Tuesday, 12/21/10, Public Square

13 Comments

Filed under The Public Square

13 responses to “Tuesday, 12/21/10, Public Square

  1. prairie pond

    I hope Zippy weighs in soon with a good, long post about the death of net neutrality. He knows more on the subject than anyone I know, and I’m anxious to hear what he has to say.

    Yet another fail for this administration and it’s corporatist henchmen.

  2. tosmarttobegop

    I am not sure what is happening about the net, I got a e-mail from one of those pro-gun shadow organizations. Screaming about Obama taking over the internet! Blocking selected sites.

    This morning it is painted as saying that no longer could a ISP block a otherwise legal site?
    That is a question?

    Telemarketing is legal and one of my biggest annoyance, does it mean that spam can not longer be blocked?

    One problem when Government tries to stop or interferes with something.
    It can and does harm or impacts things it was never meant to have an effect on.
    Remember parents and Grandparents being arrested for child porn?

    The slippery slope of trying to control the internet is what is offensive to one person is not to another.
    What is hate speech to one is only common sense to another.

    I say it about the whole freedom of speech, you have the right to say what you will.
    But there is no right to he heard if someone does not want to hear you.
    So to either force people to be subjected to your speech or service or to defend someone right to that speech or service by having no restrain or ability to prevent people who do not want to be subjected to it.

    Is to say they have no rights in it.

    The problem I am sure in researching the topic, will be to have several dozen different conclusions and spinning without a factual or real information about it. “What is meant by “it”?” kind of thing.

  3. It seems to me the BROWN SHIRTS are setting all of us up so we can arrested and jailed at their whim.

  4. tosmarttobegop

    As I suspected, a search came up with totally different takes on the subject.
    Either interfering with the ability to make money or giving undue ability to select sites and companies.
    Companies giving kick backs to ISPs to give them more access to their customer and charging for access to others.

    He who control the information controls the world, you do a search for something either a service or information. Generally you will not have the time or patients to wade through page after page.
    So you are more likely to show interest in the first few at best.

    It is a tactic that the Right excels at, flooding to push back the liberal sources for any issue.

    But aside from that this would in principle do away with the ability of ISPs to steer you to one over another site.

    • It still seems to me we are being sold a bill of goods and it’s happening in clear view of the public who won’t have an inkling of what is being done to them until much later, too late.

  5. fragotwofortwo

    “It still seems to me we are being sold a bill of goods and it’s happening in clear view of the public who won’t have an inkling of what is being done to them until much later, too late.”

    My thoughts exactly. Does the majority of the population even care?

  6. Today’s FCC ruling on net neutrality shifts billions in profits and boils down to one fact: There will soon be a fast Internet for the rich and a slow Internet for the poor.

    • itolduso

      Please explain how this is so. Not at all in argument, I have read various things on this, and I am confused as hell. Seems like the FCC barged in where there isn;t a problem, possibly in disregard to the Congress, and the courts as to it’s authority, and I can;t make heads or tails of what “net neutrality” really means.