Tech Pioneers Try to get a Delay of Net Neutrality Vote

DooKey

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Apr 25, 2001
Messages
10,650
Steve Wozniak, Vinton Cerf and others wrote a letter to their congressional representatives to get them to ask the FCC chair to cancel the December 14 vote to repeal net neutrality. They wrote that the FCC had many misunderstandings in its approach to regulating the internet and that repeal without some kind of adequate replacement is a big mistake. It's a noble effort by these folks and I'm sure many of you have the same feelings as these internet/tech pioneers. However, I think I'm going to sit back and watch to see how this really works out before I call for heads. Check out their letter here.

This proposed Order would repeal key network neutrality protections that prevent Internet access providers from blocking content, websites and applications, slowing or speeding up services or classes of service, and charging online services for access or fast lanes to Internet access providers’ customers. The proposed Order would also repeal oversight over other unreasonable discrimination and unreasonable practices, and over interconnection with last-mile Internet access providers. The proposed Order removes long-standing FCC oversight over Internet access providers without an adequate replacement to protect consumers, free markets and online innovation.
 

Ultima99

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 31, 2004
Messages
4,905
Tim Berners-Lee doesn't deserve to be included in your short list with Woz and Cerf?
 

BSmith

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 9, 2017
Messages
1,323
I dunno. Maybe the letter was written on the back of a bank draft for a large sum of cash.

Well, smart people would realize that would be the only way to get any traction.
 

Zion Halcyon

2[H]4U
Joined
Dec 28, 2007
Messages
2,108
Steve Wozniak, Vinton Cerf and others wrote a letter to their congressional representatives to get them to ask the FCC chair to cancel the December 14 vote to repeal net neutrality. They wrote that the FCC had many misunderstandings in its approach to regulating the internet and that repeal without some kind of adequate replacement is a big mistake. It's a noble effort by these folks and I'm sure many of you have the same feelings as these internet/tech pioneers. However, I think I'm going to sit back and watch to see how this really works out before I call for heads. Check out their letter here.

This proposed Order would repeal key network neutrality protections that prevent Internet access providers from blocking content, websites and applications, slowing or speeding up services or classes of service, and charging online services for access or fast lanes to Internet access providers’ customers. The proposed Order would also repeal oversight over other unreasonable discrimination and unreasonable practices, and over interconnection with last-mile Internet access providers. The proposed Order removes long-standing FCC oversight over Internet access providers without an adequate replacement to protect consumers, free markets and online innovation.


I think you should take the net neutrality news from here on out. Smart approach waiting to see how it plays out before calling for the heads of people. Too many knee jerk reaction re people and also too many shills interwoven trying to push the silly idea of the internet all getting taken away.

When people start fear-mongering, I tune out because they are usually full of shit.
 

pek

prairie dog
Joined
Nov 7, 2005
Messages
1,938
Who's fear-mongering? They're asking to put the repeal on hold. Once it get's changed, it will be hell to get it reversed.
 

travisty

Gawd
Joined
Feb 3, 2016
Messages
815
Republicans are so full of hypocrisy.
"We're for freedom" my ass. Maybe freedom for corporations from having to listen to their customers.
"We're for decreasing the debt!" my ass. Increase the debt by another 1.5 trillion to give tax breaks to the wealthy individuals and corporations. Leaving the bottom paying $500 billion in extra taxes while the top save the same amount in taxes.

The Republicans are nothing but the lap dog of the rich. Yes there is a difference in the parties. Who you vote for does matter.

"Make America Great Again!" my ass
"Drain the swamp" HA!

More like, "Watch me make myself richer retards!"
 

SomeoneElse

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 16, 2007
Messages
1,940
Republicans are so full of hypocrisy.
"We're for freedom" my ass. Maybe freedom for corporations from having to listen to their customers.
"We're for decreasing the debt!" my ass. Increase the debt by another 1.5 trillion to give tax breaks to the wealthy individuals and corporations. Leaving the bottom paying $500 billion in extra taxes while the top save the same amount in taxes.

The Republicans are nothing but the lap dog of the rich. Yes there is a difference in the parties. Who you vote for does matter.

"Make America Great Again!" my ass
You realize its the same story for democrats too right? There are claims to be different but the politicians all serve the same purpose. Stop pointing at one party because that's part of the problem as a whole.
 

travisty

Gawd
Joined
Feb 3, 2016
Messages
815
You realize its the same story for democrats too right? There are claims to be different but the politicians all serve the same purpose. Stop pointing at one party because that's part of the problem as a whole.

