Yeah, thanks for the permalink and raising this, it is extremely important people.
Ever read the books "Brave new World", "Farenheit 451" or "1984"?
Big brother is coming. It really is ~shivers.
Over 40% of american companies worldwide hire people to monitor email traffic on a permanent basis.
It should be forbidden. In Switzerland it is, but the law is infringed by most american companies with offices in the country.
The "net police" prevents file exchange, monitors it, rules it out. This is also highly controversial.
Google preventing access, for chinese people, to anything democracy. ~shivers.
Now THIS? eeek.
In the eternal words of Rage Against the Machine or Morpheus, it's time to wake up
What was the most powerful information exchange area, what science had built as the gold of communication, internet, is getting controlled and abused as a mean of control
in all of the above occurences. If masses accept this, we will end up bar-coded like cows and spied on freely anytime, anywhere.
I do not want this. I was born to be free - in the limits of my responsibilites towards other people.
what DB said, but more intense here: this does not just suck, this is highly dangerous.
...people, go there and say NO, please do, as the article states the google CEO is calling for it because he is foreseeing a true danger there.
This is terrifying, I am speechless. I've seen mentions of this debate for about two weeks now, but it's only now that I realise the full extent of the threat, for some reason.
Are you folks signing the petition?
quote: jive said:
I don't consider myself a very politically active kinda guy,
You don't have to be, this is about your right to express yourself and access information....
Scott Kurtz, of PVP fame, spoke about this last month on his site. The page with his old blog entries are here if you want to read what he has to say. Just scroll down to the Net Neutrality part.
They have been seeking more control over the internet for years now. Looks like it may finally become a reality. In any case, the internet we know and love is in grave danger. It is only a matter of time.
Congress has undountedly already been bought off on this one, although I'm sure the lobbyists did not have to twist too many arms. The free flow of information amomgst the slaves is scaring the hell out of governments worldwide.
there's also no such thing as a free lunch, and power is quite expensive
People a little older than yourself remember a day when there were less hours of work and less bills to pay, no internet connection, no hardware upgrades, no cell phone bills, no cell phone upgrades, no cable tv, no satellite tv, no xm radio, no, no, no. One of these things that comes along will hopefully be the straw that breaks the camel's back and makes people realize they've got and extra assload of money flying out of their family's mouths, or into the credit card company's pockets with interest. Mebbe we'll all get back to doing important things instead of building entertainment empires and status gadgets, mebbe we'll all go fishing again.
On a more serious note, because the issue is serious, would I be american, I'd be proud of the original american dream of freedom, and the 1st amendment.
This net-neutrality debate wants to put an end to it, simply:
"what, you wanted to access an informative TV show about recent events in Iraq? NO PROB. 20'000'000 bucks a minute. Can't afford it? Too baad."
"what, you thought you were free to debate all sorts of topics at the Asylum? You are, as long as you can afford the 200 bucks a thread view. Really, this IS freedom."
"what, you think we're feeding you false information? Your REALLY can't believe Iraq is now a new Disneyland, governed by Mickey Mouse himself?
Well, a glitch may have occured in our systems, thank God our helpline is available 6 hours a week. You just have to call 1-800-wesuckmoney.
Oooh... but wait, you can't afford the hundred bucks it costs a minute? REALLY? That's too bad. Well, trust us to feed you reliable information then (and bow down for an extra-free taste of our
customer service policies)"
Etc.
Is that what you want your future to look like.
I beg you, american citizens, save internet and the world, go sign that petition now.
sorry for double posting but i forgot what i wanted to say .... whats with the countries out side of the usa (yes they do exsist) what impact will it have to the rest of the world that wasnt asked??
But before that, we, as the masses, have to stand against what are the building blocks to information totalitarism, simply.
People should not be afraid of theyre government. People should not be afraid to choose the information they want to look at.
People should not live in terror of being spied on.
Governments should be afraid of theyre people.
[edit]
THE SAME impact blacknight. As the google CEO says very clearly, techology would be revised to make this happen.
Technology built mostly by american companies like Microsoft, Oracle, Sun, IBM, you name it...
