So thank to Emperor Trump you no longer will have internet privacy

So thank to Emperor Trump you no longer will have internet privacy

businessinsider.com/republicans-kill-fcc-broadband-privacy-rules-2017-3

Enjoy having your ISP look through all your internet activity

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/1J1Ots2AhiY
wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

>Enjoy having your ISP look through all your internet activity
implying they don't already

now they can just sell it to other people who want to look at it

>being this uninformed about internet privacy laws

You're literally braindead if you don't realize how this is a huge change

this is the future I voted for.
MAGA

No one cares about your trap threads, op. Relax

Then you are a retard and an Asshole.

Enjoy your turd meal.

This is a good thing. It protects our freedoms from terrorists. There are no many terrorist attacks in russia, this proof works.

...

youtu.be/1J1Ots2AhiY

You sound like you have a lot to hide lol

I'm just gonna take a big shot in the dark here.

that you do not have the number of democrats who voted against it.

...

Zero democrats voted for it, all republicans

This picture is so hot
I'm imagining I'm named at a Trump rally, and he's laughing at my penis, pointing out how small I am in front of the jeering crowds, calling me pathetic and it's all i can do to keep from crying and I get painfully hard, shaking from the cold and the embarrassment. My voice is barely above a cracked, pathetic choke as I apologize to Daddy for wasting his time

I honestly don't care. If you use twitter, facebook, or google, you shouldn't care either stupid.

Donald Trump (and Hillary Clinton for that matter) is old enough to remember when Elvis was on the Ed Sullivan show. No joke, do the math.

These old fucks don't even understand the internet much less can they make good decisions about how to regulate it.

Lol so dumb

...

#canadian

If you don't block javascript from facebook, twitter, or google, this shit has already been happening to you.
Every website that has a facebook or twitter like/share button contains javascript from them that track you. It's easy for them to match up ip info with people or residences.

NOSCRIPT.BMP

holy fuck im so fucked shit I must go to mars or to the moon n live there the rest of my life

What the hell do I care. Nothing illegal on there. If they wanna see what I jerk it to, what music I like, and my Sup Forums shitposts, so what.

What's good, FBI niggas?

They're outsourcing surveillance and bypassing the 4th amendment via marketing companies.

all well and good until they outlaw porn, then what are you going do?

>then what are you going do?
the only thing left to do

look up moscow theatre gas

so are the people who invented the internet... just saying.

also, so am I, and i am here and I suspect have more knowledge about computers, networks and the net (anyone remember Gopher?) than most people under thirty...

No faggot. Have you been reading WikiLeaks the Fed has had a microscope up your asshole for years. Difference is that you liked it.

Such faggotry. Why don't you put world population in there. It would make your liberal tears waterfall graph look better.

he's a retarded millenial who thinks old people cant into tech as tech is a magical thing that only children can comprehend.

Why are you such a passive-aggressive "just saying" faggot. Kill yourself... just saying.

Realistically, if they really wanted to know what im doing on the internet, they will find a way to figure out what im doing

>having your ISP look through all your internet activity
Don't they already do that? Isn't that how/why people keep getting letters from lawyers about downloading music and movies?

Meh, it's like voting between ball cancer and throat cancer.

Throat cancer team won!! yay

>people that literally put party before country

>muh turd or a douche
It's dumbfucks like you who are the reason why the most dangerous candidate in US history is now POTUS.
>duuuh they're all the same

Your ISP has already been doing that for many years. Haven't you ever noticed that when you search for something, ads with the same thing suddenly appear on every site you visit?

They already DO.

Just as in every election ever, the winner was the person to receive the most votes of any single candidate.
"Other" includes all of Hillary's votes, plus all the votes for all the other candidates.

>just as in every election ever, the winner was the person to receive the most votes of any single candidate
Are you retarded? He lost the popular vote by around 3 million votes.

Electoral votes are the more important ones anyways

Yeah but its not just trump you dumb fuck. Obama did similar shit. Same shit different asshole.

Its a huge issue i agree but dont be a leftist "hillary wouldnt ever do this. Obama was a savior"

Now i know you never mentioned any of this but i just felt the need to clerify this.

>most dangerous candidate in US history

Isn't Hillary the one that wanted to start a war with Russia? I'd rather get someone that triggers SJWs and talks shit on Twitter than someone who's going to get me conscripted to die freezing in some fucking tundra or get us nuked

Yeah... no shit

Stop talking out of your ass. Clinton did not want """a war""" with Russia, and I'm pretty sure congress would not have even entertained the idea if she introduced it without a pretty good reason.

