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.

 

Net Neutrality is here, get ready to kiss the internet as you know it....Goodbye!

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 04:06 PM
link   
The Fcc has just passed Net Neutrality and of course it is set in a positive light. Would anyone out there like to clue us into just what else we are going to lose because of this? This is control of the internet and we were forewarned long ago. A police state on the internet is in full swing.




After five years of contentious debate that polarized the tech-policy world, FCC chief Julius Genachowski made good on President Barack Obama’s campaign pledge to strengthen rules governing the nation’s ISPs. The measure, which passed 3-2 along party lines, did not go as far as supporters would have liked, but the FCC faced steep resistance from Republicans and the powerful telecom lobbying machine.
The FCC’s order is a milestone in the multiyear battle over so-called “net neutrality,” which is the principle that broadband service providers shouldn’t be able to interfere or block web traffic, or favor their own services at the expense of smaller rivals. Without net neutrality — which ensures that everyone has open access to the internet — revolutionary web startups like Google, Facebook and Twitter may never have gotten off the ground, proponents argue.The three new rules, which will go into effect early next year, force ISPs to be transparent about how they handle network congestion, prohibit them from blocking traffic such as Skype on wired networks, and outlaw “unreasonable” discrimination on those networks, meaning they can’t put a competing online video service in the slow lane to benefit their own video services.





........The need for the new rules largely stemmed from Comcast’s court challenge to the FCC, after the regulatory agency ordered Comcast to never again block peer-to-peer file sharing. In April, a federal judge ruled that the FCC’s legal basis for the order was inadequate, essentially neutering the agency’s ability to regulate internet access providers.


Source

Ok this seems innocent enough from the MSM, but just know this is a first step in total control of the internet content and what you can and cannot view. It starts now as just making you pay more for internet access while companies fight for your money. As well, they can determine WHO or what businesses get how much bandwidth. This could breed bullying, strongarming, blackmail or extortion so that the companies in charge (Verizon, At&t, Comcast etc.) could squeeze more money from small businesses or even home users....or you will recieve limited bandwidth while larger businesses (who can afford it) get the majority of bandwidth.

This is how it begins, this is government control of the internet. It will end in their favor...not yours. This government control will eventually filter out the net and only let the public see what they allow them to see. ATS, eventually will be stifled of bandwidth and only so much content will be seen. Further down the road sites like ATS will be offered an ultimatum, that the public won't hear, the ultimatum of disallowing any "real" government secrets or having the site negated altogether. This is only the first step. This post above looks innocent enough, but rest assured, they are not going to tell you the real reason why they are taking control of the internet. It is to keep YOU out of the loop and knowing any "real secrets" of the government. This is about an internet book burning in the end. All useful information for true freedom will be disallowed access to the people via this control. The aspersion of freedom (the great lie) will be allowed and encouraged to keep you from waking up from the American Dream. It's an illusion that the internet is shattering and they will not have this. Net Neutrality should be called net neutralization. To neutralize the net! The free lunch of fast internet and free, unmonitored viewing of content are now over. It should upset you a bit.

At the bottom of the page, is the order to be released. This does not look good for free speech on the internet.
Why does it not look good for free speech on the internet? Because this is how it is going to end up.
.....this is the REAL reason why the government has taken control of the internet.

Click here for the real reason for gov't internet control

....and give me some stars or something. I don't know what they are good for but everyone else wants them so I do to....I think. [:>(
edit on 21-12-2010 by Phenomium because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 04:38 PM
link   
I am a caveman when it comes to the interweb, but I have grown pretty fond of this mechanism. What I read was a bit over my head, could you summarize why this is cutting off our freedom of speech?



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 04:46 PM
link   
Yep, CNN is reporting this as well:

www.cnn.com...



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 04:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThinkingCap
I am a caveman when it comes to the interweb, but I have grown pretty fond of this mechanism. What I read was a bit over my head, could you summarize why this is cutting off our freedom of speech?


Simple

Large corporations wanted to eliminate net neutrality so it would work like a subscription package..aka, you can get google, facebook, and a dozen other websites for 10 bucks a month..pay a few more bucks a month and you get youtube, etc etc etc

the FCC stood against this for all these years, demanding no preferential treatment and that the doors remained open for all...no filtering out or firewalling service
aka, you can jump on a google server and read about bing (used as an example).

