Net Neutraily at risk again

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/03/republicans-internet-freedom-act-would-wipe-out-net-neutrality/

I told you the war wasn't over. And I told you that the recent decision had nothing to do with the will of the people. This is a battle between Google, Facebook and other giant tech firms vs broadband companies.

The new idea is Orwellian in nature. It's called the "Internet freedom act" and it's supposed to take all the power away from the FCC and give it to Congress. As you may know, Congress is run by Republicans and they get payed a lot of legal bribes by ISPs and cable companies.

To give you an idea of how much they have to lie to get the people to believe them, they're actually using the arguments against them and accusing net neutrality for the things they want to do to the internet. That's amazing. There's a good chance that this will pass, by the way.

Once the federal government establishes a foothold into managing how Internet service providers run their networks they will essentially be deciding which content goes first, second, third, or not at all

This is exactly what net neutrality is fighting against. It's keeping the internet as it is.

My legislation will put the brakes on this FCC overreach and protect our innovators from these job-killing regulations.

See what I mean? What FCC overreach? It's their job. They're not putting any regulations in place aside from saying that no one can mess with the nature of the internet. It's freakin' amazing how much they have to lie to get what they want.

 

[Zhukov]

Question: Does this stuff affect anyone outside of the USA?

Because I'm never sure if I should be worried about this net neutrality business or sitting back, sipping a drink and saying, "America lol," with an unjustifiably smug smirk.

 

[Albino Boo]

http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/03/republicans-internet-freedom-act-would-wipe-out-net-neutrality/

I told you the war wasn't over. And I told you that the recent decision had nothing to do with the will of the people. This is a battle between Google, Facebook and other giant tech firms vs broadband companies.

The new idea is Orwellian in nature. It's called the "Internet freedom act" and it's supposed to take all the power away from the FCC and give it to Congress. As you may know, Congress is run by Republicans and they get payed a lot of legal bribes by ISPs and cable companies.

To give you an idea of how much they have to lie to get the people to believe them, they're actually using the arguments against them and accusing net neutrality for the things they want to do to the internet. That's amazing. There's a good chance that this will pass, by the way.

Once the federal government establishes a foothold into managing how Internet service providers run their networks they will essentially be deciding which content goes first, second, third, or not at all

This is exactly what net neutrality is fighting against. It's keeping the internet as it is.

My legislation will put the brakes on this FCC overreach and protect our innovators from these job-killing regulations.

See what I mean? What FCC overreach? It's their job. They're not putting any regulations in place aside from saying that no one can mess with the nature of the internet. It's freakin' amazing how much they have to lie to get what they want.

Err the Republicans were elected and the FCC wasn't. How is the elected representatives of the people passing legislation to overturn a decision by an unelected commission got nothing to to do with the will of the people. The Republicans were elected by the people expressing their will at the ballot box. You might not agree with that decision but its democratic.

 

[Hoplon]

Question: Does this stuff affect anyone outside of the USA?

Because I'm never sure if I should be worried about this net neutrality business or sitting back, sipping a drink and saying, "America lol," with an unjustifiably smug smirk.

Yes, given it's the heart of the internet, as much as i am sure the rest of the world (which includes me) hates that idea.

The person proposing this bill is an idiot. needs to go in the sack with the homeopaths and astrologist.

 

[LordLundar]

Question: Does this stuff affect anyone outside of the USA?

Because I'm never sure if I should be worried about this net neutrality business or sitting back, sipping a drink and saying, "America lol," with an unjustifiably smug smirk.

Directly no. You're not going to see a french site suddenly throttle because the US said so.

The problem is the vast majority of jumps worldwide are held by US ISPs. Trying to connect to a Japanese site from the UK for example most likely will require at least 2-3 jumps on US servers which WILL be throttled.

 

[dangoball]

Question: Does this stuff affect anyone outside of the USA?

Because I'm never sure if I should be worried about this net neutrality business or sitting back, sipping a drink and saying, "America lol," with an unjustifiably smug smirk.

Directly no. You're not going to see a french site suddenly throttle because the US said so.

The problem is the vast majority of jumps worldwide are held by US ISPs. Trying to connect to a Japanese site from the UK for example most likely will require at least 2-3 jumps on US servers which WILL be throttled.

Guess it's time for Russia to start building some solid cyber infrastructure so we cam jump the other way 'round...
Having just watched Citizen 4 yesterday doesn't help in finding peace of mind on this matter.

 

[chiggerwood]

Well it's a good thing then that the guy who has veto power over a bill like this supports net neutrality.

 

[Fox12]

Question: Does this stuff affect anyone outside of the USA?

Because I'm never sure if I should be worried about this net neutrality business or sitting back, sipping a drink and saying, "America lol," with an unjustifiably smug smirk.

Probably not. Hey, grab a beer, I may come join you soon.

 

[flying_whimsy]

Considering Obama has been threatening the new republican congress with his veto stamp (and used it to block the keystone pipeline), I seriously doubt this legislation will make it into law anytime soon. The republicans don't have the super majority needed to pass laws without presidential approval. While I can understand where the republicans are coming from (I actually don't like the implication of internet being title 2), there wasn't an option left considering isps have completely dismantled any other avenue of oversight through overzealous lobbying. So much misinformation is out there about this and I find it hard to believe the republicans are actually representing the will of the people on this one.

