Here we go, further down the road to censorship

[Master Roshi]

http://www.infowars.com/fcc-approves-controversial-net-neutrality-regulations/

 

[~~whimsy~~]

What is this equal access to the internet business about with the anyways?

Why is when government, or other groups, fails they always bring up equality? And eventually fucking it up for everyone involved!

Equality ends when you pop out of the womb! Get over it. Make something of yourself and rise above the equality at the bottom and have a good life.

Another article:
http://www.cnn.com/2010/TECH/web/12/21/fcc.net.neutrality/index.html?hpt=T2

Aside from that what the fuck ever.

Main words that stick out to me in this dumb ass article is:

Equal, nondiscrimination, free speech issue, and regulations.

It is the fucking internet! You can either afford it and partake in it or not! Just like any other technological luxury out there. It is nothing vital or nothing you can't partake in at a local library or even a relative/friend's house.

Also this statement I despise in that CNN article:

President Barack Obama, in a written statement, called the rules an important part of his administration's goal of advancing "American innovation, economic growth and job creation."

That's going to take a lot of toilet paper to wipe up that shitty statement.

 

[Master Roshi]

yeah who knows if we will even have a Miss Freeones 2011 voting contest at this rate

 

[StanScratch]

Can anyone explain to me coherently in their own words how this is censorship?

 

[Red Spyder]

haven't read all this completely yet but here's some opinion on it
http://www.savetheinternet.com/net-neutrality-101

 

[~~whimsy~~]

Seeing how this is one of internet regulation threads I will post it in here:

Sen. Jim DeMint, R-SC, says Federal Communications Commission should be renamed the "Fabricating a Crisis Commission," following a vote by the panel's three Democrats to approve proposed rules that amount to a hostile takeover of the Internet by a government agency acting illegally.

The proposal - misleadingly described by proponents as an attempt to insure "net neutrality" by guaranteeing equal access to the Internet - was introduced a year ago by Julius Genachowski, President Obama's appointee as FCC chairman.

A federal court has ruled that the commission has no authority to regulate the Internet, and a bipartisan group of senators and representives warned Genechowski not to attempt to impose a regulatory regime on the Internet earlier this year.

The move's legality was even questioned by FCC Commissioner Michael Copp, one of the Democrats who voted today with Genachowski, saying he considered voting against the proposal because it lacks a sufficiently defensible legal basis to survive a court challenge promised by major Internet Service Providers like Verizon, Microsoft, and AT & T.

But legal challenges by industry are likely to be much less of a problem for the Genachowski-led takeover than efforts in Congress to stop the FCC in its tracks.

That's clearly what DeMint has in mind, as he said in his statement released today following the FCC action:

“The Obama Administration has ignored evidence that this federal takeover will hang a millstone of regulatory and legal uncertainty around the neck of a vibrant sector of our economy.

"Proceeding on its own liberal whims rather than facts, this FCC has chosen to grant itself broad authority to limit how businesses can bring the internet to consumers in faster and more innovative ways.

“Americans loudly demanded a more limited federal government this November, but the Obama Administration has dedicated itself to expanding centralized government planning. Today, unelected bureaucrats rammed through an internet takeover, even after Congress and courts warned them not to.

“To keep the internet economy thriving, this decision must be reversed. Regulatory reform will be a top priority for Republicans in the next Congress, and I intend to prevent the FCC or any government agency from unilaterally burdening our recovering economy with baseless regulation.

"In order to provide the stability businesses need to grow, I will work with my fellow senators to see passage of my FCC Act, which would ensure that the FCC can only use its rulemaking powers where there is clear evidence of a harmful market failure, as well as the REINS Act, which would add the accountability of a Congressional vote before any government agency’s proposed major regulations may be finalized.”

If the FCC plan somehow manages to survive, it will almost certainly do for First Amendment liberties and the Internet what it did for them in regulating broadcast television and radio. Former CBS News president Fred Friendly's landmark book, "The Good Guys, the Bad Guys and the First Amendment," describes in great detail how the Kennedy and Johnson administrations used the FCC to silence conservative critics.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs...12/demint-vows-reverse-fccs-internet-takeover

 

[Legzman]

Figures. The government wants to fuck up the last good thing on this planet. The only remaining place that's truly free of a bunch of lame ass rules. How will this work on things like xbox LIVE and the PSN? If you swear you get banned for life or what? Maybe they'll just make it illegal to play games online. Who knows. They could do whatever they want with this shit.

 

[~~whimsy~~]

Would this fall in line with the whole wanting to tax Amazon and Ebay during purchases as well? I remember hearing about how government is thinking about taxing online stores since more people buy there than they do in stores.

 

[Facetious]

Can anyone explain to me coherently how this broadens our horizons?


"Net Neutrality", brought to us by U.S. Regulatory CZar, Cassy Sundstein . . . any questions?

 

[Ace Bandage]

Can anyone explain to me coherently why the signs in grocery stores read "10 items or less" when they should read "10 items or fewer"?

 

[~~whimsy~~]

Anytime the government talks about bringing equality/nondiscrimination for the people or broadening the horizon or benefits for the people, that is when you want to look deeply into it and be weary about things.

 

[Facetious]

^ At least we'll all be equal!




Does being "net neutral" mean that for every boy/girl act lasting 10:09 there must also be a boy/boy act lasting 10:09? . . . but, wait! who get's to go first, the boy/girl or the boy/boy? :updown:

Thinking ahead . . . When does the ''advertising neutrality'' directive arrive?

Join me now in song, won't you?

 

[bustybbwlover]

government favoring businesses over people! never!

 

[max0rz]

Figures. The government wants to fuck up the last good thing on this planet. The only remaining place that's truly free of a bunch of lame ass rules.

How will this work on things like xbox LIVE and the PSN? If you swear you get banned for life or what? Maybe they'll just make it illegal to play games online. Who knows. They could do whatever they want with this shit.

lol, the swearing issue is very much down the bottom of the pile, if it's even there at all.

The fear that is giving rise to the push for NN, is that Comcast/Verizon etc could turn around a do deal with M$, whereby you get lightning speed to your Xbox live, and are left with just a snails pace for the playstation network.
Sure, we can argue about whether such a thing can/will happen but if the recent talks with Verizon and Google are anything to go by, then there definitely is cause for concern here.

This pic should clear things up for us - >

 

[Master Roshi]

at least it seems that there are a still a few politicians on capitol hill who still have some guts and are gonna fight to end this corporate takeover

http://www.naturalnews.com/030818_FCC_net_neutrality.html

 

[D-rock]

There should have been actual laws passed by congress for net neutrality years ago. Seeing as there wasn't his was what was needed and pretty much the only solution that could be done.

Seeing as the Internet should be considered a public commodity and an important part of our nations infrastructure the last thing we need is for the internet to become like what cable providers are like now. Or to have internet traffic be controlled because of conflict of interest for those that host the capability to use bandwidth.

Frankly the people that don't want net neutrality are usually the people that don't understand the full repercussions and/or don't know what they are talking about. They just take what some business wants for it's own benefit at face value without thinking about it.

With that said this wasn't the optimal way to go about it, but I don't see congress getting off their ass or siding the the general public about this.

 

[PirateKing]

Booo! Fuck this shit.

 

[Master Roshi]

yeah well since more people are canceling their cable tv everyday the corrupt communications corporations have to find a way to keep making their money off of us and this business model is a way for them to do it unfortunately for us