View Full Version : If you like your internet, you can keep your internet.
SomeOtherGuy
11-10-14, 11:54
No, seriously.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-11-10/if-you-your-internet-obama-calls-regulation-keep-internet-open
Major part of the WH statement:
An open Internet is essential to the American economy, and increasingly to our very way of life. By lowering the cost of launching a new idea, igniting new political movements, and bringing communities closer together, it has been one of the most significant democratizing influences the world has ever known.
“Net neutrality” has been built into the fabric of the Internet since its creation — but it is also a principle that we cannot take for granted. We cannot allow Internet service providers (ISPs) to restrict the best access or to pick winners and losers in the online marketplace for services and ideas. That is why today, I am asking the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to answer the call of almost 4 million public comments, and implement the strongest possible rules to protect net neutrality.
When I was a candidate for this office, I made clear my commitment to a free and open Internet, and my commitment remains as strong as ever. Four years ago, the FCC tried to implement rules that would protect net neutrality with little to no impact on the telecommunications companies that make important investments in our economy. After the rules were challenged, the court reviewing the rules agreed with the FCC that net neutrality was essential for preserving an environment that encourages new investment in the network, new online services and content, and everything else that makes up the Internet as we now know it. Unfortunately, the court ultimately struck down the rules — not because it disagreed with the need to protect net neutrality, but because it believed the FCC had taken the wrong legal approach.
The FCC is an independent agency, and ultimately this decision is theirs alone. I believe the FCC should create a new set of rules protecting net neutrality and ensuring that neither the cable company nor the phone company will be able to act as a gatekeeper, restricting what you can do or see online. The rules I am asking for are simple, common-sense steps that reflect the Internet you and I use every day, and that some ISPs already observe. These bright-line rules include:
No blocking. If a consumer requests access to a website or service, and the content is legal, your ISP should not be permitted to block it. That way, every player — not just those commercially affiliated with an ISP — gets a fair shot at your business.
No throttling. Nor should ISPs be able to intentionally slow down some content or speed up others — through a process often called “throttling” — based on the type of service or your ISP’s preferences.
Increased transparency. The connection between consumers and ISPs — the so-called “last mile” — is not the only place some sites might get special treatment. So, I am also asking the FCC to make full use of the transparency authorities the court recently upheld, and if necessary to apply net neutrality rules to points of interconnection between the ISP and the rest of the Internet.
No paid prioritization. Simply put: No service should be stuck in a “slow lane” because it does not pay a fee. That kind of gatekeeping would undermine the level playing field essential to the Internet’s growth. So, as I have before, I am asking for an explicit ban on paid prioritization and any other restriction that has a similar effect.
If carefully designed, these rules should not create any undue burden for ISPs, and can have clear, monitored exceptions for reasonable network management and for specialized services such as dedicated, mission-critical networks serving a hospital. But combined, these rules mean everything for preserving the Internet’s openness.
If you take this at face value, it sounds pretty good. But I don't take it at face value. People are already deciphering how this will be used to censor, tax and/or regulate speech on the internet. It seems all but certain that is, somehow, the intent here. I hope I'm wrong.
Obama is NOT the person I want regulating my internet.
The man is certifiably insane
The Internet was better when the geeks ran it.
TriviaMonster
11-10-14, 13:13
I like what he is saying, but he needs to prove he isn't filth.
I'm sure we will get to read what it is after its implemented. But I have a feeling the neutrality he wants isn't what we have in mind.
Belmont31R
11-11-14, 01:59
NN FTW.
I have a feeling that just because Obama said it, no one will want net neutrality now.
What he is preaching is actually, for once a good idea (holy sh*t, I know). It's not his idea. It is what most people in the know have been wanting for a while.
Take a minute to read up on this net neutrality thing. The FCC has been ignoring tens of thousands of comments on their feedback page ignoring the demand to make ISPs utilities. The head of the FCC (yes, appointed by Obama) is a former telecommunications CEO. He has a vested interest in making internet fast lanes a real thing to potentially line his own pockets. Net Neutrality laws COULD stop that from happening.
While I dislike him as much as anyone else, IF (that's a big if) Obama actually does this, it will be a win for internet users.
However, i'm skeptical. Realllllly skeptical.
Moose-Knuckle
11-11-14, 02:34
Well Barry has single handedly ****ed up everything from health care to the Border Patrol, why not Al Gore's gift to the world too?