Ah someone who's drunk the 'status quo' Kool-Aid.

Tell me how Obama took people's freedom.
Tell me how Clinton took people's freedom.
Tell me how Carter took people's freedom.

Do corporations have say in politics? Yes. How far the different parties are willing to go is different. Republicans bend over and present their butts. Democrats, for the most part, are more protective of people's well being.

Republicans?
  • Trump posts hate tweets against Muslims NY Times
  • Republicans do everything they can to repeal Affordable Care Act causing almost 13 million people to lose their insurance so corporations can save money Washington Post.
  • Republicans don't include CHIP (Children's Health Insurance Program) which could run out of money in months causing 8 million children to go uninsured PBS Newshour
  • Republican-lead states decrease number of early voting days, decrease voting locations (mostly in predominantly minority dense areas), and make it harder to vote which all hurt minority turnout. Washington Post

For the Republicans, unless you're rich and white you don't matter.
 
Last edited:

Gigus Fire

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Messages
2,275
Republicans are so full of hypocrisy.
"We're for freedom" my ass. Maybe freedom for corporations from having to listen to their customers.
"We're for decreasing the debt!" my ass. Increase the debt by another 1.5 trillion to give tax breaks to the wealthy individuals and corporations. Leaving the bottom paying $500 billion in extra taxes while the top save the same amount in taxes.

The Republicans are nothing but the lap dog of the rich. Yes there is a difference in the parties. Who you vote for does matter.

"Make America Great Again!" my ass
"Drain the swamp" HA!

More like, "Watch me make myself richer retards!"
Democrats - we're all against sexual abuse!
Al Franken - Grope grope

Honestly, both democrats and republicans can be the scummiest people on earth. You know what they have in common? They're both politicians.
There are almost no good/honest/worthy politicians in DC.
Show me either side that's not full of hypocrisy.
 

travisty

Gawd
Joined
Feb 3, 2016
Messages
815
Democrats - we're all against sexual abuse!
Al Franken - Grope grope

Honestly, both democrats and republicans can be the scummiest people on earth. You know what they have in common? They're both politicians.
There are almost no good/honest/worthy politicians in DC.
Show me either side that's not full of hypocrisy.

And Al Franken resigned.

And Trump should resign to. Instead he's all for an alleged child molester Roy Moore.

Yes there are always bad apples. At least the Democrats don't welcome child molesters and known rapists to continue to serve.


I will say this. I would respect the Republican party if it was the Republican party of old - see David Brooks for a good example. It's current radical right form is a horrible mockery of US values.
 

Gigus Fire

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Messages
2,275
And Al Franken resigned.

And Trump should resign to. Instead he's all for an alleged child molester Roy Moore.

Yes there are always bad apples. At least the Democrats don't welcome child molesters and known rapists to continue to serve.


I will say this. I would respect the Republican party if it was the Republican party of old - see David Brooks for a good example. It's current radical right form is a horrible mockery of US values.
Was Bill Clinton a democrat or a republican? Can you remind me, i forget.

Both parties don't represent american values. The left is filled with social justice warrior leaning policies. https://today.yougov.com/news/2015/05/20/hate-speech/
I thought Americans stood for free speech and would fight for your right to say what you want to. I guess not today's democrats.
 

Bigbacon

Fully [H]
Joined
Jul 12, 2007
Messages
19,568
why do they even bother. FCC is going to get rid of it no matter what. there could be riots across the country over it and they would still do it.
 

Biznatch

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 16, 2009
Messages
2,224
Was Bill Clinton a democrat or a republican? Can you remind me, i forget.

Both parties don't represent american values. The left is filled with social justice warrior leaning policies. https://today.yougov.com/news/2015/05/20/hate-speech/
I thought Americans stood for free speech and would fight for your right to say what you want to. I guess not today's democrats.


Were the police out there arresting people for their speech? Then their 1st amendment rights were not violated... That's all it protects you from. It does not mean people have to listen to the hate filled verbal diarrhea spewing from their face anuses, and it doesn't mean we can't protest shit like that either.
 

travisty

Gawd
Joined
Feb 3, 2016
Messages
815
Was Bill Clinton a democrat or a republican? Can you remind me, i forget.