You wouldn't be able to make a single phone call without having to fear prison if you don't use the right words.
In the UK, just learnt that ISPS are now authorized to block content they judge inappropriate WITHOUT having to provide an excuse or any argument.
In Switzerland, right besides your country, ISPS are instructed to log records of all net activity for a long period, and hand them to the police.
Big brother is being stealthfully built, simply, and this will impact the world.
Exactly as in 1984, you and I won't have the freedom of our opinions, and will leave in fear of the stealth gov agents.
Hence the analogy with Vendetta above
[/edit]
So how do we fight it? Sign the petition, alright. Now what?
If worse comes to worse, is revolution possible within the internet? A digital coup? With those in power trying to control the new technologies.. How do we fight this?
So how do we fight it? Sign the petition, alright.
I have both signed pettitions, sent emails to my local senate and congressman, and called them as well. This will drastically effect my
company. Something worth rallying the streets for I suppose....
2nd way to fight: spreading the word, simply, I have mailed and talked to people around me about this a lot, intellectuals or average Joes, I have tried and tried to tell them,
without trying to look like a "messiah" or new Che Guevara (it would kinda spoil the point to put too much emphasis
on "the world is coming to an end" to audiences who are not tech savvy). Simply speaking my mind as I did above is the right way to convey the info.
3rd way to fight, if all else fails: big companies still have to rely on developers, and developers have a mind of theyre own.
If several distros of Linux can shake the Microsoft market as they do, it means corporates will never be able to encompass, hire, or otherwise "control"
free minded, Open Source oriented geeks, and when the day comes...
If all else fails, that is.
@Miniature, sometime ago, an open source initiative called "freenet" had been attemptedly built, which made data transfers over the www almost impossible to monitor.
At some point, an initiative called "W-A-S-T-E" has been released by Winamp, and strongly disapproved and turned down by AOL.
"w-a-s-t-e" made for secure and intelligent file sharing, highly encrypted and controlled, and despite the efforts of AOL, the program and it's source code had
been released. I have them here on one of my HDs.
These technologies exist, at hand, ready to be used if they become a necessity. Until then, it's still is time to fight diplomatically, words first,
and if it becomes a true necessity, if it gets as dark as it could be, then swords. Spread the word, information is gold.
..And freenet is not just sitting there, waiting for bad things to happen: it still is a very active sourceforge project. http://freenet.sourceforge.net/
From: 100101010011 <-- right about here Insane since: Mar 2000
posted 06-13-2006 19:18
The "idea" around this bill is to be able to limit access to (or charge a premium) for services such as VOIP (Voice over IP Phone) and IPTV (IP Television), perhaps web based video on demand services .
Basically for telcos the holy grail is to hook people into the "triple play" of High Speed Internet, Phone Service and Cable TV. If the subscribers are getting all three but only paying the cable/phone company for the Internet then the telcos get screwed.
From: Rochester, New York, USA Insane since: May 2000
posted 06-13-2006 19:33
I am not really getting all up in a flutter about this.
A free flowing internet is not going to disappear because the telcos are able to impose QoS routing. There are technologies available now that will prevent this type of situation from leading to the critical breakdown of the internet.
Access might be come more expensive, connectivity might decrease, but only for a while.
If needed people will create a technical solution, mesh networks, network bridges. These dinosaur companies move way too slow to stop the spread of disruptive technologies.
I believe that we are at the point where attempting to fight these battles is likened to the boy sticking his finger in the dam. The flood waters are going to come rushing in eventually, it is better to be prepared for it and to have the materials at the ready to build a better dam.
I agree with JKM, power is expensive; dissent, cheap. Warmage hit the nail on the head, fast individuals or groups beat slow companies. Laws are only an issue to the law abiding.
It never hurts to write your purchased representative to express your concern on this issue either.
Just wanted to point out the fact I am not the only one underlining the inherent danger of such decisions: the open letter is from the google CEO, I just happened to give me the creeps TOO
(and I think each and every word I wrote above).
-And its not just google. It's Microsoft, Yahoo, Ebay, or other technology/i-net powerhouses that are protesting. You know it's an issue when Google and Microsoft agree...
