We are about to lose some freedom...

[JD Barleycorn]

...did you notice? On Thursday of this week (26 Feb.) the FCC will vote to allow government regulation of the Internet. Since the panel consists of two republicans and three democrats the outcome is a foregone conclusion. A "shadow" panel has been working since the election to craft something called "Net Neutrality" or as some are calling it "Obamanet". Understand this, we don't know what is going to be in the regulations because the leadership (democrats) won't release them. There is a cry coming up from Congress to see the regs but so far the cries fall on deaf ears. What we do know is coming from discussions and conversations that are being reported by the republican members of the committee.
We are talking equalization of the Internet between those who have broadband and those who don't. Companies like Google will be expected to pay for installing new high speed fiber Internet to tiny little towns off the beaten path because want permission to install the high speed Internet to downtown KCMO. They will be required to be fair despite the financial hardship which means two things; they will be reluctant to install a lot of hardware and the cost will be passed on to the customer.
A new layer of federal bureacracy will increase the cost for start ups which will result in fewer successful startups
Customers will be required to pay higher prices for less service in order to provide service to that single household in Bumfuck, Texas out in the panhandle.

And this is just the initial foot in the door. Speculation by industry professionals points to licensing of all websites (that includes ECCIE), more regulation on content, and even a litmus test on political content. You can loose your license if you have too much conservative content (they would never worry about liberal content).

Congress needs a swift kick in the ass (or cojones if you prefer) to stiffen their spine to do something about this usurption of our freedom.

[Jackie S]

This all looks good on paper. Stick it to the big guys, ie, the rich. Let the little guy have his fair share.
But nobody is reading the fine print. Along with all of this so called "fairness" comes control.
If a Republican Administration was suggesting this, there would already be rioting in the streets. How dare they interfere.

But remember. this President is SOOOOOOOOO cool. He would never allow a government over reach and strart censoring the content of everybodies web sites, would he? He would never allow the Government to demand you have a liscence to be part of all of this. He would never allow the free flow of ideas and information to be regulated by a bunch of political hacks in the guise of a Federal Agency.

Because he is SOOOOOOOOOOO cool.

[DSK]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

...did you notice? On Thursday of this week (26 Feb.) the FCC will vote to allow government regulation of the Internet. Since the panel consists of two republicans and three democrats the outcome is a foregone conclusion. A "shadow" panel has been working since the election to craft something called "Net Neutrality" or as some are calling it "Obamanet". Understand this, we don't know what is going to be in the regulations because the leadership (democrats) won't release them. There is a cry coming up from Congress to see the regs but so far the cries fall on deaf ears. What we do know is coming from discussions and conversations that are being reported by the republican members of the committee.
We are talking equalization of the Internet between those who have broadband and those who don't. Companies like Google will be expected to pay for installing new high speed fiber Internet to tiny little towns off the beaten path because want permission to install the high speed Internet to downtown KCMO. They will be required to be fair despite the financial hardship which means two things; they will be reluctant to install a lot of hardware and the cost will be passed on to the customer.
A new layer of federal bureacracy will increase the cost for start ups which will result in fewer successful startups
Customers will be required to pay higher prices for less service in order to provide service to that single household in Bumfuck, Texas out in the panhandle.

And this is just the initial foot in the door. Speculation by industry professionals points to licensing of all websites (that includes ECCIE), more regulation on content, and even a litmus test on political content. You can loose your license if you have too much conservative content (they would never worry about liberal content).

Congress needs a swift kick in the ass (or cojones if you prefer) to stiffen their spine to do something about this usurption of our freedom.

They are masters at restricting our freedom. Enjoy the free internet while you can! On the other hand, if it stops identity theft, what price should we pay? They definitely serve a function in preventing cyber crime, also.

[IIFFOFRDB]

The millennials won't take kindly to the Ozombies fucking up their internet. There will be a heavy price to pay...

[Yssup Rider]

How about you SLOBBRIN? What'll you do when you can't cut and paste racist YouTube videos of dubious origin?

Will you be screaming for "your Internet?"

[CuteOldGuy]

So, AssupLiar, does this mean you are in favor of government control of the Internet?

