Internet Neutrality

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

Should corporations get priority on the Internet?

 

 

Recently it emerged the FCC was considering letting ISPs charge fees to content providers for prioritised access to their networks as long as they acted "in a commercially reasonable manner".

 

This is why the control of the Internet should be placed in the hands of the ITU (a UN agency).  We have enough advertising as it is.  I, for one, don't want big corporations to have priority on the net.

 

[Duke87 1,070]

 

The debate has taken on new urgency in recent months as ISPs grow increasingly impatient with the glut of bandwidth-heavy services such as video-on-demand.

 

The classic attitude of stale telecom companies suffering from a lack of competition. In a competitive marketplace, ISPs would respond to this by investing in upgrades to their infrastructure to handle the extra demand - or suffer as their competitors did and grabbed more customers with faster service. But telecom companies in the US all operate in a near-monopoly situation, so they have no motive to do this. Instead they complain about increased traffic and want to start charging the sources of high-bandwidth services extra, so they can make more money and still sit on their asses and not upgrade their networks.

 

Net neutrality has some obviously serious implications for the public at large, but the fact that there is a fight over this is just one facet of a larger problem: that the communications industry needs either tighter regulation or more competition in the marketplace, since it currently suffers from a lack of both.

[Fatherted 129]

Apparently one router company put the FCC site in the slow lane to protest. Good on ya.

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

While we have the big three in Canada (Bell, Rogers, Shaw), there are lots of small outfits around, especially in outlying communities.  Unfortunately, the CRTC has its mitts in this.

[LexusInfernus 908]

Even so, the internet is one of the most important inventions of the past decades and it is becoming vital social infrastructure. Without net neutrality, there is a very real possibility and chance that the internet becomes a luxury for those with money. It will furthermore give those with money the possibility to essentially control the flow of information, those with money essentially get the priority from ISP's to get their message out the quickest while fringe groups or alternative sources with less money will suffer. In a free and democratic society, this cannot be tolerated. 

 

The death of net neutrality in the United States will only enhance the position of the rich elites and big corporations even further, while the majority gets shafted. This is unacceptable. 

[Wiimeiser 434]

Even so, the internet is one of the most important inventions of the past decades and it is becoming vital social infrastructure. Without net neutrality, there is a very real possibility and chance that the internet becomes a luxury for those with money. It will furthermore give those with money the possibility to essentially control the flow of information, those with money essentially get the priority from ISP's to get their message out the quickest while fringe groups or alternative sources with less money will suffer. In a free and democratic society, this cannot be tolerated. 

 

The death of net neutrality in the United States will only enhance the position of the rich elites and big corporations even further, while the majority gets shafted. This is unacceptable. 

As I have mentioned several times before, the USA is repeating the exact means by which the Soviets adopted Communism.

 

What I have failed to mention previously, is that Communism is seen as the ultimate evil in America, leaving the country with no alternatives if they overthrow Capitalism.

[Fatherted 129]

Don't see why Communism would be seen as so evil. It doesn't work well but neither does capitalism.

[AkemiAzula 280]

Aye well said Father Ted. Both are ideal systems and obviously ideals dont work here. However freedom of speech is an achievable ideal and equality of speech should be part of that.

[jmsepe 2,038]

Don't see why Communism would be seen as so evil. It doesn't work well but neither does capitalism.

 

This is by far the most truthful and straightforward reply I have ever read in Simtropolis. 

 

Well, let's just say that no matter how efficient your competitor is, you will always see his ways wrong and your methods the best, it's propaganda. 

[Fatherted 129]

Well until 1973 North Korea (Marxism-Leninism) was outpacing South Korea (Capitalism) in economic growth before the USSR gave Kim the reigns full on.

I'll just leave that there.

[LexusInfernus 908]

Yeah to bad all those communist regimes are run by dictators, with prison camps, secret police and some occasional genocidal tendency. But yeah, totally better than capitalism. 

 

As for those high growth figures, sure, rapidly expanding your industrial base through forced labor does tend to inflate the growth figures. Especially if before that you were still a pre-industrial agrarian society. To bad that after the initial growth phase, the whole thing pretty much stops growing, never mind being able to produce anything of quality. 

