LA Times admits that the FCC will be policing the internet under net neutrality.

originally posted by: interupt42
a reply to: MystikMushroom

This is more blind partisanship, absent of real facts or understanding. Typical DC nonsense.

Exactly and the general population eats it up. The problem is, there are more blind political cheerleaders than critical thinkers. Even worse ,they are multiplying at a greater rate than the educated , non biased truth seekers, and those with common sense.

The blind partisanship is unbelievably unbreakable and strong. I have seen it first hand.

I have a computer engineering background and have worked in the industry for over 15 years, I have been guest speaker at IBM conferences, have consultant wide range of private industries [Raytheon's, IBM,Eli Lilly,MS,SunPower and many many more] including gov't industries [NASA and others] .

Now I'm not saying I'm the most knowledgeable or best computer engineer that knows it all, but i'm no slouch either.

However, when I discuss net neutrality with my family and friends who are hard core republicans and have no idea about anything technical nor any computer related field experience, they think they know more than I do on the topic.

In fact I'm their help desk, and goto tech guy and they came to me asking what it was and what I thought, but the minute I painted a different picture than what the GOP is painting , they tell me I'm wrong about what net neutrality is or what it effects. Its amazing, then I ask them well then tell me what it is, and they just look at me blindly and repeat the GOP spill.

Its truly amazing, how people actually think that politicians aren't used car salesmans and its only the other side that has them.

Until people remove the 'R' and 'D' blinders we and our children are screwed and will continue going the path of destruction we are heading.

How is what you are saying any different than what you are accusing the 'other side' of doing? I almost had to go back and reread it to figure out who you were talking about until I got to 'GOP'.

Indeed, you make a very strong argument for cautiousness in the face of alarmist legislation and for not trusting government.

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
Having been in the IT industry for a while, I can say I really don't trust the companies to do the right thing. Companies operate to line the pockets of CEOs and investors.

Having been an American my entire life, I can say I really don't trust the government to do the right thing. The American government operates to line the pockets of CEOs and political friends.

Here's the summary of the rules: Fact Sheet: Chairman Wheeler Proposes New Rules for Protecting the Open Internet

originally posted by: grandmakdw
Written in the myriad of pages
there are provisions for
control over content.

From the summary...

No Blocking: broadband providers may not block access to legal content, applications, services, or non-harmful devices.

No Throttling: broadband providers may not impair or degrade lawful Internet traffic on the basis of content, applications, services, or non-harmful devices.

No Paid Prioritization: broadband providers may not favor some lawful Internet traffic over other lawful traffic in exchange for consideration – in other words, no “fast lanes.” This rule also bans ISPs from prioritizing content and services of their affiliates.


The rules have nothing to do with regulating what is said online.

The owners of ATS probably didn't think the FCC would have the nerve to do it, but it appears they did.

You are wrong. They did not.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: stosh64
Does anyone have a link to the actual bill so we can decide for our selves rather than rely on BOTH sides propaganda?

I want to be doe eyed and naively believe this Net Neutrality is going to be a good thing, but actions like blocking any real information from the people until after it is approved and signed doesn't fill me with hope. I'm just not unfeigned enough to take that leap.

I would love to believe the little peoples, me, best interest is at heart. I don't believe that.

Its not like anything I do about it is going to change anything at this point, so I don't know why I bother thinking about it.

I want to be 'doe eyed' and trustful.

originally posted by: stosh64

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: ScientificRailgun



What supporters of free enterprise and corporations fail to realize is the inevitable consolidation of these big companies. Eventually there would be "the corporation" that sells everything from toothpaste to shingles. Everyone would work for "the corporation" as well. This really isn't any different than the government having control over everything.

Exactly, there is no difference between the 2 anymore. Reasons why we got to this point can be debated, but here we are none the less.
Enjoy the illusion of choice, what we think or do any more is irrelevant to the inevitable outcome.

Who do you trust more? Government or corporations? Great choice. No choice.

What do you mean "no difference anymore"? That implies there was a difference to begin with. You are a fool if you don't know that the government and corporations have been in a tug of war over controlling the people since forever. Even when America was first founded, corporate interests immediately started to hijack the government. Look up the history of the first bank of the US. The government was just as guilty when it arbitrarily decided to put a tax on alcohol (notably whiskey) (without representation I might add).

a reply to: SkepticOverlord

Thank you SO. I am going to read so maybe I can comment intelligently on the subject.

As long as this IS what passed.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
Having been in the IT industry for a while, I can say I really don't trust the companies to do the right thing. Companies operate to line the pockets of CEOs and investors.

Having been an American my entire life, I can say I really don't trust the government to do the right thing. The American government operates to line the pockets of CEOs and political friends.

