It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: OpenMindedRealist
If major ISPs were to do half the things claimed in this thread...
Section3 - Defines "cybersecurity" as "information security" which is defined (in federal code provisions related to the coordination of federal information policy) as protecting information and information systems from unauthorized access, use, disclosure, disruption, modification, or destruction in order to provide integrity, confidentiality, availability, and authentication, as those terms are further defined in specified federal code provisions related to information security. Defines "information system" as any equipment or interconnected system or subsystems of equipment that is used in the automatic acquisition, storage, manipulation, management, movement, control, display, switching, interchange, transmission, or reception of data or information, including certain industrial control systems.
originally posted by: AgentShillington
originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus
Well, thank you very much for coming out of the closet...
Grow up. Marxism isn't a dirty word.
originally posted by: Openeye
a reply to: SkepticOverlord
If these IPS's refuse to make a reasonable and moral decision then we as customers have the moral responsibility to not indulge in their service.
Perhaps instead of screeching at Ted Cruz that he's not very technical, we can see that he is interested in protecting free speech, not regulating it.
originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Hefficide
How many times has the Internet busted a story that the MSM then had egg on their face because they refused to cover it?
You put the government in charge of the 'net and they can then start to regulate what you see on it ... you know, like those embarrassing stories.
How many times have we heard them opine that Internet bloggers aren't proper journalists lately? Do you want any part of the government anywhere near tampering with the effectiveness of the Internet as a communications medium?
I think there are better ways to increase innovation and competition on the 'net than making it a government entity.
Don't forget how keen they are to use it spy on us, too.
originally posted by: OpenMindedRealist
How many people in the US are dissatisfied with the speed of available internet connections? I don't hear much griping about it in developed regions. That might change if more Americans knew what hi-speed was like overseas, and began to demand better service for their money.
originally posted by: OpenMindedRealist
And Exxon could start charging double to hybrid drivers. But they won't because that would be bad for business.
If major ISPs were to do half the things claimed in this thread, internet service would no longer be valued as it is today. Not only would people drop ISPs, there would be a public backlash against the ISPs responsible.
originally posted by: OpenMindedRealist
I agree - this looks like a Progressive (i.e. Fascist) power grab over the last realm of truly free speech. Of course it needs a disguise, so they give it the misnomer 'net neutrality' and pitch it as a defense against greedy corporations by our one and only savior: the Federal government.
Nevermind what happens later! We have to save the internet from a future threat, now!
originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus
a reply to: GodEmperor
gov issued Internet ID to be issued down the road maybe? Big Brother decides who gets to be on Internet and when?
I think this is an area the government actually sees the wisdom in listening to the people.
violence is also attributed and more justly to the major providers.
originally posted by: Openeye
a reply to: BritofTexas
Its moral hypocrisy.