Tag: Net Neutrality

Response to Rep. Marsha Blackburn: A True Conservative Tech Policy (via The Prelator)

On By southwerkIn Capitalism2 Comments

This article is concerned with net neutrality. A good part of the article focuses on this issue. But the article takes on some other critical issues. One is Congress’ bizarre lengthening of the copyright privilege to seventy years plus the life of the author. It’s tragic in literature but in the tech world it ties up technology is a disastrous fashion. He also discusses new laws under consideration that would make suppliers of net access vulnerable to legal action over the content of their various customers. This would provoke massive censorship of the web not because there is illegality but to avoid the slightest possibility of illegality.

It’s a good article and his conclusions are very close to my own. I wish the author well.

James Pilant

On January 18, Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn gave a speech purporting to give a conservative view of technology policy. As a strong conservative myself, I was deeply saddened to read this speech, which not only displays a deep lack of understanding about important policy issues facing the tech world, but a misunderstanding of the true tenants of conservatism in favor of the very corporate cronyism which Republicans are all too often accused of. … Read More

via The Prelator

Net neutrality – Who really benefits? (via Now we’re EtherSpeakin’)

On By southwerkIn business ethics

This article focuses on the key issue in the FCC ruling. The issue is whether or not the decision actually favors consumers.

I hold the FCC decision in contempt. I do not believe it protects the interests of consumers because it will allow charges for using larger amounts of bandwidth when there is no shortage. Further, the FCC under these rules can only respond to complaints. The FCC does not enforce the rules without customers asking it do so in individual cases. Responding to complaints sounds good until you look at what happens with a complaint. If my web site is discriminated against and my loading time dramatically increased, I will only get redress after a lengthy complaint process. By the time that is completed, I would no longer have a successful blog. It’s the same with anybody else. The Internet is a fast moment by moment product. A complaint system is a post destruction remedy that does in no way mitigate the damage.

This is a good blog entry that asks who does the decision really benefit. If you are interested in a deeper understanding of this issue, I would read the article.

James Pilant

Contributed by: Bill Alessi, EtherSpeak Communications As defined by Wikipedia, Network Neutrality (AKA net neutrality and internet neutrality) is a principle proposed for users’ access to networks participating in the Internet. The principle advocates no restrictions by Internet Service Providers and governments on content, sites, platforms, the kinds of equipment that may be attached, and the modes of communication. About a month or so ago the … Read More

via Now we’re EtherSpeakin’

Net Neutrality: The More Things Change… (via The PSSI Blog)

On By southwerkIn Capitalism

Is a major factor in the battle over net neutrality the consolidation of the industry by companies like Google? History suggests that after a period of development the market tends to consolidate and it consolidates with companies that make things simpler. From the author –

The question today is whether this is happening again, and if the Internet is slowly becoming monopolized. Here, think Google, with 70 or 80% of global search volume. Likewise, in social networking, Facebook has become predominant. Apple’s iTunes rules content download in the music sector. We’re consolidating.

See what you think. Read the article and ask yourself if consolidation makes the end of net neutrality inevitable.

James Pilant

Net Neutrality: The More Things Change… The FCC recently cast its vote in creating a net neutrality law.  Basically, this means it’s illegal for a major carrier, say Verizon or AT&T or any of the others, to block or tamper with the speeds of content providers.  In an example posited by Tim Wu, the Columbia Law professor who is said to have originally coined the term “net neutrality,” it would prevent, say, Verizon in partnership with, say, Google speeding up YouTube while slowing d … Read More

via The PSSI Blog

Netflix Fires a Neutrality Shot Across The Bow (via 112 West)

On By southwerkIn business ethics

This is the first blog entry which has a source discussing what might happen in terms of internet pricing in the absence of net neutrality. It appears that Net Flix is not just where I watch movies but where I look for an ally in the fight for the web.

I just discovered the blog, 112 West and I like his style.

Please Read.

James Pilant

Netflix Fires a Neutrality Shot Across The Bow Netflix posted better than expected growth Wednesday, adding 3 million users to top off at 20 million subscribers.  That’s good for them.  But what got the most attention was what the company had to say about that little inconsequential thing called “Net Neutrality” An independent negative issue for Netflix and other Internet video providers would be a move by wired ISPs to shift consumers to pay-per-gigabyte models instead of the curre … Read More

via 112 West

Broadband as a public right of way (via Virtual Democracy)

On By southwerkIn Privatization

I have often discussed net neutrality in my blogging sometimes at considerable length and sometimes with considerable passion. I have not discussed the broad band implications. I am not really familiar with broad band. This gentleman is.

He discusses this part of the issue with obvious knowledge. If you are interested in this aspect of the net neutrality issue, this is a good read.

James Pilant

Broadband as a public right of way This essay was written in support of the Super Santa Barbara 2011 art exhibit on net neutrality In the forty-one years since UC Santa Barbara became the third node on ARPANET (the government funded precursor to the Internet), generations of Santa Barbarans have been born into lifescapes increasingly dominated by “online time.” The growth of the Int … Read More

via Virtual Democracy

Do you want to pay more for internet? (via yourkeyed)

On By southwerkIn business ethics

I have been appalled at the FCC’s decision making on the matter of net neutrality. Essentially they have abandoned it. The way is open for a corporate division of the internet. It should not be long before web sites will have to pay money for fast service while those unable to pay will sink into obscurity and then disappear. Consumers will (as always) bear the costs of these changes. Your use of the internet will become something like the cable industry with their multiple packages of different channel combinations. You will pay more for certain kinds of services, in particular, a fast internet connection.

The fight over net neutrality continues. Some sites like yourkeyed are still slugging. I like this web site’s spirit and appreciate its call to action.

I hope you hear that call and want to take part.

