Hillary Endorses Net Neutrality - Federal Control of the Internet and the Taking Do

[musterion]

"The way to deal with superstition is not to be polite to it, but to tackle it with all arms, and so rout it, cripple it, and make it forever infamous and ridiculous." --H.L. Mencken

If it's impossible to refute.

 

[kmoney]

al gore invented it

how does he feel about it?

As long as it doesn't get too warm...

 

[kmoney]

Being serious here, can one of you explain your side of this issue for me? My understanding is that "net neutrality" means all internet content is treated the same in terms of access and speed. Without it, ISPs would be able to slow down or restrict content they don't like (e.g., things from competitors, political views they don't support), and/or charge extra for speed/access.

Net neutrality OTOH is basically a level playing field for all content.

So how is that a bad thing? Isn't net neutrality more on the side of "freedom" than "ISPs can restrict or slow down content they don't like"?

I look at it this way too. I'm for net-neutrality. :idunno:

 

[kmoney]

No, I don't have any information showing that, just a suspicion that a basic minimum download speed is something the government is likely to enforce.

A minimum speed wouldn't prevent ISPs from having a tiered service where someone could pay more for faster speeds.

 

[musterion]

An alternative view.

A lot of these LIV Net Neutrality supporters believe that these regulations will do nothing more than making the internet ‘fair’. If that were the case, then the FEC would not be involved. Net Neutrality rules and regs have already been found unconstitutional. . . .

‘Net Neutrality is not really about 'tubes', Comcast (which will almost certainly be granted a waiver) and Netflix. The fact that the FEC has been involved should tell you exactly what this is about. The Left has been outraged by the Court's decision in Citizens United for years. It has developed Citizens United Derangement Syndrome - CUDS. In my opinion, Net Neutrality is actually, at least in part, the Left's attempt to undermine Citizens United through the backdoor.

 

[Jose Fly]

No, I don't have any information showing that, just a suspicion that a basic minimum download speed is something the government is likely to enforce.

I wish! I was stuck on less than 1 MB for years and still paying $70 a month until someone finally put up a new tower. It's better (not cheaper), but still nowhere near what we'd get if someone would just run a line up our road.

I'm wondering if a better way to go about this is to have Congress legislate 'no throttling' and 'equal access' laws for ISP's as the preferred method of government regulation. It seems archaic to apply an 80 some year old regulation to the internet and give the government carte blanche over the whole thing.

I agree, but given the current state of Congress this is probably the next best option.

 

[Morpheus]

An alternative view.

The FCC is uninterested in censorship. Using the commission for that purpose would be too onerous to be affective. And whether you realize it or not, internet content was already censored during the Iraq war under Bush. Very shortly after pictures showed up of Baghdad burning, with all the burned, dismembered and dead women and children, domestic websites carrying them suddenly went offline. Images from the Middle East and Europe went next. I downloaded my copies about that time from Australian and New Zealand news outlets, but within a couple of hours those sites went black. And they stayed unavailable for over a week. Then came Abu Grahib. The Bush administration was much more efficient that time, and those same sources all became unavailable in the U.S. within hours. These regulations won't speed up that process.

 

[musterion]

FEC, not just FCC.

 

[kmoney]

An alternative view.

"Left's attempt to undermine Citizens United through the backdoor. "


How would they do that?

 

[musterion]

"Left's attempt to undermine Citizens United through the backdoor. "


How would they do that?

Look up the CU case first. Make that the starting point and ask yourself exactly what an end-run around it would need to entail, and why someone would want to make an end-run at all.

But set that aside for just a moment.

Why would the FEC be involved in this issue at all? The FEC, okay. But the FEC?

Think about it.

 

[drbrumley]

Hillary Endorses Net Neutrality - Federal Control of the Internet and the Taking Down of the Open Source Revolution

http://www.nowtheendbegins.com/blog/?p=31180

"Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton signaled support for the Federal Communications Commission upcoming vote to make the internet a Title II public utility."

"Democrats have always been opposed to fundamental American rights like the Second Amendment, they are not overly fond of the First Amendment, the right to free speech against the government, either. By taking over and regulating the flow of free speech on the Internet, the greatest communication medium this world has ever seen, the government will be able to effectively squash the tide of truth that the main stream media has long since stopped reporting on."

