Page 1 of 5 12345>
Topic Options
#96385 - 02/03/15 09:08 PM FCC: Adversarial Force to Open Internet
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 7007
Loc: Virginia
ABC Article - Net Neutrality: FCC Considers Who the Internet Belongs To

The FCC is still at it, trying to get its hooks into the Open Internet by declaring it a utility.

CNN Money article

 Quote:
Under the proposed new rules, the FCC would ensure that broadband companies don't unfairly discriminate against content providers by creating "slow lanes" on the public Internet, according to CNNMoney's anonymous source. But there might still be "fast lanes."



That old adage, The road to hell is paved with 'good intentions', sounds about right.

Once it's declared a public utility, then comes heavier regulations and restrictions.

It's going to get interesting.

Save the Internet has ramped up its petition to encourage citizens to write their local Representatives. It's showing up as a splash page on a lot of social media services. Tumblr is full of the stuff.

Thoughts? How much of a difference would it make if citizens flood the House with cries of woe? Seems like a placebo to me.



_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
#96386 - 02/03/15 10:31 PM Re: FCC: Adversarial Force to Open Internet [Re: SIN3]
CanisMachina42 Offline
active member


Registered: 08/10/13
Posts: 1186
Loc: CA
So the FCC wants to censor it, and the IRS wants to profit off it? Leave it to a civil regulatory agency and the control arm of a privately owned bank to further their own interests - what the fuck is the gold standard anyway?

Dress it up any other way but I suspect there are prominent business interests losing their market share, and perhaps even a "won't somebody think of the children" angle in there somewhere.

There's always money to be had, and a largely unregulated Internet is a gold mine of unexploited tax revenue. It's called the trickle up effect.

_________________________
Canis Machina

Top
#96390 - 02/04/15 09:43 AM Re: FCC: Adversarial Force to Open Internet [Re: CanisMachina42]
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 7007
Loc: Virginia
Obama is fully behind it, under the guise of an Independent Resource.

Wall Street Journal reports:

 Quote:
President Obama, who made waves last fall, when he came out in support of treating Internet service providers like telecommunications companies. It subjects the ISPs to closer oversight of how they manage traffic on their networks. For example, the FCC would ban broadband providers from slowing down your Netflix streams.


So while people are focused on the minutia, the larger picture is that it opens the door for the FCC to later enforce other regulations that restrict access and/or affect the bottom like to the consumer.

I'm sure there's some loophole in there that will show up as an additional tax in the fine print on your monthly bill... Seems inevitable at his point.

Even if the original proposal was struck down last January, looks like the agency hasn't given up on finding new and creative ways to exhaust the courts until the levies finally break.
_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
#96392 - 02/04/15 09:56 AM Re: FCC: Adversarial Force to Open Internet [Re: SIN3]
mountaingoat Offline
member


Registered: 05/08/10
Posts: 471
Loc: Colorado
In addition to the additional taxes, labeling it a utility makes it less secure for private citizens who use it. It becomes a state property, so the laws for free speech in public terrirory become muddier. Furthermore, eavesdropping becomes a matter of a rubber stamp from a FISA court as opposed to permission from a private isp. And there is also the whole language game that gets played when regulated fees come into play. If it becomes illegal so slow down someone's broadband connection, then you simply slow everyone down, and charge a premium for the regular speed. The whole thing stinks of a poorly concealed state power/money grab. And this from the same government that condemned Hugo Chavez for nationalizing resources in Venezuela.
_________________________
“The human race is unimportant. It is the self that must not be betrayed."

-John Fowles

Top
#96406 - 02/04/15 04:59 PM Re: FCC: Adversarial Force to Open Internet [Re: mountaingoat]
antikarmatomic Offline
BANNED
stalker


Registered: 09/22/13
Posts: 3208
Loc: El Mundo
General reply.

Long story short is that the internet started as a fun project that "grew legs".

This shit happens all the time.

It simply wasn't intended to do all the shit that it is doing today. (which I suppose is probably true of anything living)

Not to sound hokey, or whatever, but Frankenstein's monster flatly warned us of the internet - and while that analogy has been made before in terms of the C/S... the internet does not give a fuck what type of anything you are - it is all-consuming - Christian, Jew, Muslim, Atheist, Buddhist, Satanist alike.

Honey badger does not care.

And now, mind you, I'm not quite talking out of my ass here - I code (a lot), write protocols, I fuck with systems for a living... shit! most of my posts are written while waiting for other shit I wrote to compile and/or run tests and wait for results.

Net neutrality is not at all black and white.