I have a feeling that just because Obama said it, no one will want net neutrality now.
What he is preaching is actually, for once a good idea (holy sh*t, I know). It's not his idea. It is what most people in the know have been wanting for a while.
Take a minute to read up on this net neutrality thing. The FCC has been ignoring tens of thousands of comments on their feedback page ignoring the demand to make ISPs utilities. The head of the FCC (yes, appointed by Obama) is a former telecommunications CEO. He has a vested interest in making internet fast lanes a real thing to potentially line his own pockets. Net Neutrality laws COULD stop that from happening.
While I dislike him as much as anyone else, IF (that's a big if) Obama actually does this, it will be a win for internet users.
However, i'm skeptical. Realllllly skeptical.
It's a suck idea and I'll tell you why.
AT&T, Comcast and DishWhatever might have various levels of incompetence and shitty plans but at least they are SERVICES competing for your business.
This is not the situation with a utility which in effect is a monopoly. I'm old enough to remember when AT&T was a utility and not one of many service providers, lots of problems.
When was the last time anyone offered you an alternative to your local water, power or garbage "service provider"?
If the internet becomes a "utility" it will be regulated to a standard and there will be on option B. And it won't be superior than what you can just pay for now. The FSA who pays for shit service will get a better deal at your expense....again.
All those Obamaphones now need unlimited talk, text and internet...Obama wants everyone else to pay for it.
Belmont31R
11-11-14, 03:32
It's a suck idea and I'll tell you why.
AT&T, Comcast and DishWhatever might have various levels of incompetence and shitty plans but at least they are SERVICES competing for your business.
This is not the situation with a utility which in effect is a monopoly. I'm old enough to remember when AT&T was a utility and not one of many service providers, lots of problems.
When was the last time anyone offered you an alternative to your local water, power or garbage "service provider"?
If the internet becomes a "utility" it will be regulated to a standard and there will be on option B. And it won't be superior than what you can just pay for now. The FSA who pays for shit service will get a better deal at your expense....again.
All those Obamaphones now need unlimited talk, text and internet...Obama wants everyone else to pay for it.
This post is so full of WTF I don't know where to start.
There is no competition in the US. Comcast is lobbying that the LACK of competition is the reason they can buy out TWC. Not sure where you get there is competition here.
These companies had no problem building out their network as a Title 2 utility which allows them access to public right of ways.
When was the last time I got a competitive alternative? Comcast's main lobbying effort is that TWC doesn't compete with them.
Deregulate the Comcast and TWC merger then the Feds better nullify all local laws and allow municipal networks, and deny all subsidies and demand all money back they have received in the last 3 decades. They must pay all current right of ways a past due balance for 2 decades at minimum, and the ISP's are on their own in the future. Meaning no more piggy backing and if a landowner refuses a right of way then tough shit. No more hiding behind public utility rules. Pay or go around with zero recourse.
If the ISP's want to get the benefits of private corporations then no more public funds or benefits. Let them pay fair market values for ALL OF THE RIGHT OF WAYS they enjoy, and back pack pay all land owners. They can also be subject to anti-trust laws, and be broken up.
montanadave
11-11-14, 06:56
The struggle between private business seeking to monopolize markets and the public sector seeking to regulate those same markets is nothing new and has always been a process akin to making sausage. It's a balancing act and those who insist on leaning too far in favor of either position inevitably overturn the boat.
The_War_Wagon
11-11-14, 08:35
Obama is NOT the person I want regulating my internet.
When I was in college - in the deep mountains of NC - in the late '80's/early '90's - we had the crappiest cable company in the world; 24 basic channels - 3 of which were country music video channels :bad: - and NO FOX! When you called the provider, they offered one of two excuses - "We'd hafta put anuther satellite dish up on a ridge to get that." Or, "Well, FOX has that Simpsons, and Married with Children, & them shows jest don't reflect good Jackson Co. val - yews"... to which I replied, "Yeah - and the couple of channels you DO show, have actors with good teeth - and that doesn't reflect 'Jackson Co. VAL - yews either apparently... but you still SHOW them" - a response they NEVER cared for... :rolleyes:
So when the cable deregulation bill was making it's way through CON-gress in 1990, I thought it a GOOD thing, since we had such craptacular cable there in Podunk, NC... I was only 23 at the time though, and didn't realize JUST yet, that gummint's main purpose, is to figure out new & innovative ways to screw up a free cup of coffee. :neo:
Having since LEARNED that lesson, and knowing that the 'Obama touch' instantly turns gold into fertilizer, I'd prefer this - and EVERY - administration, not try & mess with net neutrality. Because if they do, the one thing GUARANTEED to result from it, will be a thousand-fold increase, in the number of people using Ham radio...
montanadave
11-11-14, 09:30
Because if they do, the one thing GUARANTEED to result from it, will be a thousand-fold increase, in the number of people using Ham radio...
