[url]http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/12/20-8[/url]
[quote]Late Monday, a majority of the FCC's commissioners indicated that they're going to vote with Chairman Julius Genachowski for a toothless Net Neutrality rule.
According to all reports, the rule, which will be voted on during tomorrow's FCC meeting, falls drastically short of earlier pledges by President Obama and the FCC Chairman to protect the free and open Internet. ]According to all reports, the rule, which will be voted on during tomorrow's FCC meeting, falls drastically short of earlier pledges by President Obama and the FCC Chairman to protect the free and open Internet.
The rule is so riddled with loopholes that it's become clear that this FCC chairman crafted it with the sole purpose of winning the endorsement of AT&T and cable lobbyists, and not defending the interests of the tens of millions of Internet users.
Welcome to AT&T's Internet
For the first time in history of telecommunications law the FCC has given its stamp of approval to online discrimination.
Instead of a rule to protect Internet users' freedom to choose, the Commission has opened the door for broadband payola - letting phone and cable companies charge steep tolls to favor the content and services of a select group of corporate partners, relegating everyone else to the cyber-equivalent of a winding dirt road.
Instead of protecting openness on wireless Internet devices like the iPhone and Droid, the Commission has exempted the mobile Internet from Net Neutrality protections. This move enshrines Verizon and AT&T as gatekeepers to the expanding world of mobile Internet access, allowing them to favor their own applications while blocking, degrading or de-prioritizing others.
Instead of re-establishing the FCC's authority to act as a consumer watchdog over the Internet, it places the agency's authority on a shaky and indefensible legal footing -- giving ultimate control over the Internet to a small handful of carriers.
Obama's 'Mission Accomplished'
Internet users deserve far better, and we thought we were going to get it from a president who promised to "take a backseat to no one in my commitment to Net Neutrality." Watch as he and his FCC chairman try to spin tomorrow's betrayal as another "mission accomplished."
Don't believe it. This bogus victory has become all too familiar to those watching the Obama administration and its appointees squander opportunities for real change. The reality is that reform is just a rhetorical front for industry compromises that reward the biggest players and K-Street lobbyists while giving the public nothing.
It's not the FCC chairman's job to seek consensus among the corporations that he was put into office to regulate. His duty is to protect Internet users.
More than two million people have taken action on behalf of Net Neutrality. Tomorrow, we'll all get the carpet yanked from beneath our feet.
Net Neutrality is the freedom of speech, freedom of choice issue of the 21st century. It's the guarantee of a more open and democratic media system that was baked into the Internet at its founding.
On Tuesday, Obama's FCC is going to sell that out.[/quote]
:ohdear:
Not really shocking, sadly.
This is pure bullshit
This has no gains for the people only cons
[QUOTE=ineedateam1;26847836]This is pure bullshit
This has no gains for the people only cons[/QUOTE]
con-gress.
So how will this affect me?
I dont mean to sound skeptical or anything, I just don't understand what most of that said
[QUOTE=Jiyoon;26849098]So how will this affect me?
I dont mean to sound skeptical or anything, I just don't understand what most of that said[/QUOTE]
It means nothing will happen, which is what you want on this occasion.
[QUOTE=Jiyoon;26849098]So how will this affect me?
I dont mean to sound skeptical or anything, I just don't understand what most of that said[/QUOTE]
[Quote]allowing them to favor their own applications while blocking, degrading or de-prioritizing others[/Quote]
Government has been getting worse a lot quicker these past few months. I don't like that.
Wonder if anyone will start a new ISP that doesn't do this. I really hope so.
If anyone ever doubts that the government doesn't give a shit about the people all one has to do is point at this.
I could go into a long-ass rant about online liberty and dangers of an authoritarian control of the web, but it's not worth it anymore. Everything that needs to be said has been said, and if the government don't realise the issue with what they are doing, then they're just deluded.
Julius Genachowski. Fucking hebrews, always looking out for number one.