I've been looking at this shit for the last 3-4 years on and off and I still haven't made up my mind.

Should the internet be considered a utility? yeah, sure, why not?

Landlines are. Makes sense to me.

Is it already regulated? pffft ask "Sabu's" "family" at lulsez, or Captain Crunch (Dwyer)

Where's your pay phones now? *whistle blowers* (there's like 3 puns in there - I promise you)

Anyway the internet is what it is - it operates on a separate realm of thinking for which legislature is simply not prepared to deal with.

For every road block put up there are, literally, ten-thousand dorks like me figuring out ways around these things while juggling between that, work, and not-getting-laid - it's a sure fire way for fail.

So, am I pro or anti-net-neutrality?

I'm neutral. 'Doesn't matter what they do, to be quite honest.

Information wants to be free - and that's simply not a tendency that can be muzzled.

It's all trial and error / babtism by fire on the bleeding edge of technology, anyway.

Making better mouse traps only ensures that there will be better mice gnawing on the wires (if not dead ones)

\:D


Edited by antikarmatomic (02/04/15 05:00 PM)
Edit Reason: the last thing anyone needs is another fucking church
_________________________
Angelic harlequins and sinister clowns.

Top
#96415 - 02/04/15 10:14 PM Re: FCC: Adversarial Force to Open Internet [Re: antikarmatomic]
Fist Moderator Offline
veteran member


Registered: 08/31/07
Posts: 1453
Loc: B'mo Cautious MF
Follow the money.

The Telecoms want to make more money off service providers. In other words, Comcast/Verizon/Cox et al want to charge Facebook and Google (and Netflix) a premium for priority traffic over their network.

Big Govt sees a Big Payday in new taxes and regulation. AND, they get their long desired wish to actually control internet content. Oh, and TOR will become decidedly less anonymous.

And you? You get screwed either way. Mark my works, Internet 2.0 the People's Web will make Silk Road look like a couple of kids slinging rocks in the alley. When big govt and big corps control the WWW, something new will spring up in it's place.

Of course, we could just "do nothing" and let the web chug along like it has been. But, no politician ever got paid by leaving well enough alone.

Top
#96418 - 02/04/15 10:59 PM Re: FCC: Adversarial Force to Open Internet [Re: Fist]
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 7007
Loc: Virginia
Nowadays letter writing campaigns have been replaced with emails. I'd imagine it would be rather easy to ignore, if not delete or spam them wholesale. Not to say that all reps are corrupt but there's definitely corruption in the system with no real checks and balances in place.

Then there's the matter of how many reps take the time to read through all the details of these bills or show up to House meetings.

I remain skeptical of the effectiveness of such campaigns.

 Quote:
Mark my works, Internet 2.0 the People's Web will make Silk Road look like a couple of kids slinging rocks in the alley. When big govt and big corps control the WWW, something new will spring up in it's place.


I tend to agree. I think it's an inevitability that the government will gain more control thus be the cause of a 2.0 situation.


Better or Worse?

I guess we'll just have to wait and see.
_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
#96424 - 02/05/15 03:18 AM Re: FCC: Adversarial Force to Open Internet [Re: SIN3]
antikarmatomic Offline
BANNED
stalker


Registered: 09/22/13
Posts: 3208
Loc: El Mundo
Err... I don't blame a single soul for not being up to snuff on this computer shit... but hey!if I can turn yalls onto a few things: in order of “advanzenzed” descending.

http://insecure.org
^don't scan networks – that never works – but do scan your own just to be sure.

http://packetstormsecurity.com
^latest vulns – pay attention and patch stuff.

http://www.2600.com/
^funz

https://www.defcon.org/
^”a bunch of very capable people doing utterly useless crap” - that's what it all comes down to - a certain amount of fear and loathing (I just noticed the connection as I was typing it) of the freaks and weirdOs who make it their "deal" to make shit go boom! for teh lulz.

http://www.phrack.org/
^welcome to ring 0 (not updated often but when it does it's hiroshima – plus it's equally as garbedly-gook, except, unlike enochian, it actually does damage when you understand it - also I have no idea why windows says these .txts are infected *shrugs*) \:D

Not trying to plug URLS or whatever, I'm not going to sit here and re-hash shit some very bright people already said and pretend it's my own.

I encourage you dig and fuck around around with shit. (maybe use a a PC you literally don't care about to do it on)

Yeah, sure, I code and shit for a living, but it's really not that hard – cryptic! That's really all it is. You don't even have to be good at math – just breaking shit and putting it back together.

That said.
 Quote:
Internet 2.0 the People's Web will make Silk Road look like a couple of kids slinging rocks in the alley.


