Slashdot Mirror
Net Neutrality Suffers Major Setback
RingDev writes "The US Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Comcast today, stating that the FCC lacks the authority to require broadband providers to give equal treatment to all Internet traffic flowing over their networks."
We're so screwed. All politicians are so technologically ignorant they can't tell when a lobbyist is lying to them, and even if they could tell many wouldn't care.
I am moving the hell out of this country ASAP. Day after day its just worse news. US is going to have some massive brain drain soon, I predict.
wow, are you really this ignorant?
*brought to you by Starbucks
>>>For the purpose of regulating interstate and foreign commerce
Because most Comcast companies are organized to handle INTRAstate communications. They lay their wires to serve a town or county, but don't cross the state line except at the highest level. Therefore they are can choose which websites they will, or will not carry, to the local homes.
Therefore I'd suggest you try lobbying your State government, and have them regulate Comcast, in the same fashion that they regulate the electrical and natural gas monopolies.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
Because most Comcast companies are organized to handle INTRAstate communications. They lay their wires to serve a town or county, but don't cross the state line except at the highest level.
Bullshit. They have fiber crisscrossing state lines all over the country.
>>>Notice the word Communications. So it seems like they might have some authority here.
Yes the FCC has authority over commerce/communications AMONG the States. Not inside. