Internet Warning

Automatic Washer - The world's coolest Washing Machines, Dryers and Dishwashers

Help Support :

T

tomturbomatic

Well-known member
Platinum Member
Joined
May 21, 2001
Messages
21,695
Location
Beltsville, MD
The Senate has passed a bill virtually eliminating internet privacy which will make it possible for your ISP to monitor you and your searches, manipulate what you see and sell your personal information to anyone waving money in front of their eyes, EVEN THE CONTENT OF YOUR EMAIL. It is very important to contact your representative in the House and tell them to vote against H.J. Res. 86.

 

I don't think that this is political and placed it here so that all members and visitors could see it. If it needs to be moved, so be it.

[this post was last edited: 3/27/2017-10:07]

 
I wonder what someone searches for that requires anonymity?  The worst I have ever searched for are random celebrities shirtless.  You guys must be really dirty!
 
I don not think you understand what is going on.  It is NOT your searches and such, Google and all the others already have that.  It's you SOCIAL SECURITY number, your bank accounts your health issues, your kids any personal info you send.  It is done by your ISP, ATT Comcast, Version or what ever.  They will have the right to do whatever they want with this information.

 

You can become a troglodyte and do everything in person or via mail, bu once that info gets entered into a computer and sent to lets say the main office, all the info is fair game under the new rules.
 
What matters to me is WHO has the data.  I know google and yahoo collect stuff, and I live with that.  But letting ATT or Verison read my emails -before I do -- is a problem I want stopped.  They have no right to know my medical lab test results, my bank balance, my social security number and on and on.  This is stuff I would never put on google.  Yet they will now have full access to ANYTHING.  You are ok with that?  Sorry I'm not.  All in the interest of making a few more $$ off our backs.  We already pay much more for much less service compared to the rest of the world, now they want blood from us.  Plus, factor in the risk of any of these companies being hacked, it would be the mother load of info for any hacker. 
 
For sure Matt!

It's total B.S. if this passes congress. Um-peach harvest won't be soon enough either. For the people by the people? No it isn't.
The one who said America first is as much a globalist as anyone is. He makes royalties from properties in Manila, Istanbul, etc., etc.
Now the son in law is the one in charge of reworking government. They know real estate, not govt. They are acting more totalitarian like their money can buy anything. I suspect they want to move the UN so they can redevelop the NY site. It's adjacent to one of his towers.
Many others have worked and paid into everything for at least three decades, only to lose their jobs so close to retirement, and all they got was 22 weeks unemployment and on the street.
They lost their 401k profits, health insurance, pensions, etc. prior to 2009.
Then one of the ones responsible for it gets a cabinet appointment. Disgusting.
I used to think of this guy as a real builder, back in my twenties, when I visited NY city, and Atlantic city. It seemed he was a job maker, and making a run down city better. I could have filed bankrupt also in 2008, but I didn't.
No doubt they'll see this and I'll be on the anarchist list, if I'm not already.
Back in 2008, I got a phone call from a polling agency asking which candidate I liked and which party. I told them none, they all need to go.
Now I'm not a tea bagger either, and I liked Obama.
I've never needed a public assistance hand out, but you can bet if I ever do, I paid into that also.
 
Don't count on the HIPPA thing -- not only a lot of things that used to be illegal are now happening, but there are all kinds of loopholes in laws. If I remember right, HIPPA prohibits releasing *your* or *mine* or *their* medical information, but it does not prohibit enough things from happening. I'd be surprised, for example, if it has anything to say about aggregates, randomized info and anonymous info, for example. So, they could gather medical info from say, one million browsers, aggregate them and remove "personal identifying info" from the data and sell it.

So, what's the problem, you ask? It's an aggregate and all personal info has been stripped, right?

Yes. And no.

If you have diabetes in NYC, LA, SF, Boston etc, you are probably safe.

If you have a rare form of cancer and live in Santa Barbara, CA, they might have your data. If you live in a place whose population is less than 10,000 and the "aggregate" offers as little as neighborhood or street name, they may have your file.

The entire problem is more complex than people would intuitively grasp.

For example, there used to be (maybe you can still google and find them) websites that used to offer you an idea of how "unique" your browser is. Things like what machine, OS, fonts browser, memory size etc could all be sniffed and a "unique index" (your system appears to be one in 10 million, for example) would show up even if you were coming thru VPN or TOR (I have not been keeping tabs on that, I don't know if they fixed that "flaw" in TOR), another more recent way to correlate your system with the one using TOR is sniffing the delay the mouse movements ("mouse sniffing") show at the other end, not sure if they corrected that yet or not.

So, maybe they don't know that "Joe Q. Public" who lives in Beverly, MA, USA has such and such medical problems. But if they buy enough browser data from different places, they might find out that a user whose browser/mouse uniqueness is 1 in 50 million lives in Beverly, MA, USA and has this list of medical issues, and data from other websites say that Joe Q. Public lives in Beverly, MA, USA (easy to get from their ISP) and maybe just those two websites, or maybe a third or forth website will correlate the name, the address and the "unique browser".

The good news is that in places where health insurance companies cannot deny coverage for "pre-existing" conditions or, even better, charge people more for having diseases, the privacy of medical data becomes nearly irrelevant.

Cheers,
   -- Paulo.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top