Senate Republicans Just Voted to Kill Internet Privacy

a reply to: JinMI

So you're ok with them collecting your data and selling it to the highest bidder?

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: UKTruth

That doesn't change the fact that if he signs it he will have been part of it so you reminding the OP "that the President does not make the law, so this is not 'thanks to Trump'." is wrong.

Congress do make the law. The Executive branch enforce the laws of the land.
So what i said was correct. The President can veto it, but even then he can be over ruled.
Take that as another reminder of how your own govt works.
This is not a 'thanks to Trump' bill, suggesting it is constitutes just another ridiculous attempt to blame Trump for all the ills in the world. Most amusing is that the restrictions were only put in place in Oct 2016. Was it Trumps fault before then too?

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: JinMI

So you're ok with them collecting your data and selling it to the highest bidder?

Where the hell have you been? Seriously.

Pro-tip! It even includes your health information *gasp*
www.scientificamerican.com...

originally posted by: UKTruth
Congress do make the law. The Executive branch enforce the laws of the land.
So what i said was correct. The President can veto it, but even then he can be over ruled.

If he vetoes it and it is overruled then you can say that his hands are clean. If he goes along with it then that means he went along with it. Funny how that works.

a reply to: JinMI

You didn't answer my question. Are you ok with them collecting your data and selling it to a company so that they can profit off of it?

a reply to: JinMI

Maybe, but at least if there is some risk that someone has to take before they get my info, that's atleast some kind of speed bump on their way to get it.

Like they say. If you're being chased by a bear, you don't have to run faster than the bear. You just have to run faster than the slowest guy in your crowd.

Same applies here. My info can be taken if someone really wants bad enough. But there are much easier targets out there than me. Like hacking. Nobody is 100% safe but you don't have to be. You just have to be more difficult than the people who are really easy. That way unless you are some kind of important target, they'll just move on to the next guy who's easier.

I'll take that if that's the best I can get for now. You know what I mean??

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

No, no I am not.

Now let me ask you a question. Since this is not new, is this really about your outrage or the fact that it has a political face?

a reply to: mOjOm

I get what your saying, I really do. I don't want anyone sniffing me out for any reason.

However.

Whatever info "they" can get regarding your internet usage, page visits, buying habits etc, is of far more worth than the person your intimate with or (for most of us anyway) what is in your bank account.

a reply to: JinMI

If you are against this bill then why are you trying to defend it right now?

The fact that they're trying to make selling my private information legal, information that I never agreed to giving up (I don't use Facebook btw), is what is bothering me. It has nothing to do with politics, it has to do with my personal privacy that I do NOT want sold.

Oh well though, right? Tough #, I'll just have to deal with it. Such a weak argument,

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: UKTruth
Congress do make the law. The Executive branch enforce the laws of the land.
So what i said was correct. The President can veto it, but even then he can be over ruled.

If he vetoes it and it is overruled then you can say that his hands are clean. If he goes along with it then that means he went along with it. Funny how that works.

Once again - Congress make the law.
It is not 'thanks to Trump' is he decides not to veto. A President should have very good reason to over ride the Senate instead of just unilaterally making decisions on what should be accepted or not. Veto's are rare as they should be. I am sure if Trump used his veto power constantly to over ride Congress there would be an even bigger uproar. Obama actually only used it twice during his first term, that is how rare it SHOULD be.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

The bill is fairly meaningless. Say if passes. Big biz probably saves some money on information they were already getting. Should it fail, they will still get the info.

Again, acquiring private information without your consent is not new. I know you want to think it is because it fits your political agenda.

It may or may not be a weak argument, but your words are showing me that your mind is weaker.

a reply to: JinMI

So you're a-ok with them removing a barrier between something you disagree with.

Good to know. Doesn't make much sense but more power to you.

originally posted by: UKTruth
Once again - Congress make the law.

Nobody says they don't but still the President signs it into law. If he stands for the people he would veto this law.

It's ok if he doesn't but you seem to be here doing damage control before he even decides what he is going to do.

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: JinMI

You didn't answer my question. Are you ok with them collecting your data and selling it to a company so that they can profit off of it?

You want full "privacy" and you are outraged.

Yet you are demanding that Members answer YOUR questions !!

a reply to: daskakik

That's exactly what it is, damage control. If he signs it into law then they are making excuses for it now before he does it, if he doesn't then it's no skin off their back.

a reply to: xuenchen

At least they have a choice on whether to answer it or not. This bill doesn't give people a choice. YUUUUUGE difference.

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: JinMI

So you're a-ok with them removing a barrier between something you disagree with.

Good to know. Doesn't make much sense but more power to you.

It's foolish to think there was a barrier in the first place.

Ignorance is till rampant, more power to you.

a reply to: JinMI

So it being illegal isn't a barrier? In what world does that make sense?

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

So is murder and theft........

a reply to: JinMI

So since you're making that comparison does that mean you wouldn't have any problem with them making those things legal?

I'm really trying to grasp your logic here. You don't like the idea of them selling your data but at the same time you seem to be ok with them making it legal? Is that about right?