« The Hot Brain | ~flowerchild~'s Blog | Flowerchild's Farked Up Fairy Tales: The Ordinary Girl and the Damn Pony »
Bloggers in Pajamas Blogging from the Middle of Nowhere Unite!
Net Neutrality. This was one of those things that I didn't know if I was fer or agin until I did some research. Holy crap. Talk about information overload. Took me all day to sift through it, but I concluded that I'm fer it.
On this upcoming Thursday the FCC is supposed to vote on taking the first step toward approving formal net neutrality rules. They've just been floating along with informal Internet principles for four years, but now they find themselves having to make it more concrete because telecom giant Comcast has challenged their authora-tay.
Yeah. Big business is in there wanting loose regs so they can fark us over a little bit more, make us pay for what we already have. Oh, and look who wants to help 'em......the Polar Pound Puppies, our friends, the Blue Dogs.
Here is an excerpt from the letter they sent to the FCC:
What makes this even more confusing for me is there was another letter sent to the FCC by a coalition of minority groups indicating they had some of the same concerns as the Blue Dogs.
Huh?
Minority groups and Blue Dogs barkin' up the same tree? Did I fall into an alternate universe and not notice? That's nuts! It can't be right.
But, it was:
Farking astroturfers. Plus the big telecoms have saturated D.C. with lobbyists to influence the outcome of net neutrality rules. And of course the minority groups and Blue Dogs fell for their shtick. Lobbyists are effective.....that's why they proliferate. Lobbyists will be outlawed one day! I just know it! Awww, crap. I think I just fell into that alternate universe again.
Why are there so many dumb asses in Congress? There.....now I'm back in reality.
My reality is this: My PC is literally the last stop on the phone line. I mean literally. The physical phone line ends at my house, it doesn't go any farther and yes, I live in the boonies. I'm lucky I have dial-up. On a good day, I connect at 26.9 kbps. Usually, it's 24 kbps, so all those lovely embedded vids in the blogs are mostly wasted on me. I was told that DSL would be available for me in 2008....I'm still waiting. Satellite, although still pricey, is more of a realistic option than before so things are looking up. (Pun intended) So, this net neutrality stuff had me concerned that I was going to be stuck in dial-up hell forever or have to pay higher service fees because of my remote location.
But, there's one thing that keeps me looking on the bright side of the net remaining neutral. My Prez wants me to have broadband.
Links of interest
Haaavaaaaad says yes to net neutrality.
The part of no repeats itself.
And repeats itself again
Good Stuff.
On this upcoming Thursday the FCC is supposed to vote on taking the first step toward approving formal net neutrality rules. They've just been floating along with informal Internet principles for four years, but now they find themselves having to make it more concrete because telecom giant Comcast has challenged their authora-tay.
Yeah. Big business is in there wanting loose regs so they can fark us over a little bit more, make us pay for what we already have. Oh, and look who wants to help 'em......the Polar Pound Puppies, our friends, the Blue Dogs.
Here is an excerpt from the letter they sent to the FCC:
The FCC should "carefully consider the full range of consequences that government action may have on network investment," the Democratic letter said. "In light of the growth and innovation in new applications that the current [regulatory] regime has enabled, as compared to the limited evidence demonstrating any tangible harm, we would urge you to avoid tentative conclusions which favor government regulation."Now, I don't know much about anything and I've got a boat load of evidence to prove it, but I do know this: If the Blue Dogs are agin it, I'm fer it.
What makes this even more confusing for me is there was another letter sent to the FCC by a coalition of minority groups indicating they had some of the same concerns as the Blue Dogs.
Huh?
Minority groups and Blue Dogs barkin' up the same tree? Did I fall into an alternate universe and not notice? That's nuts! It can't be right.
But, it was:
"As organizations that serve communities that are among the most severely impacted by a lack of access to technology, we urge you to keep your number one focus on the need to get everyone connected," said the letter, signed by representatives of the Hispanic Technology and Telecommunications Partnership, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), the Asian American Justice Center and other groups. "We are concerned that some of the proposed regulations on the Internet could, as applied, inhibit the goal of universal access and leave disenfranchised communities further behind."Hmmmm. Is somebody being played here? Why, yes. Yes, they are.
