Thanks, I was a bit confused why you said it, which is apparently because I was confused. :-)
I agree we need to do a better job educating users why this is important. And just so my opinion is clear, if there were a true market, I would not mind ISPs who did this (with proper notice). Unfortunately, over half of all households in the US have one or fewer choices for broadband providers. I am one of them. What do I do if my ISP wants to collect my data? VPN everything? -- TTFN, patrick > On Mar 28, 2017, at 10:18 PM, Mike Hammett <[email protected]> wrote: > > It was more a plea to educate the list on why this matters vs. doom and gloom > with a little more gloom and a little less Carmack. Instead I got more of the > sky is falling. > > Note that I don't intend to ever do this at my ISP, nor my IX. > > > > ----- > Mike Hammett > Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/> > <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL> > <https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb> > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions> > <https://twitter.com/ICSIL> > Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/> > <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix> > <https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange> > <https://twitter.com/mdwestix> > The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/> > <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp> > <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg> > From: "Patrick W. Gilmore" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > To: "NANOG list" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 9:12:15 PM > Subject: Re: EFF Call for sign-ons: ISPs, networking companies and engineers > opposed to FCC privacy repeal > > Mike: > > My guess is you do not. > > Which is -precisely- why the users (proletariat?) need to find a way to stop > you. Hence laws & regulations. > > Later in this thread you said “we are done here”. Would that you were so > lucky. > > -- > TTFN, > patrick > > > On Mar 28, 2017, at 5:58 PM, Mike Hammett <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > Why am I supposed to care? > > > > > > > > > > ----- > > Mike Hammett > > Intelligent Computing Solutions > > > > Midwest Internet Exchange > > > > The Brothers WISP > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: "Rich Kulawiec" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > > To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 4:45:25 PM > > Subject: Re: EFF Call for sign-ons: ISPs, networking companies and > > engineers opposed to FCC privacy repeal > > > > On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 06:45:04PM +0000, Mel Beckman wrote: > >> The claim oft presented by people favoring this customer abuse is that > >> the sold data is anonymous. But it's been well-established that very > >> simple data aggregation techniques can develop signatures that reveal > >> the identity of people in anonymized data. > > > > This needs to be repeated loudly and often at every possible opportunity. > > I've spent much of the past decade studying this issue and the most > > succinct > > way I can put it is that however good you (generic "you") think > > de-anonymization techniques are, you're wrong: they're way better than > > that. > > Billions, and I am not exaggerating even a little bit, have been spent > > on this problem, and they've been spent by smart people with essentially > > unlimited computational resources. And whaddaya know, they've succeeded. > > > > So if someone presents you a data corpus and says "this data is > > anonymized", > > the default response should be to mock them, because there is a very high > > probability they're either (a) lying or (b) wrong. > > > > Incidentally, I'm also a signatory of the EFF document, since of course > > with nearly 40 years in the field I'm a mere clueless newbie and despite > > ripping them a new one about once every other month, I'm clearly a tool > > of Google. > > > > ---rsk
