U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 08-02-2010, 10:51 AM
 
Location: 15 months till retirement and I can leave the hell hole of New Yakistan
25,223 posts, read 13,977,359 times
Reputation: 6466

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oerdin View Post
This is exactly what net neutrality is designed to prevent. It's sad that Glenn Beck lies about net neutrality and the wing nuts believe him. Without net neutrality internet providers can slow down access to websites they don't own or even insist on charging you more just to see websites outside of Time Warner's or Comcast's own offerings.
hmmm

with or without???

without it (netneutrality) the BUSINESSES have a say

with it, only the crooked government has a say


so which poisen do you prefer???

businesses controlling based on what YOU want and need

or Big Brother, controlling it based on what they say you need

 
Old 08-04-2010, 11:45 AM
 
5,155 posts, read 4,654,879 times
Reputation: 1544
Quote:
Originally Posted by workingclasshero View Post
hmmm

with or without???

without it (netneutrality) the BUSINESSES have a say

with it, only the crooked government has a say


so which poisen do you prefer???

businesses controlling based on what YOU want and need

or Big Brother, controlling it based on what they say you need
Big Tele already does have a say, and quite frankly, its looking like they're the only one that actually do have a say.

"The Telecom Empire is a very persuasive group, and it proves every day. Chandler is a perfect example of how powerful the Empire really is. He signed the letter the Empire wanted him to sign, not realizing that allowing Congress to decide on the status of broadband Internet service is to do the Empire's bidding. At the same time, he slams the financial reform package as not strong enough. What does he think will happen when the Telecom Empire gets its bill on the floor?

And so, Genachowski and his team sit desperately trying to avoid what, exactly? Being criticized by the captive Congress? Having the right wing gin up the Noise Machine against a "government takeover of the Internet?" The only consequence here is that failure to act means failure of the promised Obama policies.

There is another way, and another example in Washington. Just as the Telecom Empire uses the "leave it to Congress" dodge, so do their cousins, the Utilities, in trying to force the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) not to regulate (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=epa-greenhouse-gas - broken link) greenhouse gases. The Utilities follow the same playbook - letters, resolutions, bills, all generated to pressure a captive and craven Congress. And it works, in large measure, as a climate bill was pulled from Senate consideration.

Except that EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson decided to go ahead with her rulemaking to control those pollutants anyway. She proposed a more modest rule than might otherwise have been preferred, the EPA version of the Third Way, and went ahead with it despite the harrumphing form the Hill. The EPA didn't screw around with silly, backroom negotiations. It carried out its public interest mandate.

It can be done. It just takes some gumption, which is evident in some agencies, if not in others"
 
Old 08-04-2010, 11:49 AM
 
29,605 posts, read 16,347,469 times
Reputation: 13734
Quote:
Originally Posted by kovert View Post
Big Tele already does have a say, and quite frankly, its looking like they're the only one that actually do have a say.

"The Telecom Empire is a very persuasive group, and it proves every day. Chandler is a perfect example of how powerful the Empire really is. He signed the letter the Empire wanted him to sign, not realizing that allowing Congress to decide on the status of broadband Internet service is to do the Empire's bidding. At the same time, he slams the financial reform package as not strong enough. What does he think will happen when the Telecom Empire gets its bill on the floor?

And so, Genachowski and his team sit desperately trying to avoid what, exactly? Being criticized by the captive Congress? Having the right wing gin up the Noise Machine against a "government takeover of the Internet?" The only consequence here is that failure to act means failure of the promised Obama policies.

There is another way, and another example in Washington. Just as the Telecom Empire uses the "leave it to Congress" dodge, so do their cousins, the Utilities, in trying to force the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) not to regulate (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=epa-greenhouse-gas - broken link) greenhouse gases. The Utilities follow the same playbook - letters, resolutions, bills, all generated to pressure a captive and craven Congress. And it works, in large measure, as a climate bill was pulled from Senate consideration.

Except that EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson decided to go ahead with her rulemaking to control those pollutants anyway. She proposed a more modest rule than might otherwise have been preferred, the EPA version of the Third Way, and went ahead with it despite the harrumphing form the Hill. The EPA didn't screw around with silly, backroom negotiations. It carried out its public interest mandate.

It can be done. It just takes some gumption, which is evident in some agencies, if not in others"
Yes rogue federal agencies operating unchecked is a problem.
 
Old 08-04-2010, 11:56 AM
 
5,155 posts, read 4,654,879 times
Reputation: 1544
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank DeForrest View Post
Yes rogue federal agencies operating unchecked is a problem.
A rogue federal agency that is operating unchecked except by an even more rogue oligarchic corporate entity is a big problem indeed.
 
Old 08-09-2010, 09:44 AM
 
5,155 posts, read 4,654,879 times
Reputation: 1544
Big surprise, Big Tele calling the shots for the FCC.

Its time to force you know who to live up to the campaign promise of ensuring Net Neutrality

"The internet and telecom giants Verizon and Google have reportedly reached an agreement to impose a tiered system for accessing the internet. The deal would enable Verizon to charge for quicker access to online content over wireless devices, a violation of the concept of net neutrality that calls for equal access to all services. The deal comes amidst closed-door meetings between the Federal Communications Commission and major telecom giants on crafting new regulations."
 