But I am afraid that Warmage is correct. It is like the little boy sticking his finger in the damn... However my finger will be there...
People, I am sorry if this comes across as arrogant, I'll try to make it sound as neutral as possible.
Facts are the only grasp we can get of reality after all...
Over the years, I have stressed the fact Swiss engineers are exceptionally qualified. They're far from being the only ones,
but let's face it: Medtronics have mission critical devices and applications here, The United Nations have theyre worldly headquarters,
Philip Morris, Serono, and many, many huge companies with huge requirements for very high tech.
I am trained to be a coding machine and known for being that.
I am trained to plan applications that will never fail, will involve many developpers, will be based on an extremely precise risk-assessment.
I am not being overly emotional about the issue at all.
Instead, my logics being trained to be very binary, I just see what's behind this decision,
without any possible doubt: it's mathematical.
Microsoft were the first ones to foster the "Palladium control initiative", and now THEY are scared by this.
I am sorry, but Mage is wrong.
There is a huge bias around against me, deserved or not, if you want to understand what I am saying, what I was saying above, drop the emotions altogether.
Forget I am InI until the end of this post, just give it a try, and look at me as what I am: someone very tech savvy and possessed by a passion for information science,
and therefore, a logics machine. The sole belief that we can't fight the Matrix is sure fire way to make the worst happen.
...Most people go through life without caring about anything but tomorrow. I envy them for that. Some hate me for being unable to do that,
but all in all, what I see here and can't show you is what Microsoft, Google, Yahoo, Ebay see...
At least, trust them, the sole fact of thinking putting a finger in the dam is useless...
Makes your opinion useless, and enforces the Matrix.
quote:
NIOBE: I can't help it Morpheus, I can't help thinking, what if you're wrong? What if all this, the prophecy, everything is bullshit?
MORPHEUS: Then tomorrow we may all be dead. But how would that be that different from any other day?...This is a war, and we are soldiers, death can come for us at any time, in any place.
MORPHEUS: Now consider the alternative. What if I am right? What if the prophecy is true? What if tomorrow the war could be over? Isn't that worth fighting for? Isn't that worth dying for?
Everytime I post something scary or controversial, I do ask myself: "they'll hate you for the sole feel your words will give them,
they'll hate you for having tried, hate you without a reason, is it worth it?".
But information is freedom.
And regardless of anything personal between some people and me, freedom is worth dying for, worth being hated for.
Stop thinking your opinion doesn't count, even if you can't see a day after tomorrow, just consider the alternative.
Just consider I could be 100% right and monster companies do think so. There now is a savetheinternet domain of it's own, says something to you?
Now go save the internet. "Isn't that worth dying for?"
From: Rochester, New York, USA Insane since: May 2000
posted 06-15-2006 16:37
I am not arguing that keeping the near instantaneous free flow of ideas is wrong.
What I argue is that the methods that people are taking to prevent this are futile. Sitting down and playing a high stakes game when the deck is stacked against you is foolish. I do not advocate the philosophy of taking your ball and going home, I recommend taking your ball and finding a better game to play.
The Internet is not an entity that should be litigated into subjugation, it is a dynamically evolving entity that lives based on the technology injected into it.
Getting right down to it I feel that preventing QoS routing and tier pricing would be a bigger detriment to the Internet as a system then having it be rampant accross the board.
If you litigate technology to fit a static model you will stop innovation. Look at China, they have this huge firewall that is preventing their citizens access to the free flow of information, and at the same time we have hundred if not thousands of people working very hard on circumventing this. They are coming up with ingeneous solutions to this problem that work.
I believe that the same thing will happen if this tier pricing QoS routing becomes a problem. You will have people who come up with good solutions to the problem. Maybe it is large scale mesh networks that bridge QoS inpeded areas, or maybe a new technology will emerge that makes relying on the common carriers a thing of the past.
But instead, average Joe relies on the internet as it is fed to him. If it becomes "law" and documented by policies, it's the end, or the beginning of a war of informations.
From what I understand - correct me - it's not about QoS routing, it's in more general terms about access to information.
It's not the routing or the technology behind which is billed, it's the concept of getting free access to an info.
That's why it is frightening altogehter: the law would not state "QoS is billed from now on", if it was to happen, it would say
"Access to news is billed from now on".
From: Rochester, New York, USA Insane since: May 2000
posted 06-15-2006 18:27
Right now companies can offer any type of service they want and charge any rate they would like to offer that service.
What this bill is looking to do is tell these companies how they must frame their service. The bill is looking to tell these companies that they must be neutral. It should not be the governments job to make this choice.
This should be decided by economics, technology and consumer choice.
If a company is going to do things that are not beneficial to their customers then their customers should leave them. If it is a problem for a customer to leave their current provider because they are being exploitive then this is ground to prosecute the company based on anti-monopoly laws.
Let the company be attacked by bad press. Let the company be attacked by the laws that are currently on the books. Let the company be attacked by disruptive technologies.
But don't go off half cocked and try to legislate away the preceived problems. This isn't a legislative problem this is a technological and ecconomical problem, solve technical issues with technology and ecconomical one with money.
^^ this guy is saying the voting of a new law is not a legislative problem.
Who said "off-topic"?
I say, what the hell are you talking about?
quote:
But don't go off half cocked and try to legislate away the preceived problems. This isn't a legislative problem
Tell me who do you think could decide the laws you wave can change in your (united) nation(s)? Somebody said the "congress"?
I am not into politics, but even to me, from miles away, this seems pretty obvious.
What do you think is happening right now? The laws you quote are on the verge of changing. Bingo.
Of course, you have two options, it's quite a binary situation: you can sit on your ass, convince yourself it is not happenning,
or that a law has nothing to do with a legislative issue, and do nothing about it.
OR you can express the fact you want your freedom loud.
The argument here is not "wether it is happenning or not", we're miles away from this now... The argument simply is
"will you do something or nothing"? I chose my stand.
From: 100101010011 <-- right about here Insane since: Mar 2000
posted 06-15-2006 20:46
quote:
^^ this guy is saying the voting of a new law is not a legislative problem.
What that guy is saying is that it should not be a legislative problem. Let the free market economy determine how this should be handled. If your ISP charges you more to visit Google then go to another ISP that doesn't.
In the US there is no "right" to being able to get everything on the net for the same price. That's just the way it's been done.
If you want to have a philosophical argument that everything on the web should be available to anyone for free you're more than welcome, but that's different from Mage's point regarding legislation of business practices.
Oh, hmmm... I see. Ouch. Sounds twice worse actually as an option. Am worn out, though, so no more energy wasted for the day, but hey...
Putting a price to information?
A price to knowledge?
If you want to stand that as an argument, can you aslo try to foresee the mess it will cause?
Honestly, even 10 pages of 1984, just that, or Farenheit, will do as well. Silly me, "fighting against", or "sitting on one's bum".
I didn't even think anyone could possibly enjoy the end of freedom and the third, terrible option.
Fostering the fact of granting private companies all rights over information. Anyway one would possibly help this become true is dangerous.
quote:
Look at China, they have this huge firewall that is preventing their citizens access to the free flow of information, and at the same time we have hundred if not thousands of people working very hard on circumventing this. They are coming up with ingeneous solutions to this problem that work.
Anyone else shivers? FREEDOM makes for creativity. Yeah, sure, chinese people are cute little teletubbies in a magic kingdom who happily find ingeneous solutions,
I wish I was one, who would not be able to search for democracy related material, and should kill all his newborn girlies because the government forbids more than 1 baby
and girls earn less money.
Is that what you mean, or am I fucking going nuts?
If that's what you're saying, then you don't need censorship to propel you into a real world scale bambi footage.
"House Ignores Public" for example. How, how could I possibly accept this or try to convince myself I can just let go.
And finding new ways is equivalent to letting it go at the moment... later on IF IT BECOMES the only acceptable option, but until then.
I don't want the firewall to be built outside of China, I don't want to resort to other ways while burrying my latest newborn girlie. I am not a cow, the time to say it is now.
posted 06-08-2006 20:42
even youngsters know how to fish grandpa', it's only a couple of clicks away.
