EFF Call for sign-ons: ISPs, networking companies and engineers opposed to FCC privacy repeal

Mel Beckman mel at beckman.org
Wed Mar 29 00:17:40 UTC 2017


Hmmm... I hadn't heard about the $10 Internet access with no contracts and free installation. I'm pretty sure that's a complete fantasy, and that every ISP on the planet makes sure they get a tidy profit from the contract fees that lock in customers, with zero advertising income. Money from stealing user browser data is just gravy. Not that I'm opposed to gravy, but not when I, as a customer, don't get any. 

Now, if ISPs want to PURCHASE browser data from customers directly, I'm sure they'll get some takers. But that strategy has never appeared in any business plan I've seen.

 -mel beckman

> On Mar 28, 2017, at 4:26 PM, Seth Mattinen <sethm at rollernet.us> wrote:
>> On 3/28/17 16:08, valdis.kletnieks at vt.edu wrote:
>> On Tue, 28 Mar 2017 15:51:43 -0700, Seth Mattinen said:
>>> Has there ever been a real survey that asks people where they think
>>> Google gets the money to support things like Gmail for "free"?
>> There's a difference.  Google only gets to aggregate data you pass to Google.
>> Your ISP gets to aggregate data you pass to *anybody*.  The difference matters.
> I know, I'm not picking on Google like the other post was, other than to bring up that point that a lot of non-technical people don't connect that free Gmail means something has to pay for it. When I talk to people they have this expectation of free internet because ISPs charging for internet access is greedy when most most everything online is free. The internet is just a nebulous thing out there that's "free".
> So ultimately you have ISPs that sell data to marketers so they can meet the demands from sales/marketing to offer $10 gigabit internet access with no contracts and free install.
> ~Seth

More information about the NANOG mailing list