Both parties don't represent american values. The left is filled with social justice warrior leaning policies. https://today.yougov.com/news/2015/05/20/hate-speech/
I thought Americans stood for free speech and would fight for your right to say what you want to. I guess not today's democrats.

In Bill Clinton's case he was impeached by the House. Also let's remember what Clinton was impeached for - lying under oath. Which is atrocious. He also had extramarital affairs - which is not illegal - and with a consenting individual - in this case Monica Lewinsky.

As for your post it's laughable. Sure liberals may support banning hate speech. Has that happened? No. Because it's unconstitutional to ban hate speech.

This is the same as flag burning. I'm sure most republicans - heck probably most Americans - are against it. Yet there's no ban on that because the constitution protects the act of burning the american flag. Yeah most Americans support banning the burning of the flag
(Note: I am for the protection to burn the flag as I view it as a freedom of speech)
 
Last edited:

MarkVI

Limp Gawd
Joined
Sep 30, 2014
Messages
215
Democrats - we're all against sexual abuse!
Al Franken - Grope grope

Honestly, both democrats and republicans can be the scummiest people on earth. You know what they have in common? They're both politicians.
There are almost no good/honest/worthy politicians in DC.
Show me either side that's not full of hypocrisy.

While both can be awful, don't fall into the trap of "what about-ism." Not all failings share moral equivalency. If every time someone points out a fault you say "what about X, Y, and Z" you are saying that since nobody is perfect, nothing matters. Did Clinton screw up with the e-mail thing? Yes. Did she game the primary system? Yep. Are these remotely the same thing as ripping of people that work for you, sexually assaulting women, potentially colluding with a foreign power, engaging in hate speech/fear mongering, deliberately sabotaging government agencies, not bothering to prepare to do the most important job in the world (check out what his energy dept folks did in the transition), engaging in brinkmanship with Kim Jong Un, etc., etc., etc. I certainly don't think so.

What Franken did was wrong. What Roy Moore has been credibly alleged to have done is far worse. Groping a woman is abhorrent behavior, but stalking teenagers is another whole level, especially since he is supposed to be the "moral, Christian" candidate.

Back to tech: Obama's industry insider, Wheeler, actually seemed to give a crap about us. Pai is the worst shill since Bob Bedinghaus. Who wants to bet that, like Bedinghaus with the Bengals, he gets a lifetime reward afterward of a cushy industry job for selling out the taxpayers?
 

BSmith

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 9, 2017
Messages
1,323
Sheesh, those of you sucking in the teets of a political party need to get over yourself.

In my opinion, today, there are ZERO politicians who are looking to do the right thing for anyone they are supposed to be representing.

They are all in it for themselves or their party, in that order. If you think otherwise, then you are a contributing member of the problem(s) we face today.

If your desire to maintain your toys overwhelms doing what it takes to send a message, then you are a contributing member of the problem(s) we face today.

Now you can go full speed ahead with your rationalizations.
 

travisty

Gawd
Joined
Feb 3, 2016
Messages
815
Sheesh, those of you sucking in the teets of a political party need to get over yourself.

In my opinion, today, there are ZERO politicians who are looking to do the right thing for anyone they are supposed to be representing.

They are all in it for themselves or their party, in that order. If you think otherwise, then you are a contributing member of the problem(s) we face today.

If your desire to maintain your toys overwhelms doing what it takes to send a message, then you are a contributing member of the problem(s) we face today.

Now you can go full speed ahead with your rationalizations.

Then who do you vote for? Who do you support? How do you hold your elected official accountable?

Or have you given up?

If the later you are not protecting the United States. As a representative-democracy it is imperative that the people stay informed and hold their elected officials accountable.

In response to being asked what they (the founding fathers) had created, Benjamin Franklin responded, "A republic, if you can keep it."
 

Biznatch

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 16, 2009
Messages
2,224
Sheesh, those of you sucking in the teets of a political party need to get over yourself.

In my opinion, today, there are ZERO politicians who are looking to do the right thing for anyone they are supposed to be representing.

They are all in it for themselves or their party, in that order. If you think otherwise, then you are a contributing member of the problem(s) we face today.

If your desire to maintain your toys overwhelms doing what it takes to send a message, then you are a contributing member of the problem(s) we face today.

Now you can go full speed ahead with your rationalizations.


