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.

 

Senators propose law to limit location tracking

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 01:59 PM
link   

Senators propose law to limit location tracking


www.tgdaily.com

Two US senators have put forward a bill requiring companies to get permission from mobile users before sharing their locations data with others.

Democrats Al Franken, from Minnesota, and Richard Blumenthal, from Connecticut say their Location Privacy Protection Act would close loopholes in existing law.
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:

edit on 17-6-2011 by Maxmars because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 01:59 PM
link   
It's election time again, and soon we will be seeing many MANY proposed bills that reinforce our willingness to believe the congressional intent is to represent and protect the common voting citizen.... could this be one of those?


"After listening to expert testimony at the hearing I chaired last month on mobile technology and privacy and hearing from anti-domestic violence groups in Minnesota who said this kind of technology can be exploited by abusers, I concluded that our laws do too little to protect information on our mobile devices," says Franken.


Back in April, Senator Franken (I remember him as a former writer for the Saturday Night Live Show... "That's right, me, Al Franken") wrote a letter of concern to Apple about the iPhone's robust tracking database in each phone.

While i am pleased at the sentiment, somehow "national security" and "terror" will trump any notions of privacy as our political leaders have demonstrated again and again.

www.tgdaily.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 02:08 PM
link   
I love how Blumenthal can oppose tracking of this sort but support tracking related to firearms.

He's a bastard.

If you have a cell phone in your pocket you should be protected. If you have a gun in your pocket you should be tracked day and night.

You're either free or you arent. Picking and choosing isnt freedom.



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 02:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Maxmars
 





It's election time again, and soon we will be seeing many MANY proposed bills that reinforce our willingness to believe the congressional intent is to represent and protect the common voting citizen.... could this be one of those?


I believe al Franken to be genuine is his proposal here. Perhaps faced with the enormity of the national security bills the best fight might be to in return slowly chip back our personal freedoms. The congressman and senators against government invasion were in the minority this last patriot act extension(franken being one of them).



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 02:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Maxmars
It's election time again, and soon we will be seeing many MANY proposed bills that reinforce our willingness to believe the congressional intent is to represent and protect the common voting citizen.... could this be one of those?


It could be one of those. Or it could be that there actually are some people in Congress that (contrary to popular belief) are actually interested in the needs and rights of the people. I don't know about Blumenthal, but I believe Franken could be sincere.



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 02:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Seiko
 


I'm sorry but it's too close to election time for me to believe any of these new bills is sincere. They have had the last two years to be sincere. No this is just an election tool, give em what they want until we get re-elected then shut em down.



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 02:48 PM
link   
My question regarding the realistic intent behind the bill is genuine. I truly can no longer say that i am willing to submit my "benefit of the doubt" to political actors (and by "actors" I mean thespians) which I believe all of them to be as "a given" of their profession.

But just because an actor says something doesn't mean he or she is acting. I wonder when this bill will be debated, and if the debate will be public? Or does the mega-corporation and it's nearly incestuous affair with government regulators effectively nullify that possibility.

The FCC is said to be "looking into this." according to an earlier article. Yet I can't imagine what exactly that means.



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join