TOPICS:
APR 23, 2008 04:14 PM
RudieCantFail
I'm lost
January 2006
APR 23, 2008 04:17 PM
APR 23, 2008 04:45 PM
APR 23, 2008 06:25 PM
APR 23, 2008 08:01 PM
APR 23, 2008 09:17 PM
I suddenly feel the urge to stand up for this issue. 
APR 23, 2008 09:21 PM
APR 24, 2008 06:10 PM
AceT
Portland, OR
April 2004
APR 24, 2008 06:29 PM
APR 24, 2008 06:43 PM
APR 24, 2008 08:38 PM
where was she 10 years ago?!? 
_kungfoo_
Los Angeles, CA
April 2005
APR 24, 2008 09:29 PM
livertarian said:
bean said:
livertarian said:
Your dollars are the only weapon against these problems, not your votes for more regulation. Taking these worries to Washington only makes matters worse. Vote Libertarian.
Okay, at some point, the government is going to either allow or deny corporations' plans to prioritize bandwidth based on payments from sites and web services. I'd prefer they denied them. That's why I'm voting for Barack Obama.
If you want to live in an imaginary world where there is no FCC and every consumer has free access to all of the information they need to make an informed decision about every product and service they use (and where there are no service provider monopolies), then by all means, have fun in your fantasy land. For those of us in the real world who want to keep corporations from controlling the internet now, there is an option.
Ah yes. The Libertarian once again gets schooled with "reality".
The reality is that gov't will always be in bed with business. I absolutely think we should get rid of the FCC. Obama's message is seriously crippled by the fact that he's talking about a regulatory agency, that most fickle and political of concepts. Every agency is corrupt - EPA, HUD, FCC - it's a long list.
I say 'vote libertarian' because I care, and I have considered all the past and ongoing failures of ever-growing government. I live in the same world you do. Reduce power for all, equally.
Take two libertariynol and call me in the morning. It'll cure what ails ya.
Seriously, can you please explain how voting Libertarian will protect the openness and neutrality of the Internet? Reducing the power of the government to regulate ISPs helps how?
livertarian
Fairfax, VA
February 2008
APR 24, 2008 09:49 PM
KUNGFOO said:
livertarian said:
bean said:
livertarian said:
Your dollars are the only weapon against these problems, not your votes for more regulation. Taking these worries to Washington only makes matters worse. Vote Libertarian.
Okay, at some point, the government is going to either allow or deny corporations' plans to prioritize bandwidth based on payments from sites and web services. I'd prefer they denied them. That's why I'm voting for Barack Obama.
If you want to live in an imaginary world where there is no FCC and every consumer has free access to all of the information they need to make an informed decision about every product and service they use (and where there are no service provider monopolies), then by all means, have fun in your fantasy land. For those of us in the real world who want to keep corporations from controlling the internet now, there is an option.
Ah yes. The Libertarian once again gets schooled with "reality".
The reality is that gov't will always be in bed with business. I absolutely think we should get rid of the FCC. Obama's message is seriously crippled by the fact that he's talking about a regulatory agency, that most fickle and political of concepts. Every agency is corrupt - EPA, HUD, FCC - it's a long list.
I say 'vote libertarian' because I care, and I have considered all the past and ongoing failures of ever-growing government. I live in the same world you do. Reduce power for all, equally.
Take two libertariynol and call me in the morning. It'll cure what ails ya.
Seriously, can you please explain how voting Libertarian will protect the openness and neutrality of the Internet? Reducing the power of the government to regulate ISPs helps how?
There is no guarantee of protecting Net Neutrality. Libertarianism only promises to give consumers this power, which may mean we're fucked, of course. But it's the only possible way. Government regulation absolutely guarantees the demise of internet openness, by contrast. Regulators make deals with big business - it's their job.
If you want to pick examples, look no further than FCC. They just gave AT&T and Verizon near total control of the 700mHz bandwidth, for example. They have always sided with Bell in negotiations for increasing competition in whatever market Bell chooses to be in (note that I use the singular "Bell", as I do not believe their monopoly ever ended, despite what the gov't would have you think. The Baby Bells act as one.) There are major corporate exemptions and special provisions in the '96 Telcom Act - a Clinton era move. Obama's promise to put a pro-NN guy in the FCC only buys these companies a little bit more time to get their pitch together. But it will happen.
_kungfoo_
Los Angeles, CA
April 2005
APR 24, 2008 10:17 PM
livertarian said:
KUNGFOO said:
livertarian said:
bean said:
livertarian said:
Your dollars are the only weapon against these problems, not your votes for more regulation. Taking these worries to Washington only makes matters worse. Vote Libertarian.
Okay, at some point, the government is going to either allow or deny corporations' plans to prioritize bandwidth based on payments from sites and web services. I'd prefer they denied them. That's why I'm voting for Barack Obama.
If you want to live in an imaginary world where there is no FCC and every consumer has free access to all of the information they need to make an informed decision about every product and service they use (and where there are no service provider monopolies), then by all means, have fun in your fantasy land. For those of us in the real world who want to keep corporations from controlling the internet now, there is an option.
Ah yes. The Libertarian once again gets schooled with "reality".
The reality is that gov't will always be in bed with business. I absolutely think we should get rid of the FCC. Obama's message is seriously crippled by the fact that he's talking about a regulatory agency, that most fickle and political of concepts. Every agency is corrupt - EPA, HUD, FCC - it's a long list.
I say 'vote libertarian' because I care, and I have considered all the past and ongoing failures of ever-growing government. I live in the same world you do. Reduce power for all, equally.
Take two libertariynol and call me in the morning. It'll cure what ails ya.
Seriously, can you please explain how voting Libertarian will protect the openness and neutrality of the Internet? Reducing the power of the government to regulate ISPs helps how?
There is no guarantee of protecting Net Neutrality. Libertarianism only promises to give consumers this power, which may mean we're fucked, of course. But it's the only possible way. Government regulation absolutely guarantees the demise of internet openness, by contrast. Regulators make deals with big business - it's their job.
If you want to pick examples, look no further than FCC. They just gave AT&T and Verizon near total control of the 700mHz bandwidth, for example. They have always sided with Bell in negotiations for increasing competition in whatever market Bell chooses to be in (note that I use the singular "Bell", as I do not believe their monopoly ever ended, despite what the gov't would have you think. The Baby Bells act as one.) There are major corporate exemptions and special provisions in the '96 Telcom Act - a Clinton era move. Obama's promise to put a pro-NN guy in the FCC only buys these companies a little bit more time to get their pitch together. But it will happen.
Comparing the auctioning of the analog TV frequency spectrum to network neutrality is a horrible comparison. The 700MHz spectrum is, by nature, of limited bandwidth; whereas the Internet is far more interminable (based upon hardware infrastructure and addressing schemes). And they didn't give the spectrum to the telcos, it was auctioned off for almost 20 billion dollars and with specific provision about public use. The lack of understanding of the auction leads me to believe that you lack understanding of the network neutrality idea. It isn't anti-corporate anymore than it is pro-consumer. Quite simply, the idea is that every packet of data will be treated the same; exactly how the internet works now. Network neutrality isn't akin to the regulation of the frequency spectrum.
You're right though, there is no guarantee of network neutrality. Obama could turn his back on it once in office. But at least we have a promise, which is far more than Libertarians are offering in the form of 'consumer choice'.
Of course any business could set up a massively expensive internet backbone, the free market solves all ills; I have a great, wide selection of one broadband ISP here in Omaha /sarcasm.
TwistedAngel
United Kingdom
December 2007
APR 23, 2008 03:55 PM