[UnderConstruction]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

...did you notice? On Thursday of this week (26 Feb.) the FCC will vote to allow government regulation of the Internet. Since the panel consists of two republicans and three democrats the outcome is a foregone conclusion. A "shadow" panel has been working since the election to craft something called "Net Neutrality" or as some are calling it "Obamanet". Understand this, we don't know what is going to be in the regulations because the leadership (democrats) won't release them. There is a cry coming up from Congress to see the regs but so far the cries fall on deaf ears. What we do know is coming from discussions and conversations that are being reported by the republican members of the committee.
We are talking equalization of the Internet between those who have broadband and those who don't. Companies like Google will be expected to pay for installing new high speed fiber Internet to tiny little towns off the beaten path because want permission to install the high speed Internet to downtown KCMO. They will be required to be fair despite the financial hardship which means two things; they will be reluctant to install a lot of hardware and the cost will be passed on to the customer.
A new layer of federal bureacracy will increase the cost for start ups which will result in fewer successful startups
Customers will be required to pay higher prices for less service in order to provide service to that single household in Bumfuck, Texas out in the panhandle.

And this is just the initial foot in the door. Speculation by industry professionals points to licensing of all websites (that includes ECCIE), more regulation on content, and even a litmus test on political content. You can loose your license if you have too much conservative content (they would never worry about liberal content).

Congress needs a swift kick in the ass (or cojones if you prefer) to stiffen their spine to do something about this usurption of our freedom.

You've stated all this as fact and it hasn't even happened yet. Industry officials 'speculate'. And the word is USURPATION not USURPTION. How is this any different from the current model. Comcast won the bid many years ago for the town I live in and they laid the framework in exchange for exclusivity for a set number of years.

[CuteOldGuy]

Originally Posted by UnderConstruction

You've stated all this as fact and it hasn't even happened yet. Industry officials 'speculate'. And the word is USURPATION not USURPTION. How is this any different from the current model. Comcast won the bid many years ago for the town I live in and they laid the framework in exchange for exclusivity for a set number of years.

Why won't the FCC publish the regulations before the vote? Then we would know. Don't they work for us? It is unimaginable that they refuse to let us know what they are going to do. This is Soviet style government.

[UnderConstruction]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Why won't the FCC publish the regulations before the vote? Then we would know. Don't they work for us? It is unimaginable that they refuse to let us know what they are going to do. This is Soviet style government.

Really? Are people knocking on your door, questioning you about your political posts on the internet? Dragging you out of your home and putting you in a political prison for extended periods of time? This isn't a soviet style anything. Pure hyperbole.

[i'va biggen]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Why won't the FCC publish the regulations before the vote? Then we would know. Don't they work for us? It is unimaginable that they refuse to let us know what they are going to do. This is Soviet style government.

Where were you when they first started regulating radio and TV ?

[JD Barleycorn]

Originally Posted by UnderConstruction

You've stated all this as fact and it hasn't even happened yet. Industry officials 'speculate'. And the word is USURPATION not USURPTION. How is this any different from the current model. Comcast won the bid many years ago for the town I live in and they laid the framework in exchange for exclusivity for a set number of years.

I stated this as speculation and not fact. The speculation of professionals in the business and one member of the FCC panel. Forgive the typo my eyes are blurry today. How is it different? Let me ask you this, if it wasn't different then why are they passing this thing without making it public?

[JD Barleycorn]

Originally Posted by UnderConstruction

Really? Are people knocking on your door, questioning you about your political posts on the internet? Dragging you out of your home and putting you in a political prison for extended periods of time? This isn't a soviet style anything. Pure hyperbole.

Are they arresting people for just owning a gun? Yes. Are they putting people in jail for owning a gun? Yes. Are they preventing people from the right to self defense with a gun? Yes. Is this what they said would happen back when they started to regulate gun ownership in the 60s.


Maybe we can talk about regulating alcohol sales too.

[JD Barleycorn]

Originally Posted by i'va biggen

Where were you when they first started regulating radio and TV ?

No and neither were you but you were old enough to remember only three networks (because of regulation) for years.

[UnderConstruction]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Are they arresting people for just owning a gun? Yes. Are they putting people in jail for owning a gun? Yes. Are they preventing people from the right to self defense with a gun? Yes. Is this what they said would happen back when they started to regulate gun ownership in the 60s.


Maybe we can talk about regulating alcohol sales too.

Prove it.

[i'va biggen]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

No and neither were you but you were old enough to remember only three networks (because of regulation) for years.

when did you change your handle to COG barleycornball?