Old 08-09-2010, 03:01 PM
 
5,155 posts, read 4,654,879 times
Reputation: 1544
If people don't speak out, Big Tele will wreak as much havoc with emerging internet technology as Big Finance did with their "innovations".

"Imagine if you were talking on the phone and Verizon or ATT decided they didn't like where your conversation was going. You'd be in the middle of a sentence and suddenly disconnected. Or maybe they didn't like the person you were talking to, or the subject. You'd be unable to connect or your conversation would become so slow and poor quality you'd give up and call someone else. Or maybe you lived in an area of the country where they didn't want to give you telephone service. So you'd be unable to call at all. The telecom companies would justify all this by explaining that the fiber optic lines or wireless frequencies were simply their private property. They had a right, they'd say, to do whatever they wanted with them.

They can't do this because telephone service has long been held to common access standards. The Internet has similarly developed and flourished as a commons open to everyone, through what we've come to call Net Neutrality. But Bush's FCC ruled that all our new communications technologies were in a different category, effectively the property of their physical carriers.

In the Soviet Union, cultural commissars determined who would see what information and in what context. In the US, it's corporations, and their choke-hold is about to get tighter unless we speak out and act. The fight to keep Net Neutrality has produced some important victories as when MoveOn and the Christian Coalition joined in an unlikely partnership to help block Congress from destroying Net Neutrality four years ago. FreePress.net, who's led on this issue all along, is now organizing now to help people speak out before final FCC decision. But we'd better act while we still have a chance if we don't want to be cut off in midstream from equitable access to all the new media whose promise and power we've come to take for granted."
 
Old 08-11-2010, 03:05 PM
 
5,155 posts, read 4,654,879 times
Reputation: 1544
Google has garnered the ire of its brethren.

"Some in Silicon Valley are responding to the Google-Verizon pact on net neutrality, and they arenít pleased. Facebook, a member of the Open Internet Coalition, said it doesnít support the legislative proposal. Google is also a member of the coalition, and is facing criticism for what looks like a retreat from previous principles."
 
Old 08-17-2010, 08:00 PM
 
5,155 posts, read 4,654,879 times
Reputation: 1544
Broken promises lead to broken and short careers

"Isn't there a new Administration in town? Didn't President Obama make an explicit campaign promise not to let Big Media turn the Internet into a toll road that favors one kind of content over another?

He did. But the FCC Chairman that Obama appointed, Julius Genachowski, has retreated from that pledge. He could have reversed the Bush FCC, and gained authority over the Internet, with a simple 3-to-2 vote; Democrats have the majority. Instead, the media companies cowed him into weeks of backroom negotiations, like the backroom health care negotiations that Republicans on the Senate Finance Committee bamboozled chairman Max Baucus (D-MT) into conducting. When Google and Verizon became frustrated by the pace of the concessions they were extracting, the talks broke down, and they announced their own Internet policy, as though they, not the FCC, were the regulators.

What emboldened them was the swarm of Big Media lobbyists working Capitol Hill. Congress gets major dough from the industry. AT&T is the top all-time donor to Congress, surpassing Goldman Sachs and Citigroup. Verizon has given more to the campaigns of congressmen and senators than General Electric, Pfizer or the National Rifle Association. It's no surprise that a majority of members of Congress -- Democrats and Republicans alike -- have written to Chairman Genachowski demanding that he cave to the industry, and to leave the Internet's future in their own well-greased hands.

This battle isn't just about money. Sure, the phone, cable and wireless companies stand to make a fortune if they can jack up the price that content companies and consumers have to pay in order to send and receive entertainment online; that's why they're spending a fortune to stop the FCC and Congress from stopping them. But this battle is also about keeping free speech and free enterprise free."
 
Old 08-18-2010, 02:33 PM
 
5,155 posts, read 4,654,879 times
Reputation: 1544
There are a select few yet to be bought off by Big Tele.

"Four Democratic members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee penned a letter to Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski Tuesday asking the FCC "to ensure the maintenance of an open Internet" by rejecting a recent deal by Google and Verizon that could lead to tiered pricing for internet service."

But Stewart breaks things down the best.
 
Old 08-22-2010, 02:09 PM
 
5,155 posts, read 4,654,879 times
Reputation: 1544
Some FCC members speak out.

"Sen. Al Franken, who has led on the issue of net neutrality recently, concurred. Speaking of the Google-Verizon deal, he said, “We can’t let companies write the rules that we the people are supposed to follow. Because if that happens those rules will be written only to protect corporations.” As Copps put it, “Dealmaking between big Internet players is not policymaking for the common good.”

Copps and Clyburn were also in agreement on the crucial importance of net neutrality for all Internet products. While stressing that the issue “is not about regulating the content on the Internet,” a clear response to tea party activists and conservatives who have criticized net neutrality in that fashion, Clyburn called an open Internet “the great equalizer” and preferred a situation where “consumers and not corporations managing their own experience on Internet.” Copps cited the great importance of citizen action and the Web’s role as a tool in facilitating that, but said that “truth only tells its story when it can be heard.”

Adding some levity to the proceedings, Franken alluded to the controversy around the Park51 Islamic cultural center project near Ground Zero. “Net neutrality is the First Amendment fight of the 21st century, except for religious freedom, which before last week I thought was settled.” Franken also warned of the imminent merger between Comcast and NBC Universal, and the dangers of having a company control the content and the pipe through which that content can be viewed."
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top