Full of confidence in Ajit Pai – the new boss at the FCC, America's communications watchdog – groups representing US telcos are seeking a repeal of the regulator's privacy rules.
Citing the appointment of Pai and the imminent decision to roll back the previous administration's net neutrality protections, industry groups now hope that the little requirement for an opt-in for the collection of user data will be frozen, if not done away with completely.
[...] "For over twenty years, ISPs have protected their consumers' data with the strongest pro-consumer policies in the internet ecosystem," the group writes.
"ISPs know the success of any digital business depends on earning their customers' trust on privacy."
Source: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/01/31/net_neutrality_dead_privacy_next/
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Grishnakh on Thursday February 02 2017, @07:34PM
Terrible analogy. The State has a real interest in deterring murder, and other such violent crimes, for many reasons (social stability, economic progress, etc.). However, the State has zero interest in protecting your privacy, in fact quite the opposite.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 03 2017, @02:45AM
> However, the State has zero interest in protecting your privacy, in fact quite the opposite.
That's like saying the state has zero interest in the prosperity of the citizenry.
It is a short-sighted, ultra-reductive take on life that says more about your nihilism than it does about the values of a modern democracy.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Friday February 03 2017, @03:38PM
Wrong. You're making the claim that privacy for citizens will somehow necessarily result in greater prosperity. That's a specious argument, with no supporting evidence whatsoever. I could make precisely the opposite claim that having no privacy at all will increase privacy, and I can point to factories throughout history where workers had no privacy from managers who watched them at all times to make sure they weren't slacking on the job.
Personally, I like my privacy, but I'm not about to make up utterly baseless claims about how it's beneficial to society, or that the state would have any interest in it when that is quite obviously a bald-faced lie, as evidenced by the current surveillance state (NSA spying, etc.). In fact, I don't know of any major government now that doesn't spy on its citizens somehow.