Which is closely regulated by the FCC. ;)
Averageman
11-11-14, 09:40
We like your freedoms so much we are willing to control them for you !
This post is so full of WTF I don't know where to start.
There is no competition in the US. Comcast is lobbying that the LACK of competition is the reason they can buy out TWC. Not sure where you get there is competition here.
These companies had no problem building out their network as a Title 2 utility which allows them access to public right of ways.
When was the last time I got a competitive alternative? Comcast's main lobbying effort is that TWC doesn't compete with them.
Deregulate the Comcast and TWC merger then the Feds better nullify all local laws and allow municipal networks, and deny all subsidies and demand all money back they have received in the last 3 decades. They must pay all current right of ways a past due balance for 2 decades at minimum, and the ISP's are on their own in the future. Meaning no more piggy backing and if a landowner refuses a right of way then tough shit. No more hiding behind public utility rules. Pay or go around with zero recourse.
If the ISP's want to get the benefits of private corporations then no more public funds or benefits. Let them pay fair market values for ALL OF THE RIGHT OF WAYS they enjoy, and back pack pay all land owners. They can also be subject to anti-trust laws, and be broken up.
Well there is some competition. In fact I dumped DishNetwork for another ISP provider and got better service for less money.
If you don't understand the difference between services and utilities then I can't help you.
We like your freedoms so much we are willing to control them for you !
This X infinity.
If the federal government we have today is sticking their finger in the lie, you can bet there will be three outcomes. The .gov will gain more control, big business will gain more profit and the citizen/consumer will foot the greater burden they create. :(
SomeOtherGuy
11-12-14, 14:12
Karl Denninger (Market-Ticker) has some comments on why this will be a bad thing. Being a conservative/libertarian who started and ran an ISP in the '90's, he should have some idea what he's talking about.
http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=229585
wildcard600
11-12-14, 14:35
Karl Denninger (Market-Ticker) has some comments on why this will be a bad thing. Being a conservative/libertarian who started and ran an ISP in the '90's, he should have some idea what he's talking about.
http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=229585
I would argue with Mr. Denninger that we as consumers are already being screwed.
sandman99and9
11-12-14, 14:55
Did anyone else notice the ridiculous irony of Obama talking about this while he is in China ? Internet in China is totally controlled and run by the state. It is regulated, censored, and monitored by the governmanet, just what we need here don't you think ?
S.M.
The_War_Wagon
11-12-14, 15:29
Did anyone else notice the ridiculous irony of Obama talking about this while he is in China ? Internet in China is totally controlled and run by the state. It is regulated, censored, and monitored by the governmanet, just what we need here don't you think ?
Yeah... THAT would suck...
http://thepeoplescube.com/images/Obamacare_Flag_Nazi_WatchingYou.jpg
Did anyone else notice the ridiculous irony of Obama talking about this while he is in China ? Internet in China is totally controlled and run by the state. It is regulated, censored, and monitored by the governmanet, just what we need here don't you think ?
S.M.
Probably part of the reason he's there, to learn how to regulate things like the internet.
Probably part of the reason he's there, to learn how to regulate things like the internet.
But only because its for our own good. :rolleyes:
Belmont31R
11-13-14, 23:20
Well there is some competition. In fact I dumped DishNetwork for another ISP provider and got better service for less money.
If you don't understand the difference between services and utilities then I can't help you.
Satellite internet is not competition.
The ISP's built out their backbone's using utility protections, and then flip flopped to be another category because it would benefit them. I don't see how people don't understand how this game has been played. Nor the money that has been paid to them to build networks that never materialized.
I'd rather them be on their own, and stop using tax dollars to build their networks, but that isn't going to happen.
Belmont31R
11-13-14, 23:21
Probably part of the reason he's there, to learn how to regulate things like the internet.