James Pilant

Do you want to pay more for internet? [Alright folks, I’ve been mentally hoarding my entries all month, I was going to talk about KSW programming this season, Vancouver, underground networks, gender politics, more things about desire and drive and human existence, yada yada yada., all those juicy things… but it all might be futile when no one will be able to afford the internet:] Do you want to PAY MORE for Internet?  Do you want the telecommunication companies, that already rip yo … Read More

via yourkeyed

“Comcast Owns the Internet” (via Chasing Fat Tails)

On By southwerkIn Government Failure

At the moment, a great deal of weeping over the defeat of net neutrality is justified. Unfortunately the war for the internet can be lost on more than one front at a time. So, “Chasing Fat Tails” explains.

James Pilant

h/t ars technica Net neutrality has long been the goal of people who care about keeping the Internet free from corporate influence.  The Internet has tremendous potential, but it can only be realized if all users have access to fast speeds that deliver all content at the same rate.  Otherwise Internet Service Providers will be able to privilege some content and users over others, the Internet will balkanize, and the tremendous benefits of a wired … Read More

via Chasing Fat Tails

Obama Broke His Promise To “Take A Back Seat To No One” On Net Neutrality

On By southwerkIn business ethics, ethics2 Comments

From Freepress’ news release –

“The new rules are riddled with loopholes, evidence that the chairman sought approval from AT&T instead of listening to the millions of Americans who asked for real Net Neutrality. These rules don’t do enough to stop the phone and cable companies from dividing the Internet into fast and slow lanes, and they fail to protect wireless users from discrimination. No longer can you get to the same Internet via your mobile device as you can via your laptop. The rules pave the way for AT&T to block your access to third-party applications and to require you to use its own preferred applications.

“Chairman Genachowski ignored President Obama’s promise to the American people to take a ‘back seat to no one’ on Net Neutrality. He ignored the 2 million voices who petitioned for real Net Neutrality and the hundreds who came to public hearings across the country to ask him to protect the open Internet. And he ignored policymakers who urged him to protect consumers and maintain the Internet as a platform for innovation. It’s unfortunate that the only voices he chose to listen to were those coming from the very industry he’s charged with overseeing.”

Well, just another day with the President’s decisions. In a way, it’s entertaining. After all, with many politicians their previous statements are often a guide to their actions. But with the President, it’s one surprise after another.

James Pilant

Net Neutrality – Obama Caves, A Young Turks Interview With Timothy Karr

On By southwerkIn business ethics, Corporate Social Responsibility, ethics, Government Failure, Philosophy of Business, President Obama1 Comment

This is 18 minutes and 23 second. A bit long for many of my readers. Nevertheless, this is a good explanation about how the new rules amount to a surrender on net neutrality.

James Pilant

Internet Dead.

On By southwerkIn business ethics, Capitalism, Corporate Social Responsibility, Government Failure, Philosophy of Business, President Obama

From Steven Axelrod on Salon –

The internet as we know it is officially doomed, as of today, and I’m already feeling nostalgic. Funny that a technology could move so fast across the landscape of my life – from a geeks-only fluke to a curiosity, to a useful tool, to a powerful engine of procrastination and finally a central venue for all my communications, research, entertainment and shopping, only to be reduced to the closed down, controlled, censored corporate cash cow it’s about to become, with the Obama administration’s blessing.

Internet, we barely knew ye.

But of course the Proprietors of our Nation couldn’t allow this internet business to go on the way it was heading. What a frightening thought – free, unobstructed communications, with no control and no profit … people just saying whatever they want, whenever they want, leaking documents, downloading YouTube videos that make Proprietor-controlled media outlets look like liars. You knew there’d be repercussions after the “Colbert bombed at the Press Association Dinner” narrative was reduced to one more punchline, a million downloads later.

He’s right. It will take a while but these things you’re reading like my blog, the sites you surf will probably go the way of the dodo bird and the passenger pigeon.

You might be curious as to why I’m not outraged myself.

In fact, my most fire breathing, screaming fits of anger were over this issue some months ago.

I simply realized that the Obama administration will sell out the internet in a total reversal of the President’s stated position. As far as the President is concerned, words have no meaning. He says whatever is necessary to get whatever he wants at the time.

You want to argue with me.

If so much as one person objects, I will happily put up the You Tube videos where the President declares that he absolutely supports net neutrality and will not compromise. I put them up on a previous post. It took me about a minute to find four separate events where he said these things.

So, it was inevitable.

The best guide to this President’s actions are to go on You Tube, run the issue and see what the President said during the campaign. Expect him to do the opposite and you will only rarely be wrong.

The independence of the internet was critical to the kind of support and networking, the Obama campaign used to win election in 2008. You see, the President isn’t even smart.

It was unwise politically, damaging his own campaign infrastructure and limiting the influence of the blogosphere which did so much for him during the campaign. It also alienates the aforementioned bloggers, who if they are anything like me, will never forget this latest outrage.

I’m not going to forget it.

What happens to me and this blog. Well, I’m going to keep going and I have a monitor that tells me the loading speed for the web site, when it gets longer than say five seconds, I’ll start considering shutting down.

I am stubborn though, maybe I’ll hang on until it’s just me and some close friends who tell me that they log on when don’t or can’t.

And it gets better. Our President is planning on fixing the tax code next year.

Of course, he’s going to cut up Social Security like a butchered steer, George W. Bush’s dream come true.

I’d like someone to tell me what the hell happened?

I want to know.

I can get being betrayed.

I can get changes of allegiance.

I definitely understant political expediency.

But this President makes decisions that don’t even make sense from an election point of view.

Earlier, I said that you could take the opposite of what the President said as a guide, but there is another one. If there are two options and one is the more politically foolish, the White House chooses that one.

Net neutrality is dead. Happy Christmas.

James Pilant