Slashdot Mirror
How Washington Will Shape the Internet
WebHostingGuy writes "As reported by MSNBC, 'The most potent force shaping the future of the Internet is neither Mountain View's Googleplex nor the Microsoft campus in Redmond. It's rather a small army of Gucci-shod lobbyists on Washington's K Street and the powerful legislators whose favor they curry.' The article examines several pieces of legislation and lobbying initiatives which are poised to affect you and your rights online. Topics covered include Net Neutrality, fiber to the home, the Universal Service Fund, codecs, and WiFi bandwidth usage." From the article: "After years of benign neglect, the Federal government is finally involved in the Internet — big time. And the decisions being made over the next few months will impact not just the future of the Web, but that of mass media and consumer electronics as well. Yet it's safe to say that far more Americans have heard about flag burning than the laws that may soon reshape cyberspace."
.....we won't see ONE permissive regulation. We'll see MANY restrictive regulations. If lawmaking comes to the internet, I for one am looking forward to the next big thing.
1. No sig. 2. ???? 3. Profit!!!
Generally, bash is superior to python in those environments where python is not installed.
I don't think it's too cynical to say that's probably intentional. Flag burning seems to be one of those hot-button issues that conservative politicians trot out when they want to (a) drum up votes or (b) distract people from other issues. (Liberals have their own hot-button issues, though these days the conservatives seem to be punching them just fine from the other side.)
but the US implying laws on internet usage will not completely change the internet. The rest of the world won't just follow along, and you'll find hi-tech companies moving to companies that are more forgiving to their line of business.
I interned for a congressman last year. My former boss is in charge of a lot of the tech stuff coming out, but I can tell you that most congressmen could not care less about most tech. For example, I heard a congressman ranting about how consumers don't have a right to choice in telco providers. I have also seen that many policies are nothing more than clunky attempts to maintain the status quo of regulation in an era of never before seen change. It is nice to see government trying hard to catch up with the times, but the minority of uber-users, hackers, and /.ers need to watch out to maintain what we love doing. I do not see any major problems (like China's level of Internet control) coming, but there are issues that could prove quite annoying at least. The most important thing that we can do is vote. Early and often. :)
Information wants a fueled airplane waiting at the hangar and no one gets hurt.
Your Republican Congress wants to remix the Internet.
--
make install -not war
This article was broad, but shallow. It buys into and repeats a whole lot of common misconceptions. For example, it phrases the net neutrality debate as wanting to charge different prices for "complex" and "simple" data, using VoIP and e-mail as examples. This is completely wrong. This is about charging money to people who are not your network peers for not intentionally slowing down traffic from particular, wealthy, people, groups, or organizations despite the fact that that traffic is otherwise identical to other traffic. Networks 5 peers away want to extort money from google for not intentionally crippling traffic to them and not to MSN search or Yahoo.
They also parrot the whole DRM as an anti-piracy measure. Everyone knows it fails miserably in that area. It is a content access control, so they can use differential pricing using regions and so they can charge you for the same content for different locations and devices. Anyone can point a camcorder at a TV screen and then upload it to the Web or make DVDs. Then, the masses can download it or buy it. What they can't do is easily move music they paid for from their Creative player to their iPod, car stereo, and CD player.
It is pretty sad that marketing dollars can speak loudly enough that even supposed technically competent reporters just spew out the same crap that they have heard over and over again. What ever happened to critical thinking and investigation?
"After years of benign neglect, the Federal government is finally involved in the Internet -- big time."
Then != than you morons.
On "Net Neutrality:"
...If the Googles of the world win, the network owners will undoubtedly figure out some other way to raise prices.
No matter which way it goes, it means a new element of government regulation. And as far as who pays to build out the networks -- in the end, one way or another, most of the costs will still be passed on to the consumer.
It pits network owners such as Verizon and AT&T against the companies who buy their bandwidth, such as Google and Amazon, and it hinges on whether the network owners can charge extra to deliver certain kinds of bits -- bill more for streaming video, for example, than simpler data like text e-mail.
My question is this, if it's simply about building and upgrading networks and the costs will be ultimately be passed on to the customer, why not just raise rates to those that purchase bandwidth accross the board? Why add the overhead of lobbying Congress to COMPLICATE the process of selling bandwidth?
Its a very worrying time (as someone who makes his lving doing web-related stuff) when it comes to the net and government regulation. Its frought on all sides with peril - government letting corporations do whatever they want can be just as dangerous as governments coming in and dictating what goes on. There is a narrow path on which government can walk and not hurt innovation and consumers. I dont think they'll be able to pull it off.
What astounds me is how bad google, MS, etc. are at lobbying. It seems like google and MS should be winning and not losing (as my current perception leads me to believe).
The Doormat
If you're not outraged, then you're not paying attention.
Yet it's safe to say that far more Americans have heard about flag burning than the laws that may soon reshape cyberspace.
/. writup this week. It is truly shocking that more Americans have heard about an issue that has existed many times longer longer than the word "cyberspace" than the recent goings on in congress related to the latter.
Congratulations, this is the single most useless comment in a
Yes, more people should be aware of and care about this, but this is a ridiculous way to word it. Also in the news, more people have opinions on school choice than IPv6 adoption. Shocking!
Back to the issue at hand. Let's not delude ourselves into thinking that our elected representatives will have a say in this any more than any other issue. The reshaping of the internet will be done SOLELY by Microsoft, AT&T/SBC, Verizon, Google, Cisco, Amazon, Hollywood, and the usual suspects. They will be writing the laws and casting the votes. There is no reason to even pretend otherwise anymore. Sure they will be be doing this via proxy with the elected representatives, but those reps (almost without exception) have no clue what they are talking about and just repeat the talking points given to them by their corporate masters. These issues will be determined exclusively by how money and favors are allocated.
I know as Americans it feels better to pretend that corruption and corporate ownership are the exceptions in government, but to do so hurts as a nation. EVERY person currently in congress has been bought and sold to a special interest or company (no expections, don't even try to parade your favorite one out and claim them to be virtuous and pure, you are wrong). When it comes down to it, they will ALL vote they way they are told and the opinion of the voters matters not one bit.
Finkployd
It's all part of God's plan to move all successful business to India.
Yes, to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars to date.Not just direct subsidization... government also subsidizes them by granting them monopoly rights. This allows the telcos to charge more to the consumer than we'd likely have to pay in a competitive market.
It's one thing to pay for the infrastructure out of tax dollars. It's quite another to then have no choice of who uses that publically-financed infrastructure.
"Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
Soon, the internet will be rendered a privilage in which you need a license to access. We've seen it happen with roads, its only a matter of time before it happens to the net. Also prepare for internet taxes.
Honestly, I don't understand how a conservative government can increase the size of government this much, and ask for internet regulations, I mean it does not follow the philosophy at all. Am I the only libertarian here?
When law making comes to the internet, another internet will be invented, just not anytime soon. My advice is, start the planning stages for the next internet, and then when there is the will to bring it forward, bring it forward. Let's just admit once and for all that it must have been Al Gore who gave us the internet, he did not invent it, but he handed it so us. Before that, the masses didnt know what the internet is, and the masses won't know what the next internet us when us geeks invent or find it, hey we mmight already have it.
to avoid damaged segments, such as any US restrictions.
In an interconnected world where China has more Net users than the US, and so does the EU, one country standing in defiance of the Net is like a small earthen dam trying to constrain the massive tsunami that will either go around it, go over it, or crush it beneath its massive weight of inevitability.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
You don't vote someone out. You vote someone else in.
So, who do we have to vote in? (That are actually any better, that is.)
'Sensible' is a curse word.
This type of issue, requires a lot more creative touch in my opinion, than simply coming up with old ideas. We need revolutionary ideas to save the internet, and if you do not have them, then dedicate your brain power into creating the next internet. I do not think video franchising is the kind of idea that is revolutionary. Open Source was a revolutionary idea, maybe we should contact Richard Stallman and see what he has to say. Maybe we need a new set of internet protocols? The wiring is not the issue here, the issue here is an issue of how the internet is modeled.