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

I think we can agree that Capitalism has outlived Communism by several centuries.  Marx and Engels got it wrong because they assumed that the dictatorship of the proletariat would have honest pigs.  For a rather satirical view of this see George Orwell's Animal Farm.

 

Churchill once said that of all the economic systems we have tried so far, Capitalism is the least worst.  This system is on the brink of collapse at the moment but there doesn't seem to be an alternative on the horizon.  I suppose we'll have to muddle through, somehow.

 

Our mixed system of slightly socialist Capitalism seems to be working for Canada.  At the moment the right of centre bunch have the bit in their teeth, however, and the next election (2015) should fix that.  This system only works with minority governments.

[Fatherted 129]

My favourite form of Government is the Scandinavian Socialist Republics with a free market. Free healthcare and social benefits for all but a standard capitalist economy.

The GDP of North Korea was higher than SK's until 1973. Proven beyond doubt.

Besides, have you not heard of the FEMA camps? The innocently set up concentration camps in the US, using a setup model identical to Nazi Germany ("disaster relief camps") before being activated within a matter of days. The US Government is NOT a good example of capitalism in action.

Also, communism is a form of economy. It doesn't have to be a dictatorship a la Cuba used to be.

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

Well, communism means everyone owns everything in common.  You would be sitting at our computer talking over our telecommunications circuit.

 

The dead end of a Capitalist society is exemplified by the U.S.A.  Look at how the moneyed interests have deadlocked congress.  It costs millions of dollars now to run for any federal office so unless you are a member of the moneyed elite, you can only get elected if some member of the elite owns you.  It is not a democracy, it is an oligarchy at best and a plutocracy at worst.  It will soon devolve into a subsidiary of the corporate cartel.  Alas, many countries in the "western world" are headed in this direction, including us.  Let's coin a new term: Mammonocracy.  That is, a state totally driven by greed.

 

The Scandinavian countries have what I would call nanny states.  The suicide rates were high the last time I looked.  A free ride isn't all its cracked up to be.

[LexusInfernus 908]

It is a perfect model of capitalism in action. The US is exactly what you get from to much capitalism. A society divided between rich and poor, where the rich virtually control all of the country. That is the logical conclusion of capitalism if no corrective actions are taken to prevent this, like in Europe. 

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

Perhaps you would like to amplify the "like in Europe" point.

[AkemiAzula 280]

While ive been on benefits that wasnt for a lack of willinvness to work. At heart im with the founding fathers but in reality i see nothing but problems with the modern world. It steikes me as decadent and pointless at best and hellish at worst.

[NMUSpidey 3,956]

This is a thread for discussing net neutrality.  Please return to the original topic.  There is an additional thread somewhere for discussing the merits of communism and capitalism.  Please continue that discussion there.

[Fatherted 129]

There's not much to discuss about net neutrality. It should not be broken, there is nothing more to say. A discussion is defined by the ability to manoeuvre topics based on attributes of responses to the starting point.

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

The initial article had to do with the U.S. FCC setting special privileges for large commercial users.  I suggested control should be moved from the U.S. to the ITU (International Telegraphy Union), a UN agency.  The runaway capitalist system in the U.S. could easily taint net neutrality should the FCC agree to the proposals before it.

 

How do we feel about this?

[LexusInfernus 908]

The initial article had to do with the U.S. FCC setting special privileges for large commercial users.  I suggested control should be moved from the U.S. to the ITU (International Telegraphy Union), a UN agency.  The runaway capitalist system in the U.S. could easily taint net neutrality should the FCC agree to the proposals before it.

 

How do we feel about this?

The FCC is apparantly listening to the people first though. They set up a special adress where you can send your concerns too. I highly advise every American on this board to do so. 

Here is the email address: openinternet@fcc.gov

 

There is also a White House petition you can sign: https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/maintain-true-net-neutrality-protect-freedom-information-united-states/9sxxdBgy

 

But first read this! http://consumerist.com/2014/04/29/everything-you-need-to-know-before-e-mailing-the-fcc-about-net-neutrality/

[Sabretooth78 808]

I fail to see the merit in badmouthing capitalism for our current woes when we don't have capitalism and haven't in several decades.  This country was made prosperous by free market capitalism working in tandem with a checked government (really, the former can only be achieved with the latter).  As the government tentacles have crept further and further into the economy and governance has shifted from bottom-up (we were the only such experiment in government at the time) to top-down, the quicker we have lurched into decline.  The very idea that net neutrality even has to be discussed is a symptom of this.