That said, this is political grandstanding at its finest.

 

[Silence]

Question: Does this stuff affect anyone outside of the USA?

Because I'm never sure if I should be worried about this net neutrality business or sitting back, sipping a drink and saying, "America lol," with an unjustifiably smug smirk.

Just today I read that the EU has completely watered down their net neutrality stance. :/

https://www.accessnow.org/blog/2015/03/04/latest-net-neutrality-proposal-in-the-eu-a-wolf-in-sheeps-clothing

Fuck all about that.

 

[Parasondox]

Seriously, how the heck do politician try to justify this crap...

*gets handed a bag full of money*

...you see now, net neutrality is just awful isn't it? And politicians are great and civilised human beings. These ISP companies deserve a better money deal, with money added to the money, money. Ooohhh money.

In money we trust.

 

[Pyrian]

Err the Republicans were elected and the FCC wasn't. How is the elected representatives of the people passing legislation to overturn a decision by an unelected commission got nothing to to do with the will of the people.

Because the unelected commission listened to the people and the Republicans are so blatantly opposing it that they have to tell outrageous lies to make it sound like they're doing the opposite of what they're doing. Getting elected does not magically make you the will of the people - especially in a gerrymandered plutocracy like the U.S..

 

[Albino Boo]

Err the Republicans were elected and the FCC wasn't. How is the elected representatives of the people passing legislation to overturn a decision by an unelected commission got nothing to to do with the will of the people.

Because the unelected commission listened to the people and the Republicans are so blatantly opposing it that they have to tell outrageous lies to make it sound like they're doing the opposite of what they're doing. Getting elected does not magically make you the will of the people - especially in a gerrymandered plutocracy like the U.S..

translated: Anything I disagree with is undemocratic.

The public expressed their will in a secret ballot that elected the Republicans because you and all your Friends disagree with item of policy does not change that fact.

 

[Dr. Thrax]

I'm constantly confused how some of them are still claiming to want to have Net Neutrality without Title II reclassification.
That's what we had and the Supreme Court said that shit wouldn't fly, and that in order for the FCC to be able to enforce such regulation it would have go to through with reclassifying the Internet under Title II.
Thanks to that ruling siding with Verizon, we can't have NN without Title II reclassification, because if they make a law that is effectively the same shit we have now, someone will sue and that ruling will be used as precedent to strike the law down.

Err the Republicans were elected and the FCC wasn't. How is the elected representatives of the people passing legislation to overturn a decision by an unelected commission got nothing to to do with the will of the people. The Republicans were elected by the people expressing their will at the ballot box. You might not agree with that decision but its democratic.

It's not that difficult to get re-elected, especially when you can gerrymander your way into getting the "majority" even if you have fewer votes than the competition.
Republicans have never been for "the people", and the Republican party, as it stands now, is an utter joke.
They've spent their entire time doing everything they can to oppose everything Obama instead of actually doing their jobs.
They are old fuddy-duddies who have no clue what actually goes on in our world and if they get their clumsy hands on the internet then you can enjoy watching as it burns here in the US. They are so technologically inept that it's astounding we have them on any part of our governing body in this day and age.
They're stuck in the past and trying to turn our present into a past that never happened.

 

[Albino Boo]

I'm constantly confused how some of them are still claiming to want to have Net Neutrality without Title II reclassification.
That's what we had and the Supreme Court said that shit wouldn't fly, and that in order for the FCC to be able to enforce such regulation it would have go to through with reclassifying the Internet under Title II.
Thanks to that ruling siding with Verizon, we can't have NN without Title II reclassification, because if they make a law that is effectively the same shit we have now, someone will sue and that ruling will be used as precedent to strike the law down.

Err the Republicans were elected and the FCC wasn't. How is the elected representatives of the people passing legislation to overturn a decision by an unelected commission got nothing to to do with the will of the people. The Republicans were elected by the people expressing their will at the ballot box. You might not agree with that decision but its democratic.

It's not that difficult to get re-elected, especially when you can gerrymander your way into getting the "majority" even if you have fewer votes than the competition.
Republicans have never been for "the people", and the Republican party, as it stands now, is an utter joke.
They've spent their entire time doing everything they can to oppose everything Obama instead of actually doing their jobs.
They are old fuddy-duddies who have no clue what actually goes on in our world and if they get their clumsy hands on the internet then you can enjoy watching as it burns here in the US. They are so technologically inept that it's astounding we have them on any part of our governing body in this day and age.
They're stuck in the past and trying to turn our present into a past that never happened.

There is a difference between your opinion and that of the general public of the United States as expressed when they returned a Republican majority. Your opinion is just yours and it got outvoted. Thats democracy.

 

[Dr. Thrax]

There is a difference between your opinion and that of the general public of the United States as expressed when they returned a Republican majority. Your opinion is just yours and it got outvoted. Thats democracy.

