Senate Guts Privacy Rules. Will House Follow Suit?

What a bunch of sell-out traitors.<p>Is there no party that values privacy, individual liberty, or the constitution?<p>I thought these &quot;Senators&quot; took an oath to protect the constitution. From the way they vote, it seems they never even read it!

Here&#x27;s the roll-call vote [1]. Find your Senator. If they voted in agreement with your views, call and congratulate them. If they didn&#x27;t, call and explain why you&#x27;re disappointed. Then immediately call your Congressperson.<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.senate.gov&#x2F;legislative&#x2F;LIS&#x2F;roll_call_lists&#x2F;roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=115&amp;session=1&amp;vote=00094" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.senate.gov&#x2F;legislative&#x2F;LIS&#x2F;roll_call_lists&#x2F;roll_...</a>

If you do talk with your representatives, remind them this essentially means their browsing history, and the histories of their families, their constituents, and their constituents families <i>will</i> be available for sale at best, or once collected and sold are highly likely to be in a databreach before long. The aggregate of that information <i>will</i> be used to treat those people differently in some aspect or another.

I won&#x27;t be surprised if AT&amp;T revives its &quot;Internet Preferences&quot; targeted ads program[1]. Most customers apparently didn&#x27;t care and were willing to put up with it for a $29&#x2F;mo discount. AT&amp;T never indicated why they canceled it, but my money is that it was due to the FCC regulations that were put in place.<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;arstechnica.com&#x2F;information-technology&#x2F;2016&#x2F;09&#x2F;att-to-end-targeted-ads-program-give-all-users-lowest-available-price&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;arstechnica.com&#x2F;information-technology&#x2F;2016&#x2F;09&#x2F;att-t...</a>

We need good p2p mesh network applications! Relatively slow, asynchronous, person to person flow of information was, and arguably still is, the foundation of society, and the technology must be capable of fluidly falling back to this capability without dependence on unstable centralized networks!

I would have preferred them to vote the other way, but I&#x27;m trying to do a reality check here. Given that on HTTPS sites it&#x27;s just the domain name + timestamp, and that more and more sites are transitioning to HTTPS, is the mere domain name and timestamp really <i>that</i> useful? I can imagine it being useful to know you order pizzas at 7pm Thursdays, but how useful is it actually to know you e.g. browse Amazon 2pm Mondays, or use YouTube 10pm Saturdays, or send emails with Gmail every hour of every day? They have no idea what you&#x27;re buying or watching or sending. (eBay seems to be the major exception since it&#x27;s HTTP.)

Is there a good reason why a representative would vote in favor of this?

Ask Trump to veto it. He may oblige.

Is there any way to protect your browsing?

Help out here please. Is the house doing something different&#x2F;worse than the senate to gut our privacy protections? Not that I&#x27;m ok with this crap (and I&#x27;m looking into a vpn now) but I hear they could already sell our data to whoever because they gutted Tom Wheeler&#x27;s plan.

Ok trump&#x2F;republican supporters, please help me understand why this is a good thing.