Well your opinion would be wrong. There might not be a lot, but there are politicians that are acting like the public servants they are and trying to do good for their community/constituents. Too bad they get totally drowned out by the shit show going on in Washington right now. While both sides share some blame, the GOP is working the hardest to proper fuck everyone to help the rich/corporations. And their stupid cult followers just eat it up cuz "lib tearz". Hell they'd rather have a child molester in office over a 'liberal'.... Seriously, how can anyone be so utterly stupid? Oh yea, it's because we've been de-funding education for decades.....
 

SomeoneElse

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 16, 2007
Messages
1,940
Then who do you vote for? Who do you support? How do you hold your elected official accountable?

Or have you given up?

If the later you are not protecting the United States. As a representative-democracy it is imperative that the people stay informed and hold their elected officials accountable.

In response to being asked what they (the founding fathers) had created, Benjamin Franklin responded, "A republic, if you can keep it."
No whats amazing is you holding one party above the other when BOTH are in the news for the same shit.....we are all saying they all need to held accountable but you are touting that one group is better than the other.....BOTH suck you can't argue that....
 

BSmith

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 9, 2017
Messages
1,323
Then who do you vote for? Who do you support? How do you hold your elected official accountable?

Or have you given up?

If the later you are not protecting the United States. As a representative-democracy it is imperative that the people stay informed and hold their elected officials accountable.

In response to being asked what they (the founding fathers) had created, Benjamin Franklin responded, "A republic, if you can keep it."

Fair question.

I have given up voting *for* anyone. I now vote against people. In the last several elections, I have voted for people who I would never vote for if there was a better choice. The choices seem to get worse each election cycle, instead of better.

There is no "holding anyone accountable" anymore, from what I can see. Seems the worse that can happen to them is they retire from office and go to work for some government funded agency outside of the public eye. Sure, you can vote for someone else next election, but they are all cut from the same party block and so we just keep repeating the same mistakes over and over again. I do not see it changing in my lifetime.

You asked a fair question. Now it is my turn. Do you know how your representatives voted on everything this year? If you do, then good on you. I know far too many people who have no idea what their representatives are doing, outside of some reporters blog.
 

BSmith

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 9, 2017
Messages
1,323
Well your opinion would be wrong. There might not be a lot, but there are politicians that are acting like the public servants they are and trying to do good for their community/constituents. Too bad they get totally drowned out by the shit show going on in Washington right now. While both sides share some blame, the GOP is working the hardest to proper fuck everyone to help the rich/corporations. And their stupid cult followers just eat it up cuz "lib tearz". Hell they'd rather have a child molester in office over a 'liberal'.... Seriously, how can anyone be so utterly stupid? Oh yea, it's because we've been de-funding education for decades.....

Well, I wish I knew anyone who was trying to act in the best interests of their constituents. I see no difference in either party. They are both trying to make the other look bad and have both obfuscated anything potentially good for the citizens of this country, or those who would defend this country.
 

Biznatch

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 16, 2009
Messages
2,224
Well, I wish I knew anyone who was trying to act in the best interests of their constituents. I see no difference in either party. They are both trying to make the other look bad and have both obfuscated anything potentially good for the citizens of this country, or those who would defend this country.


The closest we had recently in the national spotlight would be Bernie. May not have agreed with all his policies, but you knew what you were getting with him. Solid past in office, not flip flopping every day to appease whoever he's talking to etc. Too bad the dems proper fucked him and ended up leaving us with trump, screwing us all in the process. And it looks like they didn't learn a damn thing, so I don't expect better from either party next term.

People need to get out and vote next year during midterms, because the GOP is abusing the shit out of their majority and we are all going to get screwed. At least with the majority removed, it will be politics as usual. Nothing getting done because the parties are more concerned with stopping the other side from doing anything, than they are about being bipartisan to help the fucking people they should represent....
 

nysmo

Gawd
Joined
Jan 7, 2016
Messages
948
Smart approach waiting to see how it plays out before calling for the heads of people. Too many knee jerk reaction re people and also too many shills interwoven trying to push the silly idea of the internet all getting taken away.

When people start fear-mongering, I tune out because they are usually full of shit.
I think we should just let this whole Title II thing play out. Too many knee jerk reactionaries and too many corporate shills interwoven trying to push the silly idea of the internet all getting gov't regulated and monitored away.
 

jardows

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 10, 2015
Messages
2,108
Wow, this thread went downhill fast.

