Congresswoman Jacky Rosen has introduced a bill to restore our internet privacy. Tell your congressman to support it.

Apr 6, 2017 10:17 PM

glovelyday

Views

476858

Likes

21273

Dislikes

352

See:

https://rosen.house.gov/media/press-releases/rosen-introduces-bill-restore-americans-internet-privacy-protections

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 2

No money to pay off anyone = will not pass. It simple math

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Let me repost this on pornhub so my congressman sees this.

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

NSA wiretaps us: meh CIA cracks our smart tvs: meh ISP might use web history to sell us stuff: zOMG! I do not understand this.

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 5

If you believe you have or ever will have internet privacy you should spend more time on FB.

9 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 6

Does anyone have a link to the full bill yet? Curious what other non-sense was throw in there with it. Like give congress a 50% pay increase

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 2

I literally only go to youtube, hulu and netflix. Mobile imgur. That's it. I'm so lame :( no fb no Twitter no cool porn

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Good move.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

ISPs aren't interested in your internet history. It's Google and Facebook you need to worry about and these bills aren't stopping them.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Is this like the republicans introducing legislation 60+ times to repeal Obamacare knowing it had no chance of passing?

9 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 1

It is precisely like that, and Bernie's Medicare For All Act.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

...

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

RESTORE??? You have gained and lost NOTHING. Obama specifically exempted Google and Facebook. It was a sham/scam.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 2

Why did he do that?

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

We act like we ever had internet privacy. Your ISP has always had access to your browsing history. The law to stop that was never enacted.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Upvoting, because this needs to happen

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Does it also stop sites you visit from selling your data like Facebook, Imgur, Reddit, Twitter, ect?

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

No that is in the company terms of service. Meaning any info they collect from said service can sold.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

I only go to imgur and youtube. Like...if they sold mine it would be on the discount dark web. 5 and below-low-and-lower.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

Oh no now everyone knows I like Latina amateurs !

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 1

How surveilled will some people be before they decide that perhaps it's a bit too much.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

We know about the midgets too

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

Bless this woman!

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

"Restore OUR internet privacy!" The Americans cried while the rest of the world chuckled

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 3

Have an upvote for awareness

9 years ago | Likes 192 Dislikes 14

Fuck that. If you live in the US, CALL/EMAIL THEM NOW. https://whoaremyrepresentatives.org/

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

And another!

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 1

And another!

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 1

This seems like somethibg stupid to be aware of. Because its a stupid idea in the first place. They want my diary basically.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

Unless it puts restrictions on websites and not just ISPs, then it's ineffective bad policy.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 4

I never got the argument about legalising a crime because the law isn't enforced. "They're breaking the law, better get rid of the law?!"

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 6

There was never a law.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Stopping a law from taking effect is not the same as not enforcing it.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

That's not really applicable here, but the argument is it undermines the rule of law - people lose faith in the government.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

You are all just fooling yourself if you think your browsing history isn't a gold mine and a bill will keep people from exploiting it.

9 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 14

If you yield to despair and see no hope for change then you are doomed. Leave it yo others and you are forever a victim.

9 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 7

Didn't say I give up. I'm saying money is much more powerful than a bill and someone (the govnt) will then take it over like student loans.

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 1

Money is not more powerful than a bill that becomes law. Sheesh. Here maybe this will help you: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FBpdxEMelR0

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 4

How many congressman go to Washington and then get rich? How many laws do we have that aren't enforced? Withholding $$ from bad ISP's? Yes!

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

You act as if the majority of people in his country had a choice of ISPs. New flash: most do not.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 3

I've tried. My congressman doesn't understand how the internet works.

9 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 3

Then get a new one.

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 4

Unfortunately I can only cast one vote. But I try.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

All anyone can ask/do.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

But I live in Texas =(

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Then you're fucked.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

You can try support Justice Democrats...

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Then be a leader and try.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I'm transgender. That's how you end up dead in a ditch.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Hasn't stopped me yet but I live in Los Angeles. Be safe.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I mean, we wont be "restoring" our security since the original law was never put in place. People fail to realize that it was an Obama 1/2

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Administration bill that never had the time to be put in place. So really, things will be saying the same for the most part

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Hold on, we're blowing shit up.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

just say Obama did it, then poof

9 years ago | Likes 62 Dislikes 8

Now I want to see the rest of this GIF.......

9 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 1

He dug his way to China

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

There is no rest. He's still there to this day with his head stuck in the snow and his ass pointing up in the air.

