
Trump signs internet privacy repeal - joeyespo
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/327107-trump-signs-internet-privacy-repeal
======
a3n
[2017]

~~~
zynkb0a
I had a "I feel like this already happened" moment reading the article. This
clears it up.

~~~
a3n
What clued me in to even check was that both houses of Congress would have had
to have passed this, and that makes no sense today.

------
Nevada-Smith
FTA: "...the backlash was overinflated given that the FCC rules never went
into effect and that popular websites not covered by the regulations also use
customers’ data for advertisements."

~~~
Libeste
"AT&T, Comcast and Verizon — put out blog posts on Friday decrying what they
saw as a misinformation campaign against the bill.

They argued that..."

~~~
Nevada-Smith
I intentionally omitted that bit because I didn't want to prejudice the bit I
did quite. If something is true, does it matter who stated it?

~~~
TomMckenny
Where is the true part? I see the subjective word "overinflated" and a
misdirection about what "popular websites" do.

This is more a case of a press release being a press release no mater who says
it.

------
sigmaprimus
Is there any thing positive about repealing this bill?

From the article's claims, everyone wanted this bill and Trump just tore it up
because he hates Obama so much.

That may very well be the case but I believe there are three sides to every
story. (Eg. The Reporters side, Trumps side, and finally somewhere in between
is the truth).

So I would ask again, does anyone feel brave enough to face the wrath of the
mob and provide a legitimate reason why Trumps choice in repealing this bill
might have some merit?

Possibly stopping internet bullies, phisisng schemes, pedophiles, mass
shootings or terrorists? Anything at all?