They have been fighting for years...corporations want to control the internet because they can make a mint off selling packages verses a free for all..
What finally happened was that the FCC -sort of- won and for the most part, the net will remain unchanged. The megacorp providers and large businesses are now grumbling and spinning (as they do)

What passed however is corrupt..giving far too much power to big ISPs.

The original bill...10 freaking years ago...was simple. internet providers must not slow down or give preferencial treatment to any customer, period.

now 10 years later, it is a conjumbled mess with loopholes and corruption.



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 04:52 PM
link   
OP, did you read your own excerpts? i did. it says these regulations are there to keep ISPs from f*cking with web traffic. there`s nothing about free speech in it. at least from what i read in the OP.



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 04:57 PM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


this is from the OP:
"The three new rules, which will go into effect early next year, force ISPs to be transparent about how they handle network congestion, prohibit them from blocking traffic such as Skype on wired networks, and outlaw “unreasonable” discrimination on those networks, meaning they can’t put a competing online video service in the slow lane to benefit their own video services."

i dont know how this is giving big ISPs too much power. is there something else to it?



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 04:57 PM
link   
it will be like cable bro. If you want like facebook, youtube, netflix, access you'll have to pay more, like getting hbo on tv and stuff. Or something similar, not sure what they are thinking of doing, but something simular to that. I do know in other news the isp's like comcast and verison were concerned about bandwidth consumption considering most people were streaming off their computers netflix youtube and things like that and they were concerned over consumption of bandwidth altering their TV streams.

Who knows but I am 99.9 percent sure freedom of internet is coming to an end in a few years. It will still be there but it will be all about $$, again I am not sure how it will work, but I am pretty sure they will think of a way to make lotsa money, and not to mention it will be MONITORED big time.



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 04:58 PM
link   
I remember when America used to be the envy of the world. The more i see things going on there now, the more i shake my head with disbelief. I'm so glad that i'm not an American. This is such a cynical ploy for big corporations to fatten themselves like pigs at the feeding trough off the backs of the people who made the internet so popular in the first place. I bet TPTB hate it with a passion that they have no financial control over the internet and can't wait to tear it down and rebuild it in a way that works to their advantage. Freedom of speech? wave it goodbye people.



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 05:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by delicatessen
OP, did you read your own excerpts? i did. it says these regulations are there to keep ISPs from f*cking with web traffic. there`s nothing about free speech in it. at least from what i read in the OP.


I'll just steal my own lines from the edit above
"This is how it begins, this is government control of the internet. It will end in their favor...not yours. This government control will eventually filter out the net and only let the public see what they allow them to see. This is only the first step. This post above looks innocent enough, but rest assured, they are not going to tell you the real reason why they are taking control of the internet."


.....this is the REAL reason why the government has taken control of the internet.

Click here for the real reason for gov't internet control
edit on 21-12-2010 by Phenomium because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 05:11 PM
link   
Look, I am just informing here in this post that Net Neutrality has just been passed. There is a great danger to our freedoms here, and I suggest you use the internet to find the answer on "the dangers of net neutrality" [hint]while you still can. As the old saying goes. I can give you the fish and you'll eat for a day......or I can teach you to fish and you'll eat for a lifetime. That's the problem with a lot of ATSers these days. You're gettig lazy, you want to be spoon fed everything and then without lifting a finger you want to dabate and shoot down the OP's theories or ideas or reasons for posting. I want YOU to go out and do the research for yourself on the dangers that lie within this media polished version of what net neutrality is for. You will not find a MSM source that tells you the dangers.....go out and research the other side. Find the truth for yourself. I can't tell you a thing that will make you believe a thing. When YOU research this, you will find the truth for yourself and then you can't deny.
edit on 21-12-2010 by Phenomium because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 05:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by delicatessen

reply to post by SaturnFX
 


this is from the OP:
"The three new rules, which will go into effect early next year, force ISPs to be transparent about how they handle network congestion, prohibit them from blocking traffic such as Skype on wired networks, and outlaw “unreasonable” discrimination on those networks, meaning they can’t put a competing online video service in the slow lane to benefit their own video services."

i dont know how this is giving big ISPs too much power. is there something else to it?


define unreasonable.
Its better than nothing, don't get me wrong. but they should have taken out the "unreasonable" word and simply say...no discrimination.