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

Pretty sure it's from planet earth or something. The fox does that to catch food underneath the snow.

9 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 0

Wait, are you saying they do this on other worlds?

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

Planet Mars: Ultimate Fox Snowdown

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Spoiler Alert: It was a Vole

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It is from Planet Earth.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Lemme guess... She's not a Republican?

9 years ago | Likes 88 Dislikes 29

bbbbut...both sides are equally bad!!!!!

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Bad? Yes! Equally? Not anymore!

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Just checked. Yep, not a Republican. Also, a computer gerk, so she might know what's this about. And from my Alma Mater.

9 years ago | Likes 74 Dislikes 10

Geek + nerd = gerk?

9 years ago | Likes 31 Dislikes 0

Unintentionally, yep. Damn you, sausage fingers! Maybe I should upgrade to 7+? Actually, I'm thinking of ditching the Apple altogether.

9 years ago | Likes 27 Dislikes 0

Google pixel looks alright. And i trust them to make shit not designed to break after two years

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

Be careful with your trust

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

Yeah, fuck Apple. An android is cheaper, more reliable, and isn't obsolete as soon as a new one is released

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 2

This press release is great and all. But before we urge our representatives to support it we should probably read it. There has yet to be 1/

9 years ago | Likes 2600 Dislikes 14

So much this!!!

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

This 100 times

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Someone'll put a rider in it that adds abortion funding for puppies with aids and it'll die.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Doesn't look like it's available yet. https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/1868

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Thx

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

. Don't want to lose this link! Thanks!

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 5

No. No. Your comment is not ok.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

It should be said that while the is still being reviewed in before it comes up for a vote, Congress-people can still add amendments to it.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

This can even render the proposed bill useless even if it does get passed.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

"But we have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy." - Nancy Pelosi

9 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 3

You've actually read an entire bill before? I mean, honestly, who reads a whole federal bill?

9 years ago | Likes 20 Dislikes 7

Speed reading courses ou an be completed in about a day.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Here's one in a few seconds. Use a pointer (finger, pencil) & move it to make you read faster.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

We need one of those tldr summary bots for federal bills.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

Sometimes these things are only a couple of paragraphs, especially one like that's a repeal bill.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Not even our Congressmen/women read the bills! Why should I?

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

The same guy that reads all his EULA

9 years ago | Likes 19 Dislikes 1

You're correct, hardly anyone does. In my law classes I had to read entire bills....cruel and unusual punishment.

9 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 1

Not all are that long.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

http://curry.com/ <--- this guy

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

How long are these bills and what should are some key things to look for when reading them?

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

*what are some key

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Asking the good questions! @op??

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Actually this will not restore internet privacy, it will introduce it. ISPs have always had the right to sell this info.

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 2

The previous FCC rule that got removed didn't allow them to sell non-anonymized data. So while they could sell the info 1/2

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

2/2 "Some of our customers surf porn 24/7" They couldn't sell "John Doe at 1313 mockingbird lane surfs porn 24/7"

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

But will it prevent other companies like Google and Facebook from selling the exact same data? Probably not.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 3

Problem is can you imagine the legal hurdles needed to deal with that kind of lobbying? Baby steps might be needed.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Lobbying should be banned imo, but any sentient person knows that's nearly impossible considering they run everything.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Any actual text or summary sent to the House. Before you support something you should know what it is. I'd upvote twice if I could, but 2/

9 years ago | Likes 1850 Dislikes 7

I really don't like you 3/3

9 years ago | Likes 44 Dislikes 192

i dont understand why this was downvoted so vigorously. Its just a harmless joke

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

bandwagoning.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Seems about right lol

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 5

POTATOES 3/3

9 years ago | Likes 26 Dislikes 14

AND MOLASSES 4/3

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 7

To be fair, 99,99999% of us don't read the bills anyway.

9 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 0

Ah we have a member of Congress here I see.

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

We have to pass it to see what's in it.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

That's actually a valid point. Laws don't matter unless they are enforced.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

I believe the previous commenter was taking the piss out of something the current administration said about one of their proposed bills.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

You should be aware we don't yet know what the bill actually says. 3/3

9 years ago | Likes 1467 Dislikes 3

username checks out

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

You're the real patriot. Keep that shit up.