Agreed except, we're looking at 4.0 – err... not to get too verbose... but this is a good paper:

http://www.team-cymru.org/Services/darknets.html says more than I care to and less than it cares to – it's not a lot of math, but it is a lot of numeric shit.

the only problem is “trust” (yeah I'm talking to you) (wait me? Or that other person?) that's the issue.

Anyway, it's too fluid to be fucked with. It's bigger than can be handled.

“What you need is another law - says the legislator”
“What you need is a lawyer - says the lawyer”
“What you need is a plumber - says the plumber”

Fact is – the mind is beyond law. Always will be. Always has been.

The body... well... that's a different story.

A waste is a terrible thing to mind.


Edited by antikarmatomic (02/05/15 03:23 AM)
Edit Reason: cuz a char(32) is a huge deal, apparently
_________________________
Angelic harlequins and sinister clowns.

Top
#96426 - 02/05/15 08:38 AM Re: FCC: Adversarial Force to Open Internet [Re: SIN3]
Megatron Offline
active member


Registered: 08/22/14
Posts: 859
Loc: fuckit, some kid cracked my co...
 Originally Posted By: SIN3
Thoughts?


Net neutrality is basically the idea that providers are not allowed to discriminate over sites/content.

Seems to me that that's the side we should be on.

The only way to do that is to treat it like a publicly owned utility.

Oh noes, it's socialism! Yeah, it is. Exactly!

I love the Right because they're socialist when it comes to the military, but not for anything else. And these are the same people that say with a straight face that the military is the only arm of government that actually works.

The same people who voted against Sandy relief because we couldn't "pay for it", and then one week later voted to up military spending by the same amount in Iraq. And these are the "conservatives". Tax cuts for the uber-rich, more guns and military, fuck the middle-class and poor.

Way to build an INFRASTRUCTURE. If you're Sparta. And I could get behind that, if it were actually SPARTA. But we're a nation of weak simpletons who have never been tested on any real battlefield. Part of me almost thinks that the lack of any real need for WAR has led us to manufacture it and thereby undermine our own strategic interests.

Look, the USA has a big cock, everyone knows this. But do we also have killer abs? Solid quads? Ripped triceps? I don't think so.

And no, before anyone asks/comments/reprimands, this last bit was not direct to the Opie. HOWEVER, nothing is so simple as 1+1 . . .





Edited by Megatron (02/05/15 08:42 AM)
Edit Reason: Spongebob Squarepants is Satanic. (Y/N) please discuss . . .
_________________________
You can't beat me, I'm a fucking Transformer (TM), dude.

Oh, and I spell everything right.

Top
#96430 - 02/05/15 11:36 AM Re: FCC: Adversarial Force to Open Internet [Re: Megatron]
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 7007
Loc: Virginia
 Quote:
Net neutrality is basically the idea that providers are not allowed to discriminate over sites/content.

Seems to me that that's the side we should be on.


That's my understanding of it yes but the government has this habitual behavior of over-stepping its role. I don't think people are too up in arms about keeping the ISP's in check, it's the foreseeable regulating and micromanaging.


These campaigns to contact House Reps are more or less a preemptive strike. What do you think of the effectiveness?

Placebo or no?
_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
#96447 - 02/05/15 07:36 PM Re: FCC: Adversarial Force to Open Internet [Re: SIN3]
antikarmatomic Offline
BANNED
stalker


Registered: 09/22/13
Posts: 3208
Loc: El Mundo
On the surface of it - the whole "service providers should not discriminate over sites/content" thing is a very difficult position to argue against.

The problems I see with this, though, are very much along the same lines as what you said here:

 Quote:
I don't think people are too up in arms about keeping the ISP's in check, it's the foreseeable regulating and micromanaging.


My specific issue is "how the fuck do they even plan to enforce it? Investigations and fines?" this would make it (as Fist mentioned)

 Quote:
a Big Payday in new taxes and regulation. AND, they get their long desired wish to actually control internet content. Oh, and TOR will become decidedly less anonymous.


Which is entirely correct (though, I should mention that TOR really isn't all it's cracked up to be – it's like a sheep-skin condom, basically [and for much the same reasons] - always has been)

What I do foresee happening is a no-uncertain amount of over-reach (as you've stated), the irony of which is not at all lost on me. In other words “let's pass some regulations telling ISPs they can't discriminate over content so that eventually we ourselves * can * tell them which content to discriminate against”

On the whole, (and I'm certain I'm not telling any of you anything 'new') I sincerely doubt that any particular government is fully capable of regulating the internet.

