chk772 on 30/3/2017 at 16:47
Exactly.
Mobiler Beitrag
Kolya on 30/3/2017 at 20:09
You're getting hung up on semantics while spectacularly missing the point, which remains the same.
But since all you wanted was to feel clever while simultaneously fuelling your hatred for the press, I guess it's all good.
chk772 on 30/3/2017 at 20:33
As long as i don't get aggressive and insultive towards the person i am discussing with, it's all good.
Apart from that, if you don't have anything to say at all, why not just remain silent?
heywood on 30/3/2017 at 21:03
Your browsing history and your browser's history are close to the same thing. If it's an HTTP connection, the ISP sees everything. If it's an HTTPS connection, the ISP sees certificates exchanged, your IP, the server's IP, ports, and in most cases the server name you're visiting (due to SNI). And if SNI is not used, they can always log the server name via reverse lookup from DNS. The one thing in your browser's history that the ISP won't get when you make an HTTPS connection is any arguments that were passed in the URL (some of which may be sensitive).
chk772 on 30/3/2017 at 21:36
Quote Posted by heywood
Your browsing history and your browser's history are close to the same thing.
No, it's not. The one thing is data which is saved with your internet provider, the other is data which is saved on your computer, locally.
Seriously, let's move on, and not find ridiculous reasons why something which has been reported should be true while it isn't. It's not really important enough for that. I'm almost sorry i brought it up now. Obviously, stating the obvious facts only earns you aggressive and insultive behavior, and people trying to find reasons why something is true, while it isn't. Doh. Typical internet political topic.
Sulphur on 31/3/2017 at 04:07
heywood: he's obviously not interested in logic since he prefers to interpret things in ways that suit his worldview. Leave him to his confirmation biases.
dj_ivocha on 31/3/2017 at 07:51
So which newspaper has that department of silly translations, anyway? You keep complaining about it but haven't provided a single link.
Yakoob on 31/3/2017 at 08:07
Actually he is technically right but it is semantics. There is a bigger difference, tho - browsers only save your web searches, ISPs save ALL traffic. Yep, that includes your Skype chats, discord, online gaming, Steam logins, etc. etc. etc.
Anyway, let's move on, since there's no point in arguing a newspaper's faulty word usage. One thing I'm not entirely clear on - if the bill is being repelead, does it mean the FCC's oversight of the internet is over and it's back to the FTC? If so, couldn't FTC implement new, more robust privacy rules? If they choose to, that is.
icemann on 31/3/2017 at 12:31
And there are ways to circumvent the browser saving your history. In Firefox going under "Private Browsing" mode does the trick and under Chrome going "Incognito" does the trick. This is no way stops your ISP from being able to see where your going. It's only really useful for hiding browsing history from others at your home.
For the ISP end using a VPN will do the trick. I was going to say using a virtual machine program may do the trick also, but I'm not 100% sure there. I know if you use it at a workplace then the network admins wont be able to see where you go via doing that (speaking from experience :p).
Tony_Tarantula on 7/4/2017 at 04:02
The "repeal of internet privacy"?
Were you people fucking asleep in 2013?