"When asked directly by Re/Code’s Kara Swisher if she supported the FCC’s upcoming vote, she said she supported President Obama’s position on the issue.

“I would vote for net neutrality, because as I understand it, it’s Title II with a lot of changes within it in order to avoid the worst of the utility regulation,” she said. “It’s a foot in the door, it’s a value statement, I think the president is right to be upfront and out front on that.”"

<<<<<Not surprised in the least!

 

[musterion]

The protections of the First Amendment do not turn on whether the defendant was a trained journalist, formally affiliated with traditional news entities, engaged in conflict-of-interest disclosure, went beyond just assembling others’ writings, or tried to get both sides of a story. As the Supreme Court has accurately warned, a First Amendment distinction between the institutional press and other speakers is unworkable: “With the advent of the Internet and the decline of print and broadcast media … the line between the media and others who wish to comment on political and social issues becomes far more blurred.” Citizens United, 558 U.S. at 352.

That right there is the real drive behind Net Neutrality. The Internet is an uncontrolled media. At the moment. That's the "problem" and they WILL fix it, either by controlling it or killing it outright (the old Internet "kill switch" idea floated under the guise of combating cybercrime and cyber-terrorism).

Control information -> control thought -> control beliefs -> control actions = control people.

 

[musterion]

Name that movie:

[to Norton] You mean to tell me you'd try to kill the John Doe movement if you can't use it to get what you want?...Well, that certainly is a new low. I guess I've seen everything now...You...think of deliberately killing an idea that's made millions of people a little bit happier. An idea that's brought thousands of 'em here from all over the country — by bus, and by freight and jalopies and on foot — so they could pass on to each other their own simple little experiences...Why, your type's as old as history — if you can't lay your dirty fingers on a decent idea and twist it and squeeze it and stuff it into your own pockets, you slap it down. Like dogs, if you can't eat something, you bury it! Why, this is the one worthwhile thing that's come along. People are finally finding out that the guy next door isn't a bad egg. That's simple, isn't it?...It may be the one thing capable of saving this cockeyed world. Yet you sit back there on your fat hulks and tell me you'll kill it if you can't use it. Well, you go ahead and try. You couldn't do it in a million years with all your radio stations and all your power, because it's bigger than whether I'm a fake, it's bigger than your ambitions, and it's bigger than all the bracelets and fur coats in the world.

Replace "John Doe movement" with "the internet."

 

[kmoney]

Look up the CU case first. Make that the starting point and ask yourself exactly what an end-run around it would need to entail, and why someone would want to make an end-run at all.

But set that aside for just a moment.

Why would the FEC be involved in this issue at all? The FEC, okay. But the FEC?

Think about it.

I'm somewhat familiar with the CU and am not sure what you are getting at.

I don't know why the FEC would be involved. Does seem strange. What do you think they will try?

 

[aikido7]

Explain that to almost every techie in the world. Net neutrality originated with them. The administration just picked up on it after the movement had gained momentum.

Whatever. My point still remains that net neutrality is a wide open space to take on the mantle of capitalism.

Privatization of government will ensure that the economy will only expand. Businesses should set the prices they want and let the people decide to be consumers or not.

If we fail to regulate the Internet and just hand it out free to every Tom, Dick and Harry our country will spiral downward.

 

[aikido7]

So this isn't specifically about net neutrality, and is more about a general anti-government regulation philosophy?

Net Neutrality is going to become a hotbed of regulation and control. Private business needs to expand, not contract.

 

[musterion]

Ask yourself what the FEC's main job is suppose to be, then tie that to the internet. Let your mind turn it over a few times...what possible connection could there be?

 

[aikido7]

Net Neutrality is socialist welfare for the masses.

 

[musterion]

Net Neutrality is going to become a hotbed of regulation and control. Private business needs to expand, not contract.

And a new tax revenue cash-cow, before it dries up and dies. Thoroughly rape it then enslave it or kill it, whichever is necessary. That's the idea.

 

[kmoney]

Ask yourself what the FEC's main job is suppose to be, then tie that to the internet. Let your mind turn it over a few times...what possible connection could there be?

A lot of campaign financing is done online so I can see why the FEC would be interested in the internet. What I'm not seeing is how you think net neutrality comes in. How would the FEC use net neutrality to advance regulations to combat CU?