[Ocram's Razr 963]

If Net Neutrality in the USA is destroyed, it would be very easy for companies like Comcast (which provides our Internet and TV services) to greatly slow down sites like Netflix and even CNN and BBC in favor for comcast content (which includes NBC).

--Ocram

[Msprintz 25]

I fail to see the merit in badmouthing capitalism for our current woes when we don't have capitalism and haven't in several decades.  This country was made prosperous by free market capitalism working in tandem with a checked government (really, the former can only be achieved with the latter).  As the government tentacles have crept further and further into the economy and governance has shifted from bottom-up (we were the only such experiment in government at the time) to top-down, the quicker we have lurched into decline.  The very idea that net neutrality even has to be discussed is a symptom of this.

That's not entirely accurate. This country was made prosperous by corporations working without the oversight of the government. It was only when those corporations threatened to become more powerful than the government itself that the electorate took action. Regulations were put in place to prevent that scenario from happening, some sensible and some not so much. Net Nuetrality is a needed regulation in my opinion to avoid corporations from becoming too powerful.

[Sabretooth78 808]

 

I fail to see the merit in badmouthing capitalism for our current woes when we don't have capitalism and haven't in several decades.  This country was made prosperous by free market capitalism working in tandem with a checked government (really, the former can only be achieved with the latter).  As the government tentacles have crept further and further into the economy and governance has shifted from bottom-up (we were the only such experiment in government at the time) to top-down, the quicker we have lurched into decline.  The very idea that net neutrality even has to be discussed is a symptom of this.

That's not entirely accurate. This country was made prosperous by corporations working without the oversight of the government. It was only when those corporations threatened to become more powerful than the government itself that the electorate took action. Regulations were put in place to prevent that scenario from happening, some sensible and some not so much. Net Nuetrality is a needed regulation in my opinion to avoid corporations from becoming too powerful.

 

Perhaps, but don't also forget that corporations themselves are constructs of the state.  The symbiotic relationship between them is part of the poison.

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

Unfortunately, the American 'democracy' has been corrupted by the corporations, which are a creation of the U.S. government.  As an outside observer, I consider what the Americans now have is a Plutocracy.

 

If you look into the period of American history when the great 400 of New York were active in industry, if you asked any of the principals like John D. Rockefeller, they would state that their goal was to own everything.  Well, it has taken about a century, but this goal has been achieved.

 

You now have a Roman Empire plutocracy, with the plebs and the patricians complete with clients (congress), and hangers on.  The plebs in general live from day to day on a catch as catch can basis and seem to be totally self-satisfied with their lot.  They even have blood sports (NFL, NHL, at least) to satisfy the mob sponsored by various corporate interests.  The whole thing is devolving into a bread and circuses situation and as with the Romans, the plutocrats are running out of bread as the climate changes and they deny it.

 

"Vanity of vanities, all is vanity"

Ecclesiastes I

[Sabretooth78 808]

I don't disagree at all, but I would also add in components of fascism (police state) and kakistocracy.  Of course those are by no means mutually exclusive and are rather probably part of a consequence.

 

Oh well, to quote a presenter I sat for a few weeks ago, the pig gets fat and the hog gets slaughtered.  Oh how I look forward to the hog's day.

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

Well, there is not question that some politicians are kakistarchs.  In fact, if you look at the U.S. congress, it seems to be populated mostly by such people.  Is it any wonder that politicians are now rated in popularity below lawyers?

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

Google swamped with privacy requests.

 

Search engines are a problem.  Just how neutral do you want to be on the net?

[Sabretooth78 808]

Wonder when somebody will come after facebook for this kind of thing as well.  I swear, each passing day I'm more and more tempted to just delete the account - mostly boring, largely homogeneous content and yet some people are somehow able to occupy an entire day with it...  Now of course I rarely use it and post even less identifying info (I rarely even "like" anything) so I myself couldn't really care less if they kept what little I had; but the principal of the thing tells me it's mine (not theirs as they might claim) and I should have the so-called "right to be forgotten".