Farking astroturfers. Plus the big telecoms have saturated D.C. with lobbyists to influence the outcome of net neutrality rules. And of course the minority groups and Blue Dogs fell for their shtick. Lobbyists are effective.....that's why they proliferate. Lobbyists will be outlawed one day! I just know it! Awww, crap. I think I just fell into that alternate universe again.
Why are there so many dumb asses in Congress? There.....now I'm back in reality.
My reality is this: My PC is literally the last stop on the phone line. I mean literally. The physical phone line ends at my house, it doesn't go any farther and yes, I live in the boonies. I'm lucky I have dial-up. On a good day, I connect at 26.9 kbps. Usually, it's 24 kbps, so all those lovely embedded vids in the blogs are mostly wasted on me. I was told that DSL would be available for me in 2008....I'm still waiting. Satellite, although still pricey, is more of a realistic option than before so things are looking up. (Pun intended) So, this net neutrality stuff had me concerned that I was going to be stuck in dial-up hell forever or have to pay higher service fees because of my remote location.
But, there's one thing that keeps me looking on the bright side of the net remaining neutral. My Prez wants me to have broadband.
Links of interest
Haaavaaaaad says yes to net neutrality.
The part of no repeats itself.
And repeats itself again
Good Stuff.
Advertisement
Excellent wrap up flower.
The truth is, back in the day, these companies were supposed to invest profits into expanding lines and improving service.
They've adopted the stupid corporate model which is short term profit at the expense of long term viability. If they are too stupid and greedy to see it, I don't see why gubmint should make it easier for them.
They already have a similar deal as health insurance--captive audiences, yet that is not enough.
I've about had it with these corporations. They whine and fight over any type of competition of fairness. If they can't compete on a level playing field, then let's find companies that can.
October 17, 2009 5:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
you know Bwak, you astound me sometimes....hell most of the time. Yeah, short term profit for sure.
That is why we need a postal service. Some places, some isolated places create havoc for UPS and the other outsourced corporate pigs.
If it were not for the US Postal Service, people in those places could not get mail.
And of course PCA has it right.
October 17, 2009 7:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Captive audience is it, Bwak. With so many businesses of all sizes, and ordinary people too, so dependent on the internet for their livelihood or school, it has become as necessary as any other utility. And like any other utility, it should be regulated.
October 17, 2009 8:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Melissa Rohlin, "High-speed Internet access is a legal right in Finland", Los Angeles Times, October 15, 2009
October 17, 2009 6:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Great link, Cyants. Thanks. And it kinda cracks me up a little that Frawnce has declared internet use is a human right....not merely a legal one.
October 17, 2009 8:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
You know Flower, I think I figured it out. That is I figured out how you and Wendy Davis and some others just cause me to break out in uncontrollable laughter.
You are so forthright. Of course fark is a funny word anyway. hahahaha
Hell this issue is so complicated to me that I set it aside. And yet the net is the single most important thing in my crummy little life.
So Bwak helps out.
And PCA is one of our resident experts.
Thank you so much for this post.
October 17, 2009 7:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Complicated is a good word to describe it, Mr. Day. Big is another. The net is quite important to me too, as it is my primary source of news and other information. It has replaced my dependence on the local library in a profound way.
October 17, 2009 8:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Plus I got to see my 2 year old nephew's picture that was in the local paper even though he lives 200 miles away! :o) Daycare field trip....picking out his very own pumpkin...and he gets his pic in the paper! I mean...how cool is that?
October 17, 2009 9:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
That is too kewl fer schewl
=D
October 17, 2009 9:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Comcave is a shadowcaster. They are limiting our access and saying they aren’t doing it. When pressed, they tell how they do it! http://arstechnica.com/old/content/2008/02/comcast-and-net-neutrality-advocates-clash-at-fcc-hearing.ars They call it “network management” and see it as their right as corporate sovereigns.