I get it, you'd rather have a pathological liar with a distinct authoritarian style who was probably colluding with one of the most corrupt authoritarian regimes on the planet in office... 'cause butthurt libs huhuhuh

Stay dumb.

>I get it, you'd rather have a pathological liar with a distinct authoritarian style who was probably colluding with one of the most corrupt authoritarian regimes on the planet in office... 'cause butthurt libs huhuhuh
>Doesn't mention that the alternative would've been pretty much more of the same, except Hillary would have pandered a lot harder to degenerate trannies, faggots, mexicos, and sandniggers

kek stay mad

>Doesn't mention that the alternative would've been pretty much more of the same
Low energy argument, Trumpette

Yeah, but Trump was gonna "drain the Swamp" and was for the "average Joe" and "told it like it was" and "said what he meant". How's it feel to now know he's not only just like every other politician POS, he's WORSE.

>I get it, you'd rather have a pathological liar with a distinct authoritarian style who was probably colluding with one of the most corrupt authoritarian regimes on the planet in office
>implying that citing largely unsubstantiated claims are an argument

When people like you try to claim that Trump is some authoritarian nazi because he doesn't want illegals or people from a short list of countries coming in, you sound just as bad as the people who said that Obama was trying to abolish the second amendment so he could put us all in FEMA camps when he was trying to institute stricter gun control laws.

...

Everyone knew he wasn't for internet privacy/neutrality. Hillary wasn't either so it never really came in as a major factor of either of their campaigns.

You're really grasping for straws here

>when people like you try to claim that Trump is some authoritarian nazi

>trying his best to delegitimize all critics, notably the press
>rarely presents tangible arguments to refute "fake news"
>lies about his enemies and regarding things that don't go his way
>predicates his campaign on getting rid of illegal immigrants like it's the main fucking issue we face (it's not). Oh, and don't forget to throw in the promise to ban Muslims -- sound a bit like anyone here?
>can't stand being challenged on anything

Yeah... it's not the same as the conspiritarded Republicans and their paranoia about the Dems "tekkin all their guuunz".

The only reason Trump is not like Hitler is because we have checks and balances.

>predicates his campaign on getting rid of illegal immigrants like it's the main fucking issue we face (it's not).
Didn't Obama spend the better part of one of his terms fighting for "Marriage Equality?" You're aware that gays make up like 3% of the country, and only a fraction of that 3% is interested in actually getting married. Turns out that gays, not too big on that whole monogamy thing. At best, gay marriage is a thing that affects less than two percent of the country, yet it was a huge issue for the Obama administration. Looks like Trump's not the only one who sensationalizes issues that affect an objectively small portion of the population for votes.

>Oh, and don't forget to throw in the promise to ban Muslims -- sound a bit like anyone here?
>Trump comes out with his "Muslim Ban"
>Doesn't ban Indonesia, India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, or even most of the countries with the top 10 muslim populations in the world, only bans like, two.
Donald Trump really sucks at banning Muslims, maybe he doesn't have access to Wikipedia? Or maybe, just maybe, he just wants to ban some countries known to have a disproportionately high percentage of radical Muslim terrorists until we can get better vetting in place? Kinda like that Syria place? You might've heard of that place lately. Lots of explosions, people getting their heads cut off for not following a certain religion? Bad place. Bigly.

Fuck freedom, I want big government to make me feel safe.

Wrong, immigration faces the majority of the population. That's why he won, retard.

Well yeah, fuck what the people want.

Well, if we look at the numbers, there's about as many illegal immigrants in America as there are gay people. So I felt that it was a fair comparison.

Regardless, I can't tell if you're on my side or not, I'm arguing for Trump here.

>didn't Obama spend the better part of one of his terms fighting for "Marriage Equality?
... no. Although I suppose you'd have to define "the better part".

>Or maybe, just maybe, he just wants to ban some countries known to have a disproportionately high percentage of radical Muslim terrorists until we can get better vetting in place
No, he's just settling on it as a half-assed attempt at following through on a campaign promise. It's also a superficial way for this administration to project """"""strength""""""

1. Not a single US citizen had been killed in a terrorist attack from a citizen of any of those countries since 1975
2. Our biggest concern is homegrown terrorism, and that's been the case for a long time now.
3. What do Muslims do when they feel their stupid religion is under attack? Note: we have 3 million Muslim citizens.

That guy is an idiot, and so are you for not understanding the difference between capitalizing on people's xenophobic tendencies (Trump) and pressing an issue as innocuous as giving homos the right to get a few tax breaks and have some meaningless titles.