Before I continue, I have to ask.
Do you have any knowledge on the concept of "gerrymandering" in US Politics?
Because we could have had a Democratic, or even a better split Congress without it.

Our Republican Congress re-drew the district lines during the pre-election process.
Meaning they had control over which voting districts included which areas.
They specifically drew district lines to make sure areas which leaned their way would be nicely clumped together, and also making sure to isolate the competition's areas to ensure they got "majority" in a district.
That's not "the will of the people" or "democracy", that's bullshit.

 

[Albino Boo]

There is a difference between your opinion and that of the general public of the United States as expressed when they returned a Republican majority. Your opinion is just yours and it got outvoted. Thats democracy.

Before I continue, I have to ask.
Do you have any knowledge on the concept of "gerrymandering" in US Politics?
Because we could have had a Democratic, or even a better split Congress without it.

Our Republican Congress re-drew the district lines during the pre-election process.
Meaning they had control over which voting districts included which areas.
They specifically drew district lines to make sure areas which leaned their way would be nicely clumped together, and also making sure to isolate the competition's areas to ensure they got "majority" in a district.
That's not "the will of the people" or "democracy", that's bullshit.

Translation: We win free and fair elections but they gerrymander.


BOTH SIDES REDRAW BOUNDARIES TO THEIR OWN ADVANTAGE. You are fine with it when it produces a result to your liking but its wrong and evil when its doesnt. Grow up, the democrats had majority and lost it because the Obama did not produce the results that people expected. I don't think anyone could achieve the results that was expected but if you rely on slogans instead of detailed and costed plans you will blow in the end. You really have to work out that your opinion is just yours and isn't any more valid than anyone elses.

 

[Vivi22]

Question: Does this stuff affect anyone outside of the USA?

Because I'm never sure if I should be worried about this net neutrality business or sitting back, sipping a drink and saying, "America lol," with an unjustifiably smug smirk.

It's impossible for tiered internet service for companies in the US to not affect you outside of it. Never mind that it may impact how you're able to consume the content and services of those who can't afford to pay the higher rates for the sort of service they're already using right now, the impact on competition alone will make sure everyone is getting bent over somehow. You can't have regulations that negatively impact one of the largest consumer markets in the world without having at least some tangential impact globally. We don't live in that kind of world anymore, especially where the internet is concerned.

 

[Dr. Thrax]

Translation: We win free and fair elections but they gerrymander.

BOTH SIDES REDRAW BOUNDARIES TO THEIR OWN ADVANTAGE. You are fine with it when it produces a result to your liking but its wrong and evil when its doesnt. Grow up, the democrats had majority and lost it because the Obama did not produce the results that people expected. I don't think anyone could achieve the results that was expected but if you rely on slogans instead of detailed and costed plans you will blow in the end. You really have to work out that your opinion is just yours and isn't any more valid than anyone elses.

So is that really all you're going to go with?
"Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man."?
You're not going to actually argue anything, just claim "OPINIONS OPINIONS OPINIONS"?

What about the $80K that Blackburn received from various telecomms companies in the last election cycle?
You don't think that has anything to do with anything?

Oh, right "WILL OF DUH PEEPUL". ¬¬

 

[Vivi22]

Translation: We win free and fair elections but they gerrymander.


BOTH SIDES REDRAW BOUNDARIES TO THEIR OWN ADVANTAGE.

And they're wrong to do so.

You are fine with it when it produces a result to your liking but its wrong and evil when its doesnt.

Says who? You can't infer that from what he said. He said gerrymandering is bad and it's part of the reason Republicans won. Which is true on both counts. He made no statements about it being fine if Democrats do it. But the reality is that a place like Houston can be largely Liberal and still end up with Republican representation. There's something flawed with your voting system when that happens. And given the fact that Republicans rarely win the popular vote overall, having them be the majority in congress is the opposite of a representative democracy.

Grow up, the democrats had majority and lost it because the Obama did not produce the results that people expected.

Careful, your bias is showing. Fact is the economy, job growth, and a whole host of different measures of the welfare of the US as a country have improved significantly, and consistently during his tenure as President. For someone not producing results things are, overall, quite a bit better than they were in 2008 when years of Republican leadership tanked the economy.

Now, he certainly hasn't kept all of his promises (Guantanamo wasn't closed down), and he certainly didn't do as much as he should have when Democrats did control Congress, but the reality is that he has delivered results on a lot of things. So much so that he was elected a second time and present Republican policy and leadership would not be an improvement on what he's done during his tenure. If anything, they'd largely undue the recovery that has been accomplished and send us straight back down the same road that destroyed peoples lives back in 2008.

You really have to work out that your opinion is just yours and isn't any more valid than anyone elses.

The idea that everyone has a valid opinion is a fallacy. If someone came in with the opinion that banks and financial markets should be deregulated to levels equivalent to pre-2008 levels and think that would be an improvement on today and the market would work itself out, they would be wrong. Opinions are sometimes like assholes in more than just the sense that everyone has them. A lot of the time they just stink and if you go putting them into use, everything goes to shit.