It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: BlueAjah
originally posted by: angeldoll
a reply to: BlueAjah
omg nvm. hopeless
If you are so worried about your ISP... do you use Gmail?
Gmail was not affected by the law being reversed either.
Gmail does scan all emails, new Google terms clarify
Google has clarified its email scanning practices in a terms of service update, informing users that incoming and outgoing emails are analysed by automated software.
The revisions explicitly state that Google’s system scans the content of emails stored on Google’s servers as well as those being sent and received by any Google email account, a practice that has seen the search company face criticism from privacy action groups and lawsuits from the education sector.
originally posted by: UKTruth
As for Trump, I will remind the OP that the President does not make the law, so this is not 'thanks to Trump'.
originally posted by: redmage
originally posted by: UKTruth
As for Trump, I will remind the OP that the President does not make the law, so this is not 'thanks to Trump'.
Actually, it doesn't become "law" until Trump signs it, so this would definitely be "thanks to Trump" if it becomes a law.
originally posted by: alphabetaone
originally posted by: BlueAjah
originally posted by: angeldoll
originally posted by: BlueAjah
a reply to: angeldoll
This has nothing to do with medical records.
HIPAA laws are still in effect.
You aren't fully comprehending the possible repercussions and implications of this. It has everything to do with medical records, and other things you might have on the ISP that you thought were private.
I explained a little earlier in a post, that my doctor's office put all his patients lab results, etc. in a "portal" where we go in on line to see them. At the top of the page there is a shield that says "trackers blocked". Yes, it's blocked. Right?
But when I click on it, my ISP service now has that address. Does it have my password? I don't know, and neither do you.
Oh, and I saw your post about the way "to get things done". Complain about it to the ISP's, you say?
Well of course! You wouldn't want to bother Mr. Trump and the Republicans about this little sell out.
Should people complain to doctor's when their health care is taken away?
To the airlines when they can't get into the country?
Of course. No one should bother the high and mighty and strangely demented Mr. Trump with all these little nuisances of the common American.
All your ISP can see is what page you went to.
Assuming your medical service is using encryption, they are not looking at your medical records.
Weren't you the one making the attempt to 'school' me in the business section about how you've made plenty of switchovers from non-secure HTTP servers to SSL/TLS servers and you would make a statement like the above? You really think all your ISP can see is "what page" you went to? They can and do monitor every open port from origin to destination...that doesn't only include TCP ports and certainly not only port 80 and 443 but UDP, Telnet, ICMP etc...any well known, publicly available port that you can possibly communicate through is what "your ISP can see".
With respect to medical records, encrypted or not encrypted, since when do HIPAA regulations start allowing ANY medical records to be stored anywhere but in a HIPAA authorized medium, which is typically only offline at the Doctor's office and not any random online server?
originally posted by: UKTruth
Whatever makes you feel better.
originally posted by: UKTruth
The people have voted in favour of this.
originally posted by: UKTruth
When a President vetoes a bill he is going against the will of the people, which is why it is so rare.
originally posted by: UKTruth
Congress are responsible for creating laws and they do so in representation of the people who elected them.
To suggest that a law being passed is 'thanks to the [the President]' shows a fundamental misunderstanding of your own form of govt - a Representative Republic. Sounds like you are more up for dictatorship.
originally posted by: Indigo5
a reply to: angeldoll
More to the point, the first thing anyone does when they suspect they have a medical condition is search the internet. From diabetes prevention to weight loss to depression to cancer etc. Of course data obsessed insurers will build in rate quotation models depending on what and how often you google health conditions on the internet. That's just the tip of the iceberg...did you know that airlines and travel sites have been caught charging more for airline tickets online based on the persons estimated income? The implications are massive.
It's a little sick to see trumpites defending this..but best to get folks on record for what they stand for.
originally posted by: UKTruth
Since the mid 70's (93rd Congress) there have been 11,926 enacted laws and 254 vetoes. I would call a veto rare.
originally posted by: UKTruth
Only a fool would say that all 11,926 passed laws were "thanks to the President".
originally posted by: UKTruth
Your representatives vote on bills - that is how it works.
originally posted by: redmage
originally posted by: UKTruth
Since the mid 70's (93rd Congress) there have been 11,926 enacted laws and 254 vetoes. I would call a veto rare.
Mid 70s, eh?
So 254 vetoes in roughly 42 years means an average of 6 per year, or one every 2 months... one every 2 months is not exactly "rare".
originally posted by: UKTruth
Only a fool would say that all 11,926 passed laws were "thanks to the President".
If they became laws, then it was by the signature of a President. Only a fool would deny such.
originally posted by: UKTruth
Your representatives vote on bills - that is how it works.
You got it right this time! Congress votes on bills! You're learning! Keep up the good work!
Here endeth the lesson.
originally posted by: UKTruth
a reply to: redmage
Since the mid 70's (93rd Congress) there have been 11,926 enacted laws and 254 vetoes. I would call a veto rare.
Only a fool would say that all 11,926 passed laws were "thanks to the President" or that he was in full agreement with them all.
Your representatives vote on bills - that is how it works.
Under rare circumstances the President vetoes.
Here endeth the lesson.
But, like I said, whatever makes you feel better.
originally posted by: Irishhaf
Now its a big deal... when that big treaty the previous administration was pushing wanted to do it... so many people did not seem to care.
One day my pipe dream is people will realize these labels Republican, or demcorat are interchangeable when it comes to protecting the rights of the people... in other words neither party is doing anything to protect us.
originally posted by: UKTruth
Lol, 254 vs nearly 12,000. Yep, rare.
originally posted by: UKTruth
I can see you are embarrassed by your mistake.
originally posted by: redmage
originally posted by: UKTruth
Lol, 254 vs nearly 12,000. Yep, rare.
Nah, it's a low ratio, but not "rare" by any means. Calling an average of 1 ever 2 months "rare" is similar to calling a full moon "rare" since they only occur approximately once a month compared to all the other non-full moons that occur. Full moons, and vetoes occur fairly often.
originally posted by: UKTruth
I can see you are embarrassed by your mistake.
Your intuition is worse than your political knowledge, and that's going to be a lot tougher to fix. At least you were making progress on the former by learning to differentiate bills from laws.
Good luck with fixing that poor intuition bit.
originally posted by: UKTruth
Whatever makes you feel better.
originally posted by: UKTruth
I love how you have to convince yourself.
originally posted by: UKTruth
Your representatives vote on bills - that is how it works.