Trump is a corporate whore, just like Hillary. Saw it coming

The rule you're whining about never took effect. So this literally changes nothing.

Stupid assholes need something to complain about so they feel aggrieved.

>missing the point
Nobody said that there wasn't a difference between the issues, and you're a moron for jumping to that conclusion. The point was that both people in question used a relatively minor issue that affects people in the very low single-digits of the population to incite emotional responses and make themselves look like heroes.

Obama did it with the gays, and everyone thought he was the greatest for it. Trump did it with the Mexicos, and about just as many people thought the same.

Taking shitty minor issues and blowing them way out of proportion to help your image is what politicians, do. Trump is no exception, and acting like Trump is the one to invent that is fucking moronic.

>Taking shitty minor issues and blowing them way out of proportion to help your image is what politicians, do
You mocked the liberals who point out similarities between Trump and Hitler, I gave you a list of reasons why it's not all that outlandish, and now you're moving the goalposts. You should stop being so intellectually dishonest.

Its also important to note that not only was Trump making that a focal point of his campaign, but he targeted the groups in a highly unscrupulous fashion.

Ok

>trying his best to delegitimize all critics, notably the press
The point has been made time and again by Trump defenders that the liberal press goes out of its way to treat Trump unfairly and paint him as a villain even when he hasn't done anything particularly villainous. We can take the supposed "Muslim Ban" which I mentioned earlier and point out that:

A. it wasn't a ban on Muslims specifically, regardless of what he said previously. We can already establish that there's a lot of things that Trump said to be sensational in his campaign but has stepped back and taken a more moderate stance on for one reason or another
B. It was only for 100 days or so, so that the US could assess the vetting procedures for refugees coming from those particular places because, you know, ISIS.
C. While not similar on paper to a revetting Obama did in 2011 for six months for iraqi refugees, in practical terms, it did the same shit. People had to be revetted and scrutinized more extensively which slowed their process to get into the country significantly. Trump wanted to make sure that the processes we had in place were good to begin with.

>b-but he's just trying to make it look like he's fulfilling his campaign promises by delivering on a more moderate form of his initial promise, if he could just ban muslims, he could!
And if Obama could've made guns illegal with his crocodile tears, he would've done that, too. Like you mentioned, Checks and balances. Trump is not the only President who would fuck up this country if he had absolute power. In fact, I'm willing to bet that there's been about 44 of those in history before him. Republican, Democrat, or otherwise. Also, doesn't matter. As we've found out for the last two hundred or so fucking years, Presidents say a ton of shit during their campaigns that they can't fully deliver on to get votes. Trump voters understood this from the get-go we just liked him better than Hillary.

cont

cont.

>rarely presents tangible arguments to refute "fake news"
Like what? Like I stated before, the press goes out of its way to present facts in a way that makes Donald Trump look like the villain, even when he hasn't fucking done anything. Sure, Fox news hated Obama, but the shit-flinging toward Trump is on a whole new level, and for what? It started even before he was sworn into office.

Give me some examples, and I'm sure I'll be able to find the bullshit somewhere with a five second google search. And please give me something more substantial than
>waaah trump said something mean on tweeter

>lies about his enemies and regarding things that don't go his way
Hit me with some sources, my man. Also, at the risk of being accused of "moving the goalpost" are you implying that Trump doing this is out of the norm by any means? Didn't we just finish dealing with that stupid Trump getting pissed on by russian hookers thing? What about the "Russia rigged the election" thing where there were so little facts to present that the investigating agencies declined to go before the senate and make a statement? Despite Obongo losing his mind and borderline threatening war on Russia for these unsubstantiated claims?

thank Trump's handpicked currynigger for this

cite that claim

And finally,
>can't stand being challenged on anything
..Except the promises that he's backed down on from his campaign and proposed instead more moderate solutions?

I mean again, give me something specific that you're talking about.

"Obama wiretapped me"

dude fucking lies and you like it

'cause Bush and Obama never gave the national surveillance agency absolute power and impunity to peer into everybody's private correspondences and internet activity prior

I don't excuse it being done by anybody, but the sad shit is that both parties' shitwit constituencies couldn't care less about unconstitutional domestic spying overall, and if ever they did, it was only whenever the opponents' side were the ones enacting these policies and carrying out such statist overreach

Goddamn, I fucken loathe partisan loyalists/opportunists, bunch of tribalistic cognitive contortionists, selectively outraged idiots, and above all else, statists, ultimately, all of them

Have you been living under a rock?
wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/

that doesn't prove your claim. It's like saying that since I have a gun, a tool designed to kill, that I am a killer. What are you, some kind of ultra-lib faggot?