But I'm sure they'll do their damnedest to try, and with that:

 Quote:

These campaigns to contact House Reps are more or less a preemptive strike. What do you think of the effectiveness?


Utterly ineffective.

It's not only a lost-cause, but even if one's pleas were not ignored, they wouldn't know what to make of the message on the surface, much less fathom the deeper implications of whatever is being argued.

Reminds me of "The 'truth' can be screamed from a thousand rooftops, and unless it is convenient to hear it will fall on deaf ears."


Edited by antikarmatomic (02/05/15 07:41 PM)
Edit Reason: was mulling over my condom analogy... again... and again.
_________________________
Angelic harlequins and sinister clowns.

Top
#96450 - 02/05/15 09:07 PM Re: FCC: Adversarial Force to Open Internet [Re: Megatron]
Fist Moderator Offline
veteran member


Registered: 08/31/07
Posts: 1453
Loc: B'mo Cautious MF
 Originally Posted By: Megatron

The only way to do that is to treat it like a publicly owned utility.





No. That is not the only thing. The only thing to do is leave it alone.

This has always struck me as odd, the people who are all freaked out that the govt can read their email, txts, and phone calls, are the same people who want to put the govt in charge of the internet, are the same people who post EVERY element of their personal life on social media.

Just by monitoring a persons social media I can determine nearly everyone they know, where they live, what time they are home, with 1 meter GPS accuracy where they are at any given minute of the day, what they just ate, who they are having sex with, and (increasingly) what they look like naked.

It is mind boggling. The most totalitarian police state could not hope to force people to divulge the sort of info they proudly post online.

Now, that is not to be in favor of allowing corporations to control the internet either. Corps can be trusted either. However, I am still amazed that social media users are providing so much value added to these companies completely for free. You are the product, the worker, and the consumer.
_________________________
I am the Devil and I am here to do the Devil's work.

Top
#96451 - 02/05/15 09:33 PM Re: FCC: Adversarial Force to Open Internet [Re: Fist]
CanisMachina42 Offline
active member


Registered: 08/10/13
Posts: 1186
Loc: CA
 Quote:
This has always struck me as odd, the people who are all freaked out that the govt can read their email, txts, and phone calls, are the same people who want to put the govt in charge of the internet


Too late, at least for the first part of that concern. With the Patriot Act all is possible. From 'fusion centers' to eavesdropping apps nothing prevents you from you having every signal that you transmit be intercepted and cataloged, legally. I could be be being monitored and not even know it, let alone prevent it.

That's what makes no sense about the big brother hysteria. If your interests and tendencies aren't being turned into direct marketing algorithms, that same software is used to search keywords for any sign of terror risk.

The only thing this proposal changes is you'll now be paying slightly more to be monitored. I guess the trick is to not say/do anything stupid or post something like THIS.
_________________________
Canis Machina

Top
#96455 - 02/05/15 10:23 PM Re: FCC: Adversarial Force to Open Internet [Re: CanisMachina42]
mountaingoat Offline
member


Registered: 05/08/10
Posts: 471
Loc: Colorado
The government can't be trusted to properly maintain physical roads, why the hell should I trust them to maintain the internet? So it can end up being as successful as the VA? Social Security? The War on Drugs? No thanks. I'll take chaos and criminals over government imposed order and slightly different criminals any day.
_________________________
“The human race is unimportant. It is the self that must not be betrayed."

-John Fowles

Top
#96456 - 02/05/15 10:49 PM Re: FCC: Adversarial Force to Open Internet [Re: mountaingoat]
CanisMachina42 Offline
active member


Registered: 08/10/13
Posts: 1186
Loc: CA
Well, are they (government) maintaining it or just looking for a way to profit off it by proxy? This seems not all different from the SEC and the stock market, as far as oversight is concerned. Not to say I'm exonerating the government, I'm just saying the claws of special interest are already sunk so deep into ALL media and government that this serves as little more than puppet theater.

The illusion in all this is that it actually changes anything at all, except the price you pay and possibly some additional censorship (which I doubt). Big government/small government is just an extension of the fallacy that anything that exists as a matter of public debate can actually make a significant difference.

That is why my position on matters such as these is non-involvement. For/against is just different flavors of the same Kool-aid.
_________________________
Canis Machina

Top
Page 1 of 5 12345>


Moderator:  Woland, TV is God, fakepropht, SkaffenAmtiskaw, Asmedious, Fist 
Hop to:

Generated in 0.023 seconds of which 0.001 seconds were spent on 29 queries. Zlib compression disabled.