They basically want to control how we can use applications, and when. They are blocking P2P access and discriminating geographically. We can’t have that in the free world now can we? Big YES to Net Neutrality. Great writing and research Flower! Thanks.
October 17, 2009 7:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
No! We cannot have that in the free world, strato! The free world is to keep rockin' in and not fer horsin' around with our ability to communicate.
Thanks for the link. Timothy Wu is a hero in this. He straight out told Comcast they're liars. In fact-finding about satellite internet, I came across the same type of 'management', the delaying of uploads and such.
"Artificial experiment". Fer cripes sake. Sounds like somebody was taking Luntz lessons.
October 17, 2009 9:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
The FCC has become far, far to political. I remember Nixon wanting to use it to get back a CBS and Walter Cronkite.
C
October 17, 2009 8:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
I seem to recall something about that as well, C.
October 17, 2009 9:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Comcast is doing what the big boys are supposed to do - spread like sludge out of an overflowing outhouse. Facilitated by the government of course. Heck, most of the switch to digital was to dice up the PUBLIC airwaves a bit more and transfer the PUBLIC ownership which used to be LEASED up for sale.
Then you have comcast also in the mix to controlling stake in NBC Universal which includes USA, Syfy, CNBC, MSNBC and Bravo.
The "communication" companies want to control everything - and whoever controls the "pipe" and what's in the "pipe" controls virtually everything - all communication and what gets communicated and how much it costs.
You picked a crucial issue Flowerchild.
October 17, 2009 8:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, in fairness, they also wanted the spectrum back (in order to sell it off, of course!)
And those broadcasters who are not doing HD can fit six channels of digital into one analog SD transmission's worth of spectrum.
And I have to admit, when I first saw the headline of this post, my mind flashed back to: "Bananas - in pajamas - are coming down the stairs!"
October 17, 2009 9:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
It like Monsanto wanting to control the seed for the crops we need to sustain ourselves. It's like Nestle wanting to buy up water rights in order to sell it back to us. It's like Haliburton and their farking fracing gas drilling.
What is this place? Our planet or Control Freak Central?
October 17, 2009 9:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
It is indeed. Capitalism runs towards monopolies, facilitated by legislative and regulatory changes that let them go - or even make it possible. The big bailout of the "financial sector" is rapidly shrinking the banking "competitors." We will come out of this with far fewer banks and likely 3-4 major banks. Remember when anti-monopoly legislation meant something and the government broke up Ma Bell?
October 17, 2009 9:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
I do, and MaBell looks positively benevolent next to these whiney assholes.
Free markets, what a load of hoo haw.
October 17, 2009 10:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah....what happened to that anti-monopoly stuff? I ask myself that question every time I hear something about a 'takeover' or a 'buyout'. So now all the Baby Bells have been rolled back into conglomerates and the clock has turned back 30 years. It's deja vu all over again.
I hope the FCC gets it right this time.
October 17, 2009 10:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am almost on overload in terms of all the crappola that has me pissed off.
I AM NOT a fan of big government. I want just the amount of government we need and not one bit more. The problem is these capitalistic bastards who would rather spend 1000 hours figuring out how to screw over people than 5 hours on how to help them. One way or another, if we DON'T regulate this, they WILL figure out a way to screw over us...You know it's true.
October 17, 2009 9:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
I can dig that, still. I am not a big fan of overbearing government. I want it only big enough to make the playing field level.
I do believe that for the most part, our legislators write bills and laws that have fairness as the goal. The problem is, like you say, the corporate lawyers set to work finding the loopholes and evasions around the laws and we end up with wimpy, wimpy, wimpy. Or worse, the lobbyists 'assist' the lawmakers with the tricky parts.
We have to send smarter people to Capitol Hill with meaner lawyers than the corporations have to tighten up the laws so there is no wiggle room for corporation bullshit.
October 17, 2009 11:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
I live in the middle of a family who trusts big business more than they trust big government...I figure I have the hope of voting the bastards in the government out of office...CEOs I'm stuck with.
