Hacker News Reader

Comment by devindotcom | Hacker News Reader

You have to opt in and there can't be a penalty for opting out, the fact sheet says. That said, there may be a bonus for opting in — perks or whatnot. That will have to be settled separately, probably.

View on HN

it's really hard for me to understand what the meaningful difference would be between penalty for opting out vs. bonus for opting in. don't those amount to the same thing, in practice?

No, because the status quo is to not share your information.

heh pretty much yes, though I'm sure someone can think of times it would be different. and since penalties for opting out are not allowed, the ISPs will have to be very careful how they structure such bonuses - they would have to be perks totally separate from the service they provide is my guess.

It probably has to do with the advertised price.

They probably can't advertise service as $49.95, then add an additional $20 charge if you opt-in to the privacy plan.

They probably would need to at minimum advertise both prices in their marketing copy.

Though inevitably the privacy one will be an asterisk and written in 3 point font in light gray text against a light gray background.

>then add an additional $20 charge if you opt-in to the privacy plan

probably not a viable option because a VPN offers complete privacy from the ISP, and only costs $5/month.

VPNs are completely out of the question for the vast majority of internet users, who the FCC is mainly concerned about protecting.

How so? They're easy to set up, especially with a compatible router.

I mean... why is it hard for the majority of users to use linux?

Why is it hard for the majority of users to use a password manager?

Because most people on the planet are busy and don't give a damn.

Right, so it's not at all out of reach. You can configure your OS to use a VPN in under a minute, in my experience. Maybe five, if you were following directions.

It also takes a few minutes to change your smoke-detector batteries...

this is more or less the practice used at gas stations that offer different prices for cash and credit (framed as a "cash discount"); also, not dissimilar to the debate over employer/insurer "wellness plans", wherein the employee is forced to choose between surrendering private information or paying premiums that are often 2-4x+ more than what those who participate in the plan pay.

Yes, the difference is just playing with words. Rewarding those who opt-in is materially equivalent to penalising those who opt-out. I don't think the FCC would stand for such shenanigans.

I bet legally there's no difference and the dog won't hunt.

From a purely commercial perspective, opting in allows the company to sell your data. You are, in effect, getting a cut of that revenue.

I'm not sure how you de-incentivise something like that.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com