And there was any choice on the matter in first place?

I'll take "False Equivalencies" for $500, Alex

russian shill am keking at you're life rite now how mulch our you getting payed to post this stupid dribble?

Everyone was cool with expanding the powers of the executive branch and letting him do whatever the fuck they wanted under Obama

But now that Trump's coming for the mexicos, mudlimes, and trannies, it's a problem :^)

that's not the point of the article in question faggot and you know it.

Conservatives hate the popular vote, anyway, because their last Republican president, George W. Bush, also lost the popular vote, but still won the election, thanks to a flawed, rigged electoral college. The same applies with their new leader, tRump, he lost the popular vote, but won through the electoral votes needed. The popular vote tells you just how many people choose NOT to vote for Republicans, the party that gets NOTHING done.

>how many people
Yeah, lucky for us it's the states the vote, not the individual people.

>goes out of its way to treat Trump unfairly and paint him as a villain even when he hasn't done anything particularly villainous
>hasn't done anything particularly villainous
That's debatable. However, my point still stands that when Trump and his Trumpettes cry about "fake news", they're rarely able to cite examples that support their claims (at least examples that aren't chock-full of logical fallacies and half-truths).

>it wasn't a ban on Muslims specifically
I realize that. Nevertheless, you're moving the goalposts again. And you can bet your ass that if he could get away with a Muslim ban, it would be a Muslim ban, but those pesky checks and balances tend to get in the way.

>it was only for 100 days
Oh right, they definitely need those a hundred days for... wait... why do they need 100 days??
>Trump wanted to make sure that the processes we had in place were good to begin with
Ooooo yeah, I call bullshit. It's only adding fuel to the fire, and people are really dumb for not understanding why.

>And if Obama could've made guns illegal with his crocodile tears
You're kind of a cunt, huh? In all fairness, yeah, he probably would have b& assault weapons.

>Trump voters understood this from the get-go we just liked him better than Hillary
Trump voters don't understand much at all, pal. Don't flatter yourself

>Give me some examples, and I'm sure I'll be able to find the bullshit
He has called CNN "fake news" for simply criticizing him. I think I'll need a source from you on that one. Can you tell me why CNN is fake news? Make sure you provide ample sources, user.

>lies about enemies and things not going his way
1. Obama ordering wiretaps
2. 3-5 million illegal voters
No evidence. There never will be. Never was. Lies.

FYI....we never actually had these rules in effect.
So...essentially...things will just remain the same.

russian shill faggot, the change is that they will explicitly be allowed to sell our browsing history

It's so horrible that now ISPs will no longer have to buy your browser history from Google or Facebook, who already have and do indeed sell it.

You pathetic losers.

and you want it codified in law that the ISPs can do it?

Bernie Mac

I want to educate people to the fact that you work for Google.

Btw, if you're going to respond to , I'd appreciate it if you'd be a bit less verbose. I really don't feel like reading another essay.

O come now, OP...Do you really still suppose the Internet can still be salvaged at this late hour?

tsk tsk tsk

I don't know why I expected better.

Braindead, sad!

no I work for Abbott, so don't trust me on prescription drugs.

And you do want it codified in law then? You didn't dispute my point, being the faggot that you are.

War with Russia! BWAHAHAHA!!!! See this pic.

I watched CNN once too.

>Abbottt

What, like the Pharma giant?

did I fucking stutter?

Where is your pic?

Make Sup Forums illegal.
Make America great again.

I bet you're the janitor.

Kek, if you're going to respond to my posts, I'd appreciate it if you responded to all of my points, not just the ones you feel like attacking. I do you the courtesy of attacking your points in succession, doing my best to ignore as few of yours as possible. If you're going to cherry pick lines from my post, why are you even arguing?

The only responses you had to contradict anything I said are:
>That's debatable
>you're moving the goalposts (because you pointed at Trump's "Muslim ban" for reasons why he's Hitler, and I told you why it's not a Muslim ban, also various regimes throughout history, including the third reich had strict gun control laws, does this also make Obama Hitler because we can draw one thin, obscure line between their policies?)
>I call bullshit (???)
>assorted ad hominem attacks

You criticize Trump supporters for not being able to cite examples to support their claims, but you do the same shit.

kys

so you basically forfeit your right to privacy then and expect the rest of us to do the same.

Fuck off Vladimir.

boot-licking, statist cux to the left, boot-licking statist cux to the right
I see no solace from this shit in sight