws". Buuuuuuut that's an issue ABOVE congress. You know, since it's international. ISPs on the other hand, are pretty constrained on the rules of the nation their pipes currently reside in.
Federal investment must be used to fill the gaps in truly unserved areas, not create false market competition by allowing electric utilities with established monopolies to extend their market power over this already fragile market. Together, we should be laser-focused on serving the unserved and maximizing the federal support to do it, while avoiding duplication and overbuilding, and ensuring efficiencies wherever possible.
If you believe at all in capitalism, you HAVE to realize that the ISP industry doesn't have competition and the major telcoms are engaging in anti-competitive practices:
1) They collude not to compete in each other's territory
2) They subsidize service in any area where new competition comes to town, like Google Fiber.
3) They've sued against anyone touching the poles which have their cables. If they're arguing a power company having a monopoly on their own poles, they're hypocrites to the extreme.