I've been an American my whole life too, despite my current residence. Has the government cut off or limited your access to electricity based on your political views? What about your water? I don't expect them to suddenly start censoring utilities with the internet. Although if they do, I'll be safely tucked away in Tokyo away from the fallout. I'll make sure to e-mail you the current happenings from beyond the second great firewall (first China, now the U.S.?). Last sentence should have sarcasm quotes. Nobody is going to censor American internet. If they did, the veritable army of neckbeards and perverts that would be knocking down the white house's door would innumerable.

originally posted by: stosh64
I would love to believe the little peoples, me, best interest is at heart. I don't believe that.

This is the best case scenario of three bad choices.


1) Leave it as it is -- allow corporations to manage content delivery and selectively slow down traffic and content with -- no oversight -- even content delivered to people paying more for fast Internet.

2) Impose new rules defined by corporations -- the corporate alternative is indeed ACA for the Internet, allowing the big service providers to write the rules that allow multiple tiers for speed of content delivery (paid by content providers like ATS) and content blocking during arbitrary periods of high traffic.

3) Impose government Net Neutrality rules -- classify the Internet as a vital common carrier utility.


It's important to note that, right now Verizon FIOS is regulated by as a Title II Common Carrier under the Telecommunications Act. There are no taxes on the service. There is no content restrictions. There is no censorship. There are no government fees on the service.

originally posted by: stosh64
a reply to: SkepticOverlord

Thank you SO. I am going to read so maybe I can comment intelligently on the subject.

As long as this IS what passed.

No, that is not what passed, that is a 'fact sheet'. It isn't even 4 actual pages out of the 332.

a reply to: greencmp

You do realize that the FCC fact sheet is an accurate summary of the rules, correct?

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord
a reply to: greencmp

You do realize that the FCC fact sheet is an accurate summary of the rules, correct?

No, I do not.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I agree with you Krazy, forgive my choice of words.

However I do believe the problem has grown exponentially over time to what we have now.


I am still waiting for that class your going to teach....

a reply to: stosh64

So you know whats in it? Care to direct me to somewhere I can educate myself on the 'facts' of the whole thing?
How did you get your information?

If you know and understand what net neutrality is, you know that it really can't get any worse than not having it.

If you understand what the internet is and what net neutrality is then you would know that regardless what B$ they have in the legislation down the road, it couldn't kill the internet any faster than removing net neutrality from it now.

We have bought some time because one thing the GOP is right about, the gov't does want to get its finger on it.

However, we are lucky enough that their is a TECH OLIGOPOLY [Google,comcast,netflix,etc] that thrives on net neutrality principles and has the money to keep Obomo and the democrats from removing net neutrality principles. Neither side wants it , despite what the democrats say if you look at their earlier proposals.The only reason we have it is because competition and opposing business model among two Oligopolies [ Tech vs Telecom].

www.fcc.gov...

New Rules to Protect an Open Internet

No Blocking
No Throttling
No Paid Prioritization

The Order will not impose, suggest or authorize any new taxes or fees – there will be
no automatic Universal Service fees applied and the congressional moratorium on
Internet taxation applies to broadban

transition.fcc.gov...

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord

originally posted by: stosh64
I would love to believe the little peoples, me, best interest is at heart. I don't believe that.

It's important to note that, right now Verizon FIOS is regulated by as a Title II Common Carrier under the Telecommunications Act. There are no taxes on the service. There is no content restrictions. There is no censorship. There are no government fees on the service.

It's also important to note that Verizon tried to BACK OUT of it's Title II Common Carrier status once it's fiber upgrades were nearly completed.

a reply to: ScientificRailgun

Exactly but what do the technical people involved in the industry know ?

Surely the ethically strong political leaders know best and the very competitive Telecom industry only cares to do what is best for their customers since they have such high ratings from them.

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord

originally posted by: stosh64
I would love to believe the little peoples, me, best interest is at heart. I don't believe that.

This is the best case scenario of three bad choices.


.

That I can believe. Thank you for your honest input. Since none of us will know exactly what is in it until some future date, I am off to read the fact sheet.

Then, since there isn't $&!) I can do about it anyway, I will go on living my life pretending the world is not really the way I know it is.

originally posted by: greencmp
No, I do not.

And you're rational for Chairman Wheeler doing something extraordinarily illegal is… what?

a reply to: stosh64

I'd like to believe that the 4 million comments (which were 99% in favor of net neutrality according the analysis of the first 800,000 or so) were responsible and I'm sure they're not a trivial factor, but I think a much bigger pressure was exerted by the coalition of tech giants — Amazon, eBay, Facebook, Google, Microsoft, Twitter, Yahoo, etc — that having witnessed the extortion of Netflix, saw the writing on the wall.

It just so happens that when it comes to the unfettered network access, American citizens and these companies have a common interest.

a reply to: interupt42

You genuinely made me lol. Thank you!

I agree with most others on this board that the American public is being used as collateral in a political game, but I side with what I see as the lesser of two evils.

originally posted by: interupt42
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

Exactly but what do the technical people involved in the industry know ?

Surely the ethically strong political leaders know best and the very competitive Telecom industry only cares to do what is best for their customers since they have such high ratings from them.

I love sarcasm, but sometimes it gets lost in type. This was sarc/ right?