[Curlyben]

And here's some added stupidity from the UK "Government": 'Porn lock' heralds death of WikiLeaks, internet, democracy, universe ? The Register

Can you say urinating into inclement weather ;)

[speechlesstx]

This has been going on much longer than Obama has been in office.

I know, but this is Obama's FCC, I was clear about that. Net 'neutrality' is about more than tiered systems, it's about furthering a political agenda.

Back in the 1980s, the Republican Party had the upper hand with the first computerized donor lists, "soft money" (a Reagan campaign creation), and "direct mail" operations (where Karl Rove got his start), while the left and the progressives were still relying largely on 19th century techniques such as distributing leaflets and organizing demonstrations. During the Clinton years it looked like the GOP might control the Internet when the Drudge Report dominated the 24-hour news cycle and right-wing websites had astounding "synergies" with talk radio, cable news, and whatever party line the Newt Gingrich Congress was pushing. One of the greatest achievements of Barack Obama's presidential campaign was its domination of Internet communications, which fused Netroots connectivity with Grassroots political organizing. The Huffington Post and other progressive news and information sites, along with MoveOn.org and other Internet organizing networks, played a key role in this dramatic shift in communications technology away from the Right and toward progressive social change.

We need to lock in this advantage.

A chunk of the Obama Administration's stimulus money is aimed at laying down Internet connections in areas that are underserved. This expansion and upgrading of the nation's Internet cable system should make it possible for millions of people to by-pass the filter of giant media corporations and access alternative information that undermines the Cheney-Rove-Fleischer revisionist narrative of the George W. Bush legacy. We have a very rare opportunity right now to lock in a progressive advantage in Internet communications, information sharing, and Netroots mobilizing.

What's 'neutral' about locking in a progressive advantage?

[excon]

What's 'neutral' about locking in a progressive advantage?

Hello again, Steve:

Been listening to Glenn Beck? Since when is freedom a progressive advantage?

excon

[NeedKarma]

You sometimes don't understand what you read, or your neocon-tinted agenda reads what the far-right blogs tell you've read.

The "advantage" he is referring to is the open web versus the corporate owned conglomerates deciding what you watch and listen to. You really, really need to get educated about net neutrality before entering this discussion.

[speechlesstx]

You sometimes don't understand what you read, or your neocon-tinted agenda reads what the far-right blogs tell you've read.

The "advantage" he is referring to is the open web versus the corporate owned conglomerates deciding what you watch and listen to. You really, really need to get educated about net neutrality before entering this discussion.

You really need to stop the condescension.

[Curlyben]

The "advantage" he is referring to is the open web versus the corporate owned conglomerates deciding what you watch and listen to.

Admittedly we almost have this now with Google and who can forget the old AOL, keywords and all ;)


So how would you like your browsing ?
Full, free and open or packaged, sanitised and censored ?

In a nut shell Net neutrality is concerned with the fair and free access for all.
Why should YOUR traffic be prioritised over mine, simply because you have purchased the Gold subscription.

True that will entitle you to faster access speeds, but not better treatment.

Think of the web as a Ford.
The standard package gives you everything you need to drive at 55 all day long, whereas the upgraded package allows you to drive at 75.

Yes you may get to where you want to go faster, but we BOTH have the same rights on the road.

[speechlesstx]

Hello again, Steve:

Been listening to Glenn Beck? Since when is freedom a progressive advantage?

Nope, I've told you many times I don't watch Beck. Ever. I'm all for freedom ex, but I'm not for the FCC going beyond their authorizations. Now, read what else the left says about net 'neutrality.' Same guy, same article:

Breaking up Rupert Murdoch's empire (starting with revoking the waiver that allows him to own the New York Post), and busting up Clear Channel's monopoly of radio would be a good place to start...

And while he speaks of "opening up" the media, others are clamoring for a revival of the Fairness Doctrine and people like Al Sharpton are just calling on the FCC to ban people like Rush Limbaugh.

Do you want more federal agencies out of control? I don't, and that's exactly what Obama's FCC has been trying to do. They've been trying to backdoor it in spite of the courts and Congress telling them not to do so.

Their response? Trying to turn the internet into a public utility. Now, in spite of Congress, the courts and others telling them to back off, Obama's FCC is pushing it anyway. Enough already, they need to get back in line with doing what they're authorized to do.

