Sign Up | Log In
REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS
Musicians Campaign for Net Neutrality
Wednesday, March 28, 2007 5:54 AM
DEEPGIRL187
Wednesday, March 28, 2007 9:57 AM
DAYVE
Wednesday, March 28, 2007 10:36 AM
SOUPCATCHER
Thursday, March 29, 2007 12:48 AM
Thursday, March 29, 2007 3:13 AM
HERO
Quote:Originally posted by SoupCatcher: Important fights take a long time. On the side of anti-net neutrality is power and money and influence. On the side of net neutrality is numbers. This is going to be an uphill battle for quite some time.
Thursday, March 29, 2007 3:22 AM
KHYRON
Quote:Originally posted by Hero: Even the wild west needed laws and a sherriff to protect folks and their property.
Thursday, March 29, 2007 5:30 AM
SIGNYM
I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.
Thursday, March 29, 2007 6:08 AM
Thursday, March 29, 2007 7:04 AM
Quote:Originally posted by Hero: You still have not convinced me that its a good thing. Seems like alot of folk favoring Net-neutrality are turning a blind eye to copyright infringement, fraud, and child pornography. Even the wild west needed laws and a sherriff to protect folks and their property.
Thursday, March 29, 2007 9:30 AM
Quote:Originally posted by SignyM: Hero, how does your response relate to "net neutrality"? Porn, fraud and copyright protection have nothing to do with the issue so far as I can tell.
Quote:be able to reach any website regardless of its origin...or block access to certain site for political reasons
Thursday, March 29, 2007 9:38 AM
Quote:Originally posted by SoupCatcher: I see no margin in trying to convince someone who is predisposed to corporation-self-regulation that they should worry about, and take steps to protect, the little guy.
Thursday, March 29, 2007 11:20 AM
Quote:Originally posted by Hero: Oh, I understand. You were trying to rally the 0.0003% of the population that support this idea. Good strategy. I prefer to try and expand those who support my policy goals by educating folk who don't know about or understand the issues (this can backfire since some folk once educated will respectfully choose to disagree with me) and convincing those folk who disagree with me to either change their minds or accept a reasonable compromise. For example, I would be willing to support Net Neutral legislation that created safeguards against illegal activity especially involving the exploitation of children and/or copyright infringement. You disagree?
Thursday, March 29, 2007 3:29 PM
FREMDFIRMA
Quote:Add some safeguards against illegal activity or activity that threatens the country's political, economic, and national security
Thursday, March 29, 2007 5:11 PM
6IXSTRINGJACK
Thursday, March 29, 2007 6:06 PM
Quote:but nether side, to me, seems to say that we just want to leave the Net the way it is today, which would be just fine with me.
Quote:but I don't give them any more weight or credibility than a presidential campaign commercial. As much as they make sense to me they just reek of bullshit. Nothing but a bunch of soundbytes and rhetoric to further confuse us into making ill-informend decisions.
Thursday, March 29, 2007 6:24 PM
Thursday, March 29, 2007 7:17 PM
Thursday, March 29, 2007 7:57 PM
Thursday, March 29, 2007 11:02 PM
Quote:My phone company does not have the right to decide which phone calls I receive. My cable company has the right to decide which cable channels I receive.
Thursday, March 29, 2007 11:12 PM
Thursday, March 29, 2007 11:47 PM
Wednesday, April 4, 2007 7:52 AM
Quote:Last Thursday, the Republican chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, an independent government organization which oversees all non-federal communications agencies and implements policy, decided to launch an inquiry into the much-debated issue of Internet network neutrality. The inquiry showcases the FCC's foot-dragging approach to tackling an issue that demands immediate action in order to prevent abuse, or worse - negligence. Network neutrality is the most fundamentally underlying concept behind the Internet, ensuring that all content is handled equally, regardless of its source or ownership. It is the reason we are able to view, at the same speed, both the smallest blog and the largest corporate Web site. Major corporations, such as AT&T, Verizon, Comcast and Time Warner, own the fiber-optic cables used to transmit data that act as the backbone of the modern Internet. In 2005, SBC CEO Ed Whiteacre reasoned that in order to see a return on his fiber-optic cable investment, he would charge customers for their connection to Internet service providers, or ISPs, and then charge content providers (Google, Ebay, etc.) for access to those customers. Those who don't want to pay this "royalty" would be subjected to slower speeds, less visibility and decreased functionality. In addition, these network providers, without net neutrality, would be able to completely block access to their competitors. If it's a money thing for Whiteacre and his contemporaries, let's look at the numbers. The combined annual revenues of AT&T, Verizon, Time Warner and Comcast exceed $200 billion. Profit above all else and discrimination aren't the only forces Internet users would have to reckon with; the very structure of the Internet would be challenged. SavetheInternet.com, a nonprofit organization made up of hundreds of groups from a diverse political and social spectrum, posits that the Internet's openness has served as a catalyst for economic innovation, fueled democratic participation and buoyed free speech. All of this is at stake.
Friday, July 29, 2022 5:05 AM
JAYNEZTOWN
Friday, July 29, 2022 11:41 AM
YOUR OPTIONS
NEW POSTS TODAY
OTHER TOPICS
FFF.NET SOCIAL