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 05:23 PM
link   
Here is the ultimate deal

there was a choice to be made...should how we browse be dictated by corporations, or by government

at least with government, they have constitutional rules (freedom of speech, expression, etc)..with corporations, the only thing they care about is bottom line without regard to the peoples choice...

in this instance, I side with government..because we can fire the government for screwing up...we can't fire corporations.



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 05:27 PM
link   
Interesting date to pass this legislation. December 21,2010. 2 years before the supposed end times.

I can't wait for us hackers to take over if they actually go through with this one.

Bring it on.



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 05:40 PM
link   
I just dropped my computer and broke something inside of it. Had to hit it a couple of times to shut it up, but it seems to be on it's last legs. I blame this Net Neutrality on causing me to subconsciously sabotage my laptop.


Yeah. Bunch of crap. "People aren't buying Cable anymore, so we need to monopolize the web."



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 06:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by SaturnFX
Here is the ultimate deal

there was a choice to be made...should how we browse be dictated by corporations, or by government

at least with government, they have constitutional rules (freedom of speech, expression, etc)..with corporations, the only thing they care about is bottom line without regard to the peoples choice...

in this instance, I side with government..because we can fire the government for screwing up...we can't fire corporations.


That's one of the things I wanted you to find out. There has been a campaign for some time to integrate comercialism and government as one. Which is why business have been funding politicians and potential presidents for years . This equates fascism. You think only government owns the internet now? Comcast, Verizon and AT&T are spearheading this campaign....they are corporate entities. The illusion is that the government owns the internet and not corporations, yet they are really one in the same. If you can fire the government....and cannot fire corporations....who does that tell you who's really in charge? Besides, even IF a government figure loses his job (or is sacrificed for the Great Work) they are just replaced by another government figure who will lie and tell you everything you want to hear, but like 100% of the other politicians, be it Repubs or Democrats, it will be just another lie and they will do their small part until they are fired or out of office. Every politician adds a small puzzle piece to the grand plan and then they go away. Except the larger players such as Hillary and Bill Clinton, and the Bushs', Gore, the Rockefellers and Kissenger etc. Why is it that these particular ones keep showing up in our government? Because it's a big illusion! We are made to belive that we vote them in, yet year after year of campaigns....the ones we really want in office are ridiculed in the MSM and eventually are snuffed out of the race leaving only...huess who Bush again.....Clinton again... or Kerry....or wait....a new guy? NOPE.....Obama is related to Palin, Bush and Cheney........yet he's a democrat? Yeah, a democrat who has been pushing Bushs' policies on through in full force and then creating some new policies himself that one would think that Bush himself did. This Net Neutrality is highly supported by Obama, and the other policies he has created lately are pretty oppressive. So this is just another illusion by TPTB, corporations and government are one in the same and they both own the internet now.
edit on 21-12-2010 by Phenomium because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 07:33 PM
link   
Use ATS search function, It works!

All you do is plug in the first 2 words "Net Neutrality" and you will find posts....

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 08:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by TortoiseKweek
Use ATS search function, It works!

All you do is plug in the first 2 words "Net Neutrality" and you will find posts....

www.abovetopsecret.com...


Yeah, I searched and mine is 6th on a list of 12 or more pages of links on it....what's your point?
If you don't like my version of it.....go to one of the other links and stop complaining. Ontarians, I've heard already.



posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 12:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by SaturnFX

Originally posted by delicatessen

reply to post by SaturnFX
 


this is from the OP:
"The three new rules, which will go into effect early next year, force ISPs to be transparent about how they handle network congestion, prohibit them from blocking traffic such as Skype on wired networks, and outlaw “unreasonable” discrimination on those networks, meaning they can’t put a competing online video service in the slow lane to benefit their own video services."

i dont know how this is giving big ISPs too much power. is there something else to it?


define unreasonable.
Its better than nothing, don't get me wrong. but they should have taken out the "unreasonable" word and simply say...no discrimination.


"unreasonable" here is defined as "...meaning they can’t put a competing online video service in the slow lane to benefit their own video services."



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join