And the NSA is any better?
Anyone who doesn't support Net Neutrality needs to watch this.
https://teksyndicate.com/videos/isps-want-destroy-internet-spread-message-so-we-can-stop-them
If we don't get Net neutrality here in the US you can say goodbye to the internet as we know it.
Government regulation of healthcare is bad, government regulation of the internet is good... Really?
Point being, when has government regulation of ANYTHING led to something beneficial for the nation as a whole? Everything done by government is designed to give them more power or benefit a targeted voting block or donor base.
Its tough for me to buy "freedom and liberty" when the government is the salesman.
Anyone who doesn't support Net Neutrality needs to watch this.
https://teksyndicate.com/videos/isps-want-destroy-internet-spread-message-so-we-can-stop-them
If we don't get Net neutrality here in the US you can say goodbye to the internet as we know it.
So this critcal bill will be what? 10 pages long? If it is, then it might warrant our scrutiny. If it's hundreds of pages long then it will be designed to increase government meddling, protect big business and screw the consumer. That's just the way it is. :(
montanadave
11-14-14, 08:35
Point being, when has government regulation of ANYTHING led to something beneficial for the nation as a whole?
Seriously?
:suicide:
wildcard600
11-14-14, 09:38
Satellite internet is not competition.
The ISP's built out their backbone's using utility protections, and then flip flopped to be another category because it would benefit them. I don't see how people don't understand how this game has been played. Nor the money that has been paid to them to build networks that never materialized.
I'd rather them be on their own, and stop using tax dollars to build their networks, but that isn't going to happen.
Yup, back when the internet was a shadow of what it is today they wanted to be treated as a utility. now that they see that there are massive amounts of money to be made by fleecing consumers and content providers they can't run away fast enough from the utility label.
Isnt greed just wonderful ?
montanadave
11-14-14, 10:12
The ISP's built out their backbone's using utility protections, and then flip flopped to be another category because it would benefit them. I don't see how people don't understand how this game has been played. Nor the money that has been paid to them to build networks that never materialized.
I give you TouchAmerica (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montana_Power_Company).
Montana Power Company had been a rock-steady public utility company since it emerged from the Anaconda Company of the Copper King era. Profitable company paying regular dividends like clockwork. Then came the push for utility deregulation in the nineties, promoted by Republican Governor Marc Racicot (subsequently chair of the RNC and short-listed for VP), MPC management, and Goldman-Sachs, they managed to destroy the company, leave tens of thousands of MPC retirees broke as their pensions vanished, jack up electrical rates for a million customers, and lay fiber optic line to every cow in Montana. Pity none of those cows have a computer.
"With the arrival of utilities deregulation in the 1990s, Montana Power restructured itself into a telecommunications company by 2001, Touch America Holdings, and began divesting its utility and energy holdings. The company built a 21,000-mile (34,000 km) fiber optics network and incurred heavy losses during the dot-com downturn in the early 2000s. Touch America filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in 2003, selling its facilities to 360networks with plans to sell off remaining assets to defend against shareholder lawsuits. Litigation over the company's assets continued until early 2013, when a settlement was reached offering shareholders 29 cents per share. The shares were once worth $65."
I certainly think folks need to tread lightly when regulating public utilities and the telecom industry, but having some regulatory oversight is a necessary evil, as these companies are every bit as capable as the government of ****ing up a wet dream. The principle difference is the private sector is generally driven by greed and avarice, whereas the government legislative bodies and regulatory agencies distinguish themselves with ignorance and ineptitude.
Bob Gannon, the ex-president of Montana Power, lives up at Flathead Lake in a million dollar lakefront home with a really good security system. He doesn't show his face in Butte without an armed security detail. The Goldman-Sachs boys who ran the "pump & dump" with Touch America stock also walked away clean. When greed goes up against ineptitude, greed usually carries the day.
Moose-Knuckle
11-14-14, 16:00
Anyone who doesn't support Net Neutrality needs to watch this.
https://teksyndicate.com/videos/isps-want-destroy-internet-spread-message-so-we-can-stop-them
If we don't get Net neutrality here in the US you can say goodbye to the internet as we know it.
I read a quote once, but can't find so probaly bogus but it when something like this . . .
"The internet is the most powerful weapon since the printing press . . ."
Any government on the planet would jump at the chance to regulate/censor information and ideas.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.