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

User nae checks out

9 years ago | Likes 22 Dislikes 1

Yae

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

Don't worry, it'll take at least 20k upvotes until one person actually writes a letter to their congressperson.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

"That's how we discover what's in it, by passing it into law." -Nancy Pelosi

9 years ago | Likes 55 Dislikes 5

She is a dumbass

9 years ago | Likes 25 Dislikes 3

These "solutions" are also, often a way for no restoration of previously held rights, but more, permission with caveats - we should not

9 years ago | Likes 212 Dislikes 2

This bill just reverses the previous decision Guys...

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

If that's all there is to it, that's good. But we still need to read it before throwing support behind it.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

be willing to accept just "anything to lighten the blow", we MUST insist on 100% restoration of what I believe is our Constitutional right

9 years ago | Likes 197 Dislikes 0

to privacy. Technology is ever evolving, and accepting this b/s now may have serious long-term implications and set a dangerous precedent.

9 years ago | Likes 167 Dislikes 1

Why not? It worked for the AHCA.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

im fairly sure this is sarcasm, but imagine the bill has in fine print at the bottom "only applicable during the hour of 23:01-00:01, any

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

other time of day _______ has the capacity to lawfully tap all of your devices"

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

How can she restore something that was never there? The regulations that the GOP stopped were never in effect.

9 years ago | Likes 285 Dislikes 43

[deleted]

[deleted]

9 years ago (deleted Apr 7, 2017 9:07 AM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

Nope, absolutely false. That was the whole net neutrality debate, which is very much not what this is about.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

ty

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It's literally an electronic way to share/pass information. It's not inherently secret, more like the opposite

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

As if she cares about pirivacy. She wants to get re-elected next year.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 4

That's what republican narrative tells you to think. FTC did protect your rights, when FCC didn't at all. There's a reason for this storm.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Nope, treated ISPs like Google and Facebook.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Yes, Google and Facebook do protect your rights on some level. It could be worse,as it is now. Id rather have weak firewall than no firewall

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I think the correct term is to prevent or protect instead of restore or remove

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

This is true.

9 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 6

Please read Bend3's comment in this thread: We use to have the protection under the FTC.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 3

That is also true. One doesn't negate the other.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Exactly. This hasn't even gone to the House yet.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 3

The House had nothing to do with the rules that were set to go into effect. Those were FCC-set regulations that were to go into (1)

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

The senate has approved the sale of browsing info and now house can vote it down.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

Ah, gotcha. Thought you were talking about the FCC-placed regulations.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Not the senate move to strike. That said, the GOP controls the House too.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

effect this year. People *are* incorrect in stating that we *had* those protections, but the Senate bill was very definitely a stab at (2)

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

weakening the power of the FCC.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Which is popular with (R) because of the memory of the Fairness doctrine and F*E*C attacks on Drudge.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

1) Not quite. There were protections in place by the FTC, then the FCC became the regulator so the FTC regs were to be dropped in place of

9 years ago | Likes 40 Dislikes 3

2) the new FCC regulations. So it went from FTC protection to almost having FCC protection, to 0 protection now. Its convoluted either way

9 years ago | Likes 28 Dislikes 2

Because Obama reclassified isps as utilities, so they moved to fcc jurisdiction.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

Correct. I tried to keep it to a minimal description so i didn't get more than 2 comments to get the point out

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Upvote this please people: this is the whole truth instead of the half truth some people are stuck on.

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 5

This change only gives power to other corporations that which Google and Facebook have built their empires. Internet privacy is a myth.

9 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 8

Furthermore, those services are free. ISP costs money and is infrastructure

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 2

You think Google and Facebook are free because you don't write them a check every month? That's cute.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

You can chose not to use Google and Facebook. Many people have no choice in ISP.

9 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 2

There it is. I rarely use Facebook and only use Google for vanilla stuff.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Oh, so thwarting progress on individual privacy to benefit corporations is okay by you if the progress hasn't taken effect yet? Hmmmmm.

9 years ago | Likes 64 Dislikes 67

Also, please read Bend3's comment in this thread: We use to have the protection under the FTC.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

Oh, so lying to get your way is ok? Hmmmmmmm

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

It moreso goes that since the rules never settled to begin with selling info was always possible and legal, people just care now, I guess

9 years ago | Likes 25 Dislikes 2

Also, please read Bend3 comment in this thread: We use to have the protection under the FTC.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

The point is the GOP made a pointed political statement on the matter with their vote, this is an equally pointed response. Battle is joined

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Huh, benefit corporations? You would rather have a rate hike just for some security theater?

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

Not at all what they said. Holy shit you are part of the problem with politics in this country.

9 years ago | Likes 25 Dislikes 7

Their point is that you can't *restore* what was never actually put into effect. They're getting annoyed with people mischaracterizing (1)

9 years ago | Likes 21 Dislikes 2

the issue. That doesn't mean they don't *want* the privacy protections, but they want a spade to be called a spade, and not (2)

9 years ago | Likes 19 Dislikes 2

a fucking top hat.

9 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 1

The issue is she phrasing the narrative in a way that is a blatant lie. She's lying to everyone's face.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Where do you draw the line with politicians lying? I personally am a fan of drawing it when they lie.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Don't we agree when we download software to allow them to monitor and use are data for advertisers

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Depends on the software. But *choosing* to allow an organization to do something is very different from being *forced* to do so. (1)

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

In the modern world, you can easily get by without Software X, and in fact you can probably find Software Y or Z that will do the same (2)

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

thing as X without asking to sell your info. But internet service is different. Internet service is a balls out necessity. You can't (3)

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Its not a choice if it's for Windows or a software you need. When there is really no alternative, the choice is clear.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

You can choose to get an OS other than Windows. It is not the only option. It's just the *simplest* option. Beyond that, you can turn (1)

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

One of the few times the truth has been spoken, I am all for internet privacy but everyone keeps acting like it was taken away..

9 years ago | Likes 166 Dislikes 16

I think one thing that's different is under this law sites don't have to notify if they have been hacked

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

Problem is, going from "no rules, unknown if Congress will regulate" to "Congress repealed the regulations" is a significant change.

9 years ago | Likes 68 Dislikes 8

Yeah we don't want congress regulating the internet

9 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 25

This isn’t regulating the internet. It's regulating what ISPs can do to their customers.

9 years ago | Likes 18 Dislikes 1

Wait, so, nothing actually changed? The privacy rules hadn't came into effect? I feel like I've been good winked.

9 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

Most people who mentioned it here didn't get many upvotes (or sometimes were downvoted).

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

This isn't correct. We use to have the protection under the FTC, and the rule was being added to the FCC now that they oversee ISPs.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

I think there should be a 28th Ammendment.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It was taken away. Before we even got it.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 4

Thwarting increased personal privacy is perfectly fine by you because the regulation designed to do it hasn't taken effect yet? I see....

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 24

It's pretty much a non issue, no ISP currently does this anyway.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 3

So if we legalized burning down your house you'd be okay with that since no one's done it yet?

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 9

Seems like a bit of a stretch

9 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 3

Bullshit. AT&T does it. Granted, they're paying their customers who "opt in" to the program. Or they were. Now they have no reason to.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

No they had no reason to before and they have no reason to now. Nothing changed. We as consumers must voice our opinions about this stuff 1

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 2

You're an idiot

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

Well that is certainly a convincing argument. I simply must yield to your clearly superior intelligence.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 8

To be fair, my comment didn't exactly enhance my side. I should have said "I think your comment is idiotic" I don't them personally.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Oh thank god, I was afraid this was going to become a prolonged disagreement.

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

Well I am curious, was it actually legal for ISPs to sell your history before this was to go into effect? I assumed it wasn't, and that(1)

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

The change that was supposed to take place just further cemented it, after the net neutrality stuff.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

It has always been legalish. ISPS just have been late to the game.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

ISPs can, and always have been allowed to sell your information. That was going to change, but now it will not.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Wow, I actually didn't know it was legal for them to do that - at least this spreads awareness of what they're able to do...

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Besides, if people care that much about their ISP's doing this, they'll switch to one that won't, which *gasp* would be how the free...

9 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 25

market works. (and a hint for anyone on the left reading this: that's much better than the govt forcing companies to do things)

9 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 27

*facepalm*

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

And what is this other ISP you recommend o switch to?

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Market opportunity

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 6

Its so funny when people try to be assholes but are totally wrong lol.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 3

I'm pretty sure all ISPs sell personal information.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Sometimes the govt needs to force companies to do things. Maybe not the case here but if a company clearly steals from or scams customers

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

2/2 You can't just expect everyone to be fine with it and switch companies that's why we have consumer protection laws

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

Ha! Switch ISPs? That's a good joke! Like there are any options for internet service in the majority of the country. :P

9 years ago | Likes 24 Dislikes 2

Huh that must mean there is a market opportunity out there... Egad!!! Our generation believes "the system" provides all and doesn't 1/2

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 8