[highlight](User was banned for this post ("Racism" - mahalis))[/highlight]
[QUOTE=strayebyrd;26850060]I could go into a long-ass rant about online liberty and dangers of an authoritarian control of the web, but it's not worth it anymore. Everything that needs to be said has been said, and if the government don't realise the issue with what they are doing, then they're just deluded.[/QUOTE]
They want some control internet of course. They know what they are doing.
I wish politicians could be punished for making false promises.
They said they'd preserve it, and now they're doing the opposite.
So fucking late, the thread that I made on this is ON THE FIRST PAGE, just scroll down faggots.
[highlight](User was banned for this post ("Flaming" - Jimbomcb))[/highlight]
Limiting the internet is a scary thought. Think about all the factual information we've all learned through it.
Soon they'll be attacking 'http://www.erowid.org" for 'pro drug propaganda,' even though it gives factual information about drugs, not government spawned narratives of how cannabis will ruin your life.
[QUOTE=Pepin;26850694]They want some control internet of course. They know what they are doing.[/QUOTE]
This doesn't give the Government any control, but it give corporations a hell of a lot of control.
[QUOTE=Splendor;26850202]Julius Genachowski. Fucking hebrews, always looking out for number one.[/QUOTE]
Merry Christmas to you too <3
The worst thing is that atleast the government has a chance to be reformed every four yearsa while corporations just keep growing and expanding
[QUOTE=RichyZ;26851532]They really need to lower the age limit on being able to have a seat in congress. (Both the minimum and maximum.)[/QUOTE]
What are they at the moment?
30 is the minimum, I think.
[QUOTE=Jiyoon;26849098]So how will this affect me?
I dont mean to sound skeptical or anything, I just don't understand what most of that said[/QUOTE]
basically going too allow the government and ISP's too censor what they want when they want without needing a vote or a just cause. Censorship basically, 1984 anyone?
Doesn't this still have to pass the Judicial Branch?
I mean, it's pretty unconstitutional, why don't they just stop it then?
[QUOTE=john_pelphre;26853233]Doesn't this still have to pass the Judicial Branch? [/QUOTE]
The legislative makes the laws mit the judiciary.
[QUOTE=john_pelphre;26853233]Doesn't this still have to pass the Judicial Branch?
I mean, it's pretty unconstitutional, why don't they just stop it then?[/QUOTE]
No one in the government has given a shit about our constitutional rights since 2001.
[QUOTE=Nerts;26851139]This doesn't give the Government any control, but it give corporations a hell of a lot of control.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, just like with the cable tv right? A similar scenario played out. They are trying to gain the ability to censor satellite tv as well. The government should gain no power with the internet because otherwise everything there after will be trying to expand that power.
[QUOTE=Splendor;26850202]Julius Genachowski. Fucking hebrews, always looking out for number one.[/QUOTE]
if you're going to be a racist, at least be straightforward about it instead of trying to hide from being banned
If this goes through, there had better be some fucking riots.
Funny how the people who voted to support this were democrats (3 votes yes) and the ones who were against it were republicans (2 votes no).
and you guys thought republicans only cared about money
-incoming dumbs and insults for being right-
[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;26853343]No one in the government has given a shit about our constitutional rights since 2001.[/QUOTE]
agreed
[editline]21st December 2010[/editline]
[QUOTE=Wii60;26856384]Funny how the people who voted to support this were democrats (3 votes yes) and the ones who were against it were republicans (2 votes no).
and you guys thought republicans only cared about money
-incoming dumbs and insults for being right-[/QUOTE]
they voted no due to the other side voteing yes
I HATE THE USA GOVERNMENT
[QUOTE=ineedateam1;26856567]
they voted no due to the other side voteing yes
I HATE THE USA GOVERNMENT[/QUOTE]
[URL]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/21/net-neutrality-rules-pass_n_799775.html[/URL]
[quote]The FCC's three Democrats voted to pass the rules, while the two Republicans opposed them, [B]calling them unnecessary regulation.[/B][/quote]
Fuck yea Republicans!
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.