Azalin Posted February 24, 2015 Share Posted February 24, 2015 The FCC plans to vote on it's proposal for Net Neutrality today, a 300+ page document which hasn't been shared outside the agency. Two of the FCC commissioners, as well as rep Chaffetz (R Utah who chairs the House Oversight Committee) are calling on the FCC to wait 30 days before the vote, and to make the document available for public scrutiny in the meantime, since it will effectively give the federal government regulatory control over the web, There's a lot of material available online about this, both pro & con. I'm linking one that doesn't appear to be taking sides one way or the other. http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2015/02/23/house-chairman-urges-fcc-transparency/23882079/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 24, 2015 Share Posted February 24, 2015 Obama’s Move To Regulate Internet Has Activists’ ‘Fingerprints All Over It’ The Obama White House has worked directly with online activists to pressure the Federal Communications Commission to regulate the internet. The Commission is expected to vote on the president’s “net neutrality” policy on Thursday. According to White House visitor logs, on September 23, 2014, Obama senior internet advisor David Edelman met with 30 netroots activists and executives from Spitfire Strategies. Spitfire is a public relations firm that received over $2 million from the Ford Foundation since 2009 to create PR and media strategy relating to net neutrality. During the hour-long meeting, the Obama White House appears to have collaborated with the netroots activists and PR media professionals to create the notion that the public truly wants Title II regulation applied to the internet. The activists have even celebrated President Obama’s loyalty to their cause in emails to their factions of supporters. Six weeks later in November, Obama announced his Title II internet regulation proposal in a video statement. The president’s video used an ample amount of the activists’ messaging, including a fake “buffering” gag that showed viewers the well-known “site loading” circular animation. Fight For The Future’s Evan Greer, another participant whose organization was represented at the White House in September, lauded the president for using their messaging. One day after the video was released, he wrote to his fellow activists: “We’ve been hearing for weeks from our allies in DC that the only thing that could stop FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler from moving ahead with his sham proposal to gut net neutrality was if we could get the President to step in. So we did everything in our power to make that happen. We took the gloves off and played hard, and now we get to celebrate a sweet victory.” more at the link: http://dailycaller.com/2015/02/23/obamas-move-to-regulate-internet-has-activists-fingerprints-all-over-it/ "The internet should not operate at the speed of government!" -Sen. Ted Cruz............... #NoNetNeutrality . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 24, 2015 Share Posted February 24, 2015 Senator Obama: ‘Irresponsible’ For FCC To Vote On Rules Unreleased To The Public. That Senator Obama seemed like a sensible fellow. Too bad he’s not President now. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted February 24, 2015 Author Share Posted February 24, 2015 (edited) Senator Obama: ‘Irresponsible’ For FCC To Vote On Rules Unreleased To The Public. That Senator Obama seemed like a sensible fellow. Too bad he’s not President now. . Obama had called for a 90 day review period back then, and Chaffetz is getting pushback from a request for a 30 day review period now? People don't seem to realize what's at stake here. This will have a tremendous impact on IT, web content, speed, cost, and accessibility down the road. Edited February 24, 2015 by Azalin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary M Posted February 24, 2015 Share Posted February 24, 2015 will I have to pay a "shared responsibility payment" if I don't have DSL? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted February 24, 2015 Share Posted February 24, 2015 Net neutrality is a hoax. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted February 24, 2015 Share Posted February 24, 2015 will I have to pay a "shared responsibility payment" if I don't have DSL? DSL is an outdated technology that if left to the Free Market would not survive against Cable, FIOS, 4G, Google Fiber, etc. If it moves, tax it If it keeps moving, regulate it If it stops moving, subsidize it So yes, a shared DSL subsidy is the only patriotic thing to do Forward! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted February 24, 2015 Share Posted February 24, 2015 Net neutrality is a hoax.Proceed... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 Proceed... Who's the aggrieved party and who are the regulations supposed to protect? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 Who's the aggrieved party and who are the regulations supposed to protect? You've opined. By all means continue to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 You've opined. By all means continue to do so. I also asked a question, which usually should elicit an answer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 I also asked a question, which usually should elicit an answer I'll gladly oblige, once you've completed your position statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 I'll gladly oblige, once you've completed your position statement. I did. It's a hoax perpetrated on a gullible audience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 I did. It's a hoax perpetrated on a gullible audience.That's not an argument. That's a fiat declaration. If you've made a prior argument, please link it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 That's not an argument. That's a fiat declaration. If you've made a prior argument, please link it. You seem to like using that word. Yes it's a declaration, just like the search function in this forum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted February 25, 2015 Author Share Posted February 25, 2015 Net neutrality is a hoax. I'd be interested in hearing how it's a hoax. I work in telecom, and I'd love to know that my industry won't be negatively affected by any of this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 I'd be interested in hearing how it's a hoax. I work in telecom, and I'd love to know that my industry won't be negatively affected by any of this. Of course it will be negatively affected by the hoax that's driving the new regulations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 You seem to like using that word. Yes it's a declaration, just like the search function in this forum Stop being a !@#$. It's not my job to research every post you've made, or argument you've participated in. Those arguments closed with those threads. You're free to link or quote those arguments, as I do when I reference mine, or you're free to be a !@#$. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 I think that there's enough in my posts to outline my position, it's a hoax based on who's supposed to be aggrieved and who's supposed to be relieved by the regulations. Not that hard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted February 25, 2015 Author Share Posted February 25, 2015 (edited) I think that there's enough in my posts to outline my position, it's a hoax based on who's supposed to be aggrieved and who's supposed to be relieved by the regulations. Not that hard. That's true. It's Al Gore's baby anyway. Move along. Nothing to see here. Edited February 25, 2015 by Azalin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts