It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


FCC "Net Neutrality" and what it means

page: 1

log in


posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 08:48 AM
If the law makers were truly responsible people they would never pass anything like this that has so many loopholes,
From what they were talking about in the video; it sounds like this bill is doing the complete opposite of what we want Net Neutrality to be
Why are they always trying to take our freedom away from us?!?!?!?

If they tried any Tiered pricing for internet on me; I would never pay it; I would use the cheapest service available;
Look at Cable television and TV; Look what is happening to them with their Tiered pricing;

The FCC voted on and PASSED Net Neutrality this afternoon (effort to ensure everyone has equal access to the Web & preventing Internet providers from interfering with web traffic). On the surface - FCC is doing a good thing. However Jason Rosenbaum, the Senior Online Campaign Director at the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, says what will actually happen is big companies will be able to pay for better coverage of their products and start ups will die before they have a chance to grow.
edit on 22-12-2010 by SupremeKnowledge because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 08:55 AM
Judging from the comments that I read recently from a lot of ats members, they're seriously confused about what just happen. They think this is a 'regulation' to regulate the internet. I see this as free passes for big telco companies to get more control of the internet.

posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 09:16 AM
Two thoughts: First the term "net neutrality" has been stolen and misused to fool the people. Second, someone needs to keep a list going of things the President promissed and then renigged on. This one can be added to that list.

I guess there is a third question: How well did the guys voting on this actually understand what they voted for? My hunch is they voted the way their benefactors told them to and were unconcerned about the ramifications.

posted on Dec, 22 2010 @ 09:22 AM
Net Neutrality has one and one goal only.


Okay, maybe two. There is always the tax component.

So, we have control and taxes that the gubmint does.

In the past 20 years, the interwebs have pretty much made the Lame Stream Media irrelevant. That is what they are sick of, the true intertwining of free speech. That is what the gubmint is worried about, it has NOTHING to do with neutrality. Sorry, the ONLY problems I have on the web is government intervention, not corporate control. OOOOH, I have to pay for my usage. Now, with the control freaks in the Dem party, I will have to pay for their equal protection clause. THAT is what this is about, no one listens to the freaks from the control side and they are getting mad about it.

Look at the front page here- Exterior Articles

Seems like the US and Venezuela have a lot in common.[

You really need to see the correlation between Venezuela taking over the webs and what our government is attempting to do. This is all planned folks. edit to add comment
editby]edit on 22-12-2010 by saltheart foamfollower because: change external to exterior

edit on 22-12-2010 by saltheart foamfollower because: (no reason given)

new topics

top topics

log in