On topic, and I'm ready to get flamed for this, but we need to stop calling it a repeal of Net Neutrality. It is a repeal of the FCC taking over the Internet. Net Neutrality is just a small part of this. Get this abomination of a government power grab out of the way, then we can have a real (though probably not sane) discussion of real Net Neutrality.
 

BSmith

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 9, 2017
Messages
1,323
We would not need "Net Neutrality" if we had proper competition in place, instead of these regional monopolies. It took a lot of failures in the system to get us here. Now we are stuck trying to put a bandaid on something which should have never had to exist in the first place.

I think all those monopolies should be taxed with that money being put towards building out a neutral physical communcations network in those areas impacted by monopolistic practices. Would serve those asshats right.

Well, it is the people's fault first. We let those monopolies grow into the power houses they are today. Anyway,...just a thought.
 

panhead

Gawd
Joined
Dec 19, 2003
Messages
902
Sheesh, those of you sucking in the teets of a political party need to get over yourself.

In my opinion, today, there are ZERO politicians who are looking to do the right thing for anyone they are supposed to be representing.

They are all in it for themselves or their party, in that order. If you think otherwise, then you are a contributing member of the problem(s) we face today.

As long as R's and D's are in office, nothing will change.
 

panhead

Gawd
Joined
Dec 19, 2003
Messages
902
Well, I wish I knew anyone who was trying to act in the best interests of their constituents. I see no difference in either party.

Their constituents are their corporate donors and they are acting in their best interests all the time.
 

travisty

Gawd
Joined
Feb 3, 2016
Messages
815
You asked a fair question. Now it is my turn. Do you know how your representatives voted on everything this year? If you do, then good on you. I know far too many people who have no idea what their representatives are doing, outside of some reporters blog.

I do for the legislation I care about. Michael Bennet is my representative in the Senate and Ken Buck representative in the House.
Ken Buck is a spineless twerp. i plan to do everything i can to make sure he is not re-elected
Michael Bennet has for the most part supported what I want him to. He will continue to get my vote.
 

lcpiper

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 16, 2008
Messages
10,611
Who's fear-mongering? They're asking to put the repeal on hold. Once it get's changed, it will be hell to get it reversed.

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals originally refused to here the FTC's appeal because the court wanted to wait for this decision. They didn't want to be in a position to make a ruling when they knew the FTC was going to vote on a change and possibly reclassify the Internet as Title I.

That's the whole problem here. The court already ruled that the FCC can change how they classify the internet any time they want, and even change it back later if they want. The FCC was granted the power to do so. So the court is waiting on the FCC to vote, and the FCC knows it. Asking the FCC to wait for the court is backwards to what is going on up there.

But, first thing's first, it's always useful to go back and look at the original argument.
https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/blo...-data-throttling-case-against-att-inside-look

Then let's see how it's playing out;
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy...atus-helps-it-defeat-data-throttling-lawsuit/
AT&T’s common carrier status helps it defeat data throttling lawsuit
Here is the court document;
https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2016/08/29/15-16585.pdf
This is a three Judge panel with one more Judge presiding to "keep the three focused and straight.

So the FTC sued AT&T for throttling and lost, so the FTC appealed.
And the outcome was;
AT&T appealed that decision to the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which today issued a decision in AT&T’s favor (full text). Appeals court judges had to decide whether the common carrier exception applies to all activity by AT&T or whether it applies only to activities related to one of AT&T's common carrier services.

“AT&T advocates a status-based interpretation of the exemption, arguing that its status as a common carrier under the Communications Act shields it from liability under Section 5 [of the FTC Act] even as to non-common carrier activity,” a court panel said in a decision written by Judge Richard Clifton. “We conclude, based on the language and structure of the FTC Act, that the common carrier exception is a status-based exemption... Because AT&T was a common carrier, it cannot be liable for the violations alleged by the FTC.”

But the FTC wasn't happy and still had options. Since this was only a 3 Judge Panel, the FTC could ask for a full review by a full session of the court, and they did.
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy...-fight-against-att-unlimited-data-throttling/
The FTC's options include seeking a rehearing of the case in front of the entire Ninth Circuit appeals court, and that is what the commission will do. "We are going to be seeking a rehearing in that matter," FTC Chairwoman Edith Ramirez told US senators during an FTC oversight hearing yesterday. If the FTC fails at the appeals court level, it could take the matter to the US Supreme Court, but Ramirez did not address that possibility.

And now the court is going to rehear this case under a full session of the court. Keep in mind that if they didn't think something was worth re-looking, they didn't have to rehear the case.