October 17, 2009 11:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Okay, I admit, my pjs are giant blue flannel pj bottoms with snowflakes and polar bears on them and a grey top with snowflakes down the outer sleeves.
And I will most definitely fax and call my reps about this as well as the FCC. We can see how well it's all gone with the financial industry and the healthcare industry, let's see if they can't do this one better.
October 17, 2009 9:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Start with the FCC for now, Sink. This thing is just getting off the ramp...workshop type meetings begin on Thursday. But, I reckon if you have Blue Dog or Republican representation, a little note of encouragement might not go to waste.
I have traded my pj's for a diaphanous nightgown. It is, after all, Saturday night. ;o)
October 17, 2009 11:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
As a lifelong member of the technorati I enclose here a list of web sites that may be of interest.
www.dailytech.com/
news.cnet.com/
arstechnica.com/
www.techreport.com/
www.dslreports.com/
www.tgdaily.com/
www.anandtech.com/
www.infoworld.com/
These are just a few of many and contain daily tech topics of interest and which are widely read.
October 18, 2009 4:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
Cool list! Thanks, tpc. A technorati I am not, but I do keep an eye on PCWorld.com to keep me up to date with bug fixes and what's coming down the techno pipe.
October 18, 2009 11:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
It occurs to me I left off microsoft.com
DUH!
It's only the biggest site on the entire Internet. And is perenially rated as the top site on the Internet. Most people have no idea. But that's normal.
October 18, 2009 12:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's the response from Congresswoman Nita Lowey (I love this lady):
Dear Ms. B:
Thank you for contacting me to express your support for H.R. 3458, the Internet Freedom Preservation Act of 2009. I appreciate having the benefit of your views, and I welcome the opportunity to respond.
As you know, H.R. 3458 would amend the Communications Act of 1934 and establish a national broadband policy in order to safeguard consumer rights and spur innovation. I strongly support keeping the internet open and oppose the possibility of a "tiered" internet, which has the potential to drastically alter the most democratic form of media by undermining its essential neutrality and transparency. Standing behind network neutrality legislation means standing behind consumer choice, and I am proud to be on the side of those who would protect the internet from implementation of discriminatory networking and pricing practices.
Rest assured that I will continue to support a free and open internet. It must remain a democratic medium untouched by the oft-competing interests of some of its architects. I will support similar measures as they arise in the future.
Thank you again for sharing your thoughts with me. If you would like more information on this or other issues, or to sign up for my regular e-newsletter, visit my website at www.lowey.house.gov. Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can help you in any way.
Sincerely,
Nita Lowey
Member of Congress
October 18, 2009 12:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
No wonder you love your Congresswoman! What an awesome response. Thanks for sharing, Lis. I'm feeling better all the time about the net neutrality issue. I was so sure we were gonna get farked over again and Big Business was gonna win.
October 18, 2009 12:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
pppft... The jokes on them, I blog in my David Meister and D&G dresses exclusively and only in the finest shoes from Etienne Aigner. They just don't know bloggers at all, do they!
Flower... nice I love it! red'd
October 18, 2009 12:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh and yes, emphatically yes, Net Neutrality, because no matter what they do, we will find a way around their contemptuous attempts to control the world with money.
October 18, 2009 12:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, fer shure we would find a way around their bs. Because before we were bloggers in jammies or fancy dresses, we were devious little shits. Wardrobes change. Character does not. ;o)
October 18, 2009 2:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Great shit, Flowerchild!
Enjoyed! Rec'd! Yes!
Your allegiant servitor,
Overreach THIS!
October 18, 2009 4:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Migwetch, OT!
October 18, 2009 5:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Migwetch gayegiin, Flowerchild!!
October 18, 2009 10:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Those blasted digital cameras... Can't be "comfortable."
October 18, 2009 4:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Marquis, whenever I read your comments I always make sure to leave a trail of Reece's Pieces so I can find my way back home.
October 18, 2009 5:57 PM | Reply | Permalink