[excon]

Nope, I've told you many times I don't watch Beck. Ever. I'm all for freedom ex, but I'm not for the FCC going beyond their authorizations.

Hello again, Steve:

And, I've told you that I speak only for ME - not Democrats. The Democrats want to pass laws that protect whatever the hell THEY want to protect... And, the Republicans want to pass laws that protect whomever the hell THEY want to protect...

I say, don't pass ANY laws, and protect the hell out of everybody.

excon

[NeedKarma]

You really need to stop the condescension.

Y'know every once in a while I get fed up with people knowingly spreading disinformation to further their agenda.

[speechlesstx]

Y'know every once in a while I get fed up with people knowingly spreading disinformation to further their agenda.

Me, too so stop. I furnished links to 6 different news sources in my last post, which was wrong? The fact is, none of us here want our content censored or see others get priority service... but who are we to tell corporations what to do with their property, i.e. servers and other equipment. It may be a problem for rural areas that don't have many options, but I can choose from many providers and if I don't like Comcast's policies I can go with one I like. I would much rather have that then trust the government to control the internet and place even more regulations on private property.

[NeedKarma]

The fact is that there aren't many providers at all in most areas, and there is a possibility of collusion. The barrier to entry is high for any competitors.

You keep talking talking about Obama's FCC when it's the Republicans that are oppose ensuring net neutrality:After GOP Kills Net Neutrality Bill, Focus Shifts Back to FCC - DailyFinance

[speechlesstx]

You keep talking talking about Obama's FCC when it's the Republicans that are oppose ensuring net neutrality:After GOP Kills Net Neutrality Bill, Focus Shifts Back to FCC - DailyFinance

In other words, you've been telling me I don't know what I'm talking about but you haven't actually read what I said.

Try one more time, starting with this from your link:

the FCC, which has been caught in jurisdictional limbo ever since a federal judge ruled in April that the agency lacked the authority to enforce net neutrality

What part of Obama's FCC doesn't have the authority to enact net neutrality don't you get?

[NeedKarma]

Yea I got that steve. I simply mentioned that the net neutrality issue is older than Obama's office. You started getting it wrong here: https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/2638573-post22.html

What the FCC is trying to do is to preserve the status quo, not "a government grab to takeover the internet" like the right-wing pundits keep saying.
Once again: it's not to enact net neutrality, it's to preserve it.

[speechlesstx]

You made an assumption, NK. In that very link I said "I know" it's been going on longer than Obama. I said nothing about "a government grab to takeover the internet" either.

[NeedKarma]

All right.

Cheers.

[tomder55]

Which is more than I can say for cable service which is, at least in my area ,run like a utility with the backing of the local government .

There are still some viable alternative to Google so I don't think it is comparable yet. I think the size of Google reflects consumer preferences . I generally use Bing .

I always thought the better alternative is for the information provider to charge subscription for access. The reason people use the net for their news and print is dying in part is related to the fact that I have to pay for my daily hard copy of the NY Slimes but can access it free of charge on the Web.

[paraclete]

. The reason people use the net for their news and print is dying in part is related to the fact that I have to pay for my daily hard copy of the NY Slimes but can access it free of charge on the Web.

Don't quite understand what you said there Tom but what is wrong with getting the news free. There are any number who rush to provide this service so that they can gain advertising revenue, which after all far outweighs the revenue from selling pieces of paper. Become environmentally friendly and stop giving them an excuse for cutting down trees. I did years ago and I haven't missed the ads

[tomder55]

Did you not pay for print copy ? Why should you expect to get content for free ?

[paraclete]

did you not pay for print copy ? Why should you expect to get content for free ?

I don't expect anything but I take what is on offer, so if web content is free... it is free. One financial paper here decided to make web access subcriber access only, as the same information is available free elsewhere from any number of sources, I didn't sign up.

The market determines the price and the price is free, capitalism in action. Why should a traditional newspaper expect me to pay because they are slow to realise times have changed. It is like cable offering me what I can get for free, not well thought out.

[tomder55]

Not sure where I come down on Net regulation. But I do come down strongly against a government takeover of the web without the authority coming from the legislature.

Unfortunately that is exactly what happened yesterday when the Obama FCC ;without the authority of Congress ,voted themselves new unconstitutional powers to control the internet.

It is up to the next session of Congress to smack the FCC down. Regulatory authority comes from Congress.