You know, this vote by the FCC is still a vote, the conclusion isn't set, it could go either way.

It sure looks like it matters to the court so I think the vote has to come first, and the FCC sure sounds like they are not going to do it any other way.
 

Dekoth-E-

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 23, 2010
Messages
7,599
I think you should take the net neutrality news from here on out. Smart approach waiting to see how it plays out before calling for the heads of people. Too many knee jerk reaction re people and also too many shills interwoven trying to push the silly idea of the internet all getting taken away.

When people start fear-mongering, I tune out because they are usually full of shit.

There are also far too many people that conveniently forgot the long list of crap ISP's were starting to pull which was why NN came into existence to begin with.
 

viper1152012

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
1,025
I would point out that many reputable people in the field of technology are speaking in a unified front and one group of lawmakers is pushing the legislation through because they have lobbiest monies....

People notice these things.

Remember if they had to display sponsors like NASCAR drivers do they would be covered in logos.
 

lcpiper

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 16, 2008
Messages
10,611
I would point out that many reputable people in the field of technology are speaking in a unified front and one group of lawmakers is pushing the legislation through because they have lobbiest monies....

People notice these things.

Remember if they had to display sponsors like NASCAR drivers do they would be covered in logos.


I want to make sure that I am getting your point right .....

You are saying that Pai and others are pushing for re-classification of the internet under Title I, (from Title II), because big business lobbyists are handing out the bucks, while at the same time, they are asking for a delay in the FTC's vote?

Or are you saying that lobbyists, from companies like Comcast, Verizon, and AT&T are pushing a few corrupt shills like Pai and others, to push through legislation that will completely fuck them, just like in this AT&T case, and that other "reputable people" of standing in the IT Industry want to stop it for some reason?

I do like the NACAR image thingy though.
 
Last edited:

lcpiper

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 16, 2008
Messages
10,611
Perhaps you would care to enlighten us with a portion of that list?

I wouldn't mind seeing a list myself but I do know that there are several examples of companies taking advantage of consumers on cell phone, internet, and carrier related tactics.

Of course we heard about most of them because the FTC or the FCC was suing them over it.

Just one more thing of note. When the FCC sues a business for fucking people over, they can only make the companies pay a fine. But when the FTC sues a business for fucking people over, the FTC can force the company to pay back the people they fucked over.

It's just a small thing that' could be useful to point out.
 

Kalabalana

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 18, 2005
Messages
1,313
Steve Wozniak, Vinton Cerf and others wrote a letter to their congressional representatives to get them to ask the FCC chair to cancel the December 14 vote to repeal net neutrality. They wrote that the FCC had many misunderstandings in its approach to regulating the internet and that repeal without some kind of adequate replacement is a big mistake. It's a noble effort by these folks and I'm sure many of you have the same feelings as these internet/tech pioneers. However, I think I'm going to sit back and watch to see how this really works out before I call for heads. Check out their letter here.

This proposed Order would repeal key network neutrality protections that prevent Internet access providers from blocking content, websites and applications, slowing or speeding up services or classes of service, and charging online services for access or fast lanes to Internet access providers’ customers. The proposed Order would also repeal oversight over other unreasonable discrimination and unreasonable practices, and over interconnection with last-mile Internet access providers. The proposed Order removes long-standing FCC oversight over Internet access providers without an adequate replacement to protect consumers, free markets and online innovation.

What? Come on man.

This should be a simple bipartisan issue - do not give companies control of how you use the internet, because they will betray that trust, and make you pay for it. Pay a lot.

The idea of a utopia is a great one, but let's look at things, like healthcare in American, and realize, the system is being exploited (which will always happens, but we want to minimize opportunity for this, rather than have a wait and see approach).
 
Last edited:

viper1152012

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
1,025
I want to make sure that I am getting your point right .....

You are saying that Pai and others are pushing for re-classification of the internet under Title I, (from Title II), because big business lobbyists are handing out the bucks, while at the same time, they are asking for a delay in the FTC's vote?

Or are you saying that lobbyists, from companies like Comcast, Verizon, and AT&T are pushing a few corrupt shills like Pai and others, to push through legislation that will completely fuck them, just like in this AT&T case, and that other "reputable people" of standing in the IT Industry want to stop it for some reason?

I do like the NACAR image thingy though.
Second part. I hate lobbiest.
 
Top