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.

 

The Devolution Of The Internet And Control Of Information

page: 4
13
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 09:10 PM
link   
a reply to: worldstarcountry

Title II requires unrestricted (non-descriminatory) use for all users of a common carrier's infrastructure. "Net neutrality" placed ISPs under Title II, designating them as common carriers.

The FCC has classified them now as "information services" under Title I. They are no longer bound by the requirements of Title II. They can discriminate in any way they wish toward users of their infrastructure.

edit on 12/17/2017 by Phage because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 09:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage
I am not seeing that. Could you copy paste directly from the cited hundreds of pages of documents on the last page we found this morning? Or give me the page number?? Its been a lot of reading and my eyes are drowsy from donating blood.



posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 09:20 PM
link   
a reply to: worldstarcountry

You're not seeing what?
Can you be more specific?



posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 09:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage
Your post was quite specific.

The FCC has classified them now as "information services" under Title I. They are no longer bound by the requirements of Title II. They can discriminate in any way they wish toward users of their infrastructure.


What part classified them under title I??



posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 10:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: SpeakerofTruth
a reply to: dreamingawake

Yeah, see, I am not really an online/multiplayer gamer... I am primarily a single player gamer, so I don't see it affecting my gaming habits much, but I do see how people who play primarily multiplayer games would be concerned.


I used to be an online gamer. I got tired of low bandwidth. I paid $10 a month more for higher-tier of speed, more open bandwidth. I saw it as buying a pass for the carpool lane on the highway.

Yep, that's my story. The horror.



posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 10:52 PM
link   
a reply to: worldstarcountry



What part classified them under title I??



Restores the classification of broadband Internet access service as an “information service” under Title I of the Communications Act—the classification affirmed by the Supreme Court in the 2005 Brand X case.

transition.fcc.gov...
edit on 12/17/2017 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 18 2017 @ 08:28 AM
link   
Actually the article says service providers can block certain sites outright.

Forget about the games, you don't want gov't controlling the net.



posted on Dec, 18 2017 @ 01:29 PM
link   
a reply to: nOraKat

Personally, I don't want the government or damned corporations either one controlling the internet, grasshopper.
edit on 18-12-2017 by SpeakerofTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 18 2017 @ 01:52 PM
link   
People get addicted to bandwidth. They want more and more. I see ISPs figuring out new ways to (legally) suck your wallet dry. But this isn't really anything new. It's the way a free market seems to work.
edit on 12/18/2017 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 18 2017 @ 05:58 PM
link   
a reply to: jonnywhite

Well, I can understand the "money makes the world go around" mentality. However, I find it rather humorous how some try to justify the raping of common people's pocket books and look upon any criticism of it with indignation.
edit on 18-12-2017 by SpeakerofTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 20 2017 @ 09:12 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage
and yet, all the protections against the very threats the MSM and modern propaganda giants such as Facebook and Google, Netflix and others are peddling, continue to apply. This has not erased longstanding existing protections, like the ones cited in what you just posted.

Report and Order

Requires that ISPs disclose information about their practices to consumers,
entrepreneurs, and the Commission, including any blocking, throttling, paid
prioritization, or affiliated prioritization.

Finds that transparency, combined with market forces as well as antitrust and consumer
protection laws, achieve benefits comparable to those of the 2015 “bright line” rules at
lower cost.

Eliminates the vague and expansive Internet Conduct Standard, under which the FCC
could micromanage innovative business models


So if all the protections are in law that prevent or at least require the ISP to disclose such practices, then what has happened is that the MSM propaganda has worked to get everyone up in a frenzy about a situation they clearly know nothing about, because such fears are already protected against in legal writing.

With that in mind, what is left to prove that the sky is falling? Seems quite open and shut to me this was really an attempt by the censorship brigade to prevent their ability to stay quiet about the practices they may already be guilty of but do not have to be transparent about.
edit on 12-20-2017 by worldstarcountry because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
13
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join