The next internet for sure won't be modeled anything like this one. The client server model is what lead to this. When you model the internet in a slave/master type of frame work, the result you get is a top down internet hierarchy. Beyond the protocols, the technology itself is also top down. I think all of this will change eventually when the technology adapts and becomes smaller, but this issue is a lot more complicated than simply, legal. In fact, legalese language is meaningless in the long term. It's always about design.
If you do want to think of legal language, the language itself has to be strategicially designed. The invention of the internet will go down in history as being as important as the invention of the constitution or the bill of rights. Of course it was not going to last forever, but you have to put the internet itself into historical context.
Really...the anything goes wild wild west anarchy internet is a *complete total threat to governments all over the planet and large corporations*. Everything about the current and past model is a threat to them. It's a threat to their rule, (they call it governing but it really is rule-technofuedalism) a threat to their money(your money is their money by default), the way they want power over you politically or economically, etc. All of it. So..apply occam's razor and some extrapolation-what do you think will happen? What this article says-and more.
It is about inevitable they will slice it up into something that looks like a combo of your cellphone bill and cable TV bill. You'll be seeing a large number of "nets" and be forced into "subscribing" to one or another-think a lot of different closed up walled garden type AOL experiences. And be paying through the nose to go outside that area-or be denied totally. And they'll be completely happy if 95% get herded into their control more, they'll pick off the other 5% at their leisure and when it suits their purposes. No one is completely leet enough to avoid it if they get a notion to mess up your day. No one.
Wow, I think you should have a look at the rest of the world and realize that we don't "import" laws from the US. Most of Europe and Canada are Socialist countries... you don't see us adapting US education and healthcare do you?
The Canadian Privacy Commissioner is currently reviewing cross-border data flow because Canadians' privacy is being compromised by the Patriot Act. If anything, we're seperating ourselves from the US, not the other way around.
You can vote as much as you want, I'll tell you this. If you are a consumer, you only have the right to consume. Thus the label consumer, because you consume and consume. Your opinions do not matter, if your opinions mattered the politicians would be meeting with you and asking you for your opinions.
If you really worked for a politician like you say, you'd know that the average voter has little to no influence on what deals are made between leaders. If you want in, then get in, join the club, work for the company, invest! If you want, start an investment club.
Just talking about politics will change absolutely nothing. Politicians do not care about our opinions. The have experts to tell them what to care about, they have pollsters to tell them what our opinions are, and they can shape our opinions when they don't like what our opinions are. In the end, it's ultimately just about money. You can buy influence, you can buy politicians, you can buy just about any favor. It's about favors.
Teleco companies are VERY VERY powerful, they have infinite leverage over any politician. The telecos know everything, and had these abilities before the whole NSA wiretap scandal, so what politician is going to challenge the big telcos, or big oil? I wouldnt, you wouldnt, and a politician wouldnt for the same reasons we wont.
The best thing you can do is work with these big powerful corporate entities, and try to make policies which in a give and take fashion, where you make deals. If you expect to be a politician, it's a dirty business, it's a VERY dirty business, but ultimately it is a business, and the way to be successful is to do business with big business.
If you actually think you can be involved in politics, and that Google has more influence than telephone and oil companies, you are insane. The hardware companies have more influence than the software companies. The phone companies have more influence than the hardware companies. The energy companies have influence over ALL companies.
If you were smart, take an economics class and see how society is organized.
The telcos seem to be setting themselves up for lawsuits down the road. Tom Tauke, Verizon executive vice president for public affairs, said today in a press release that all of this is about "hypothetical business plans" and thus shouldn't be addressed now.
If Net Neutrality isn't addressed proactively then we will see it end up in the courts where some activist judge could potentially really mess up the internet.
The best thing that could happen at this point would be for the telcos to come out and openly debate the merits of their Tiering plans instead of using front groups and lobbyist, short of that the next best thing might be some form of legislation.
But the worst thing to do would be to do nothing and wait for lawsuits.
that the internet exists outside of the US of A already, right?
As important an issue as net nutrality is, and as much as is will affect the internet, it will hardly matter to people in say, the EU, where many lawmakers are moving away from internet regulation.
Just a point, is all.
We (America) needs to shift priorities. There are too many priorities in the wrong things. The last election was won by Bush because of something as stupid as gay marriage. Some where along the line America has lost it's way and priorities shifted. Why are athletes, actors, actresses, ceo's, etc make insane amounts of money..where the people who actually do real work and benefit society make squat. Tell me why these people get paid millions to do very little amounts of work? Our system has become a two party system that just doesn't work any more. American's are fooled when going to the elections because there really is no choice in who they have to vote. Election campaigns have grown to be a huge shit fest on each other and they don't focus on things like what they can do to help society, not of just the US but of the world. There are too many rich, ignorant, selfish people in our government today. It isn't about serving the people any more. It is about what bids can I get, or how many votes I can get with the signing of this bill. It is absolutely appauling.
I would like to see our government completely wiped out from top to bottom and start from a bunch of young people who actually do give a shit about our country and our future. There is a huge damn generational gap that is happening. All the old people are making decisions that they have no idea what the consequences will be or they just don't care completely because they will be dead by the time those consequences happen (ie. global warming, internet, pirating, etc.)
The problem with America is that there is too much business. Because people are rich, they seem to have the most pull, which is bullshit because being rich doesn't make you intelligent. Too many things get passed through our congress and our senate because these assholes don't read anything, why? because they are on their damn big ass boats fishing or doing something other than coming up with new ways to help society. I hope all of our politicians burn in hell if there is one...because they are all evil....every single one of them. No one has the balls to stick up for what is right any more.
You know, we could of have been atleast one step closer to getting a better energy source. You take the worlds top scientists and stick them in a lab and give them whatever they want, and you will have your new, cleaner, better energy. How do you think the atom bomb was made? exactly the same way. We could of spent that $300 billion it is costing us for the fuckin retarded ass war in Iraq for R&D of new technology to HELP society on a global level instead of hurting society. I will be damn surprise if humans will make it another 100 years because of the retarded people in high up places will do something like nuke another country, which will set off a huge train wreck through out the world. How do we have the power to wipe the human race over and over again, and the person at the helm is no other than the guy who choked on a pretzel, the guy who fumbles words constantly, the guy who says he will not change his path even though everyone says he is a moron and he is wrong, the guy who probably doesn't know what 10 x 10 is?
Something needs to be done. We really need a good revolution of our government. Even though it won't happen, we really need one. This is what our second amendment right is for, to stand up against this bullshit when our government gets out of hand. Hell I am sure some of our military would even fight for the people, well whats left of it here in the US. I honestly don't think America could take another huge attack on American soil, and it shouldn't. Too many people in America are comfortable in their life driving their damn H3 hummers and as long as they can have their gas we are alright. I won't even go into all the BS oil and how that is going to end. America better get its act together or it will end up a 3rd world country in no time. And it all starts now with this damn goverment we have. This government has shifted America in a dir
>If so[nationwide telco video franchises], then fiber optic cables to the home are going to happen far more quickly than anyone would have predicted five years ago -- a major upgrade to the U.S. information infrastructure.
Yes, and if Lucy holds the football I can come running up to kick it. Telcos have spent *decades* saying "give us this break and we'll lay fiber', "give us that break and we'll lay fiber", then taking the money and doing nothing.
>abolition of the USF altogether -- but that seems unlikely, as that would impose an immediate and costly burden on many rural Americans.
The USF money is not accounted for and when rural areas get service the telcos raise the rates by the amount of the subsidy.
At least this one isn't telco propaganda:
>electronic versions of anonymous cash
That was the cypherpunk dream from the previous millenium, but if you look around at all the anonymous payment systems that used to exist they've all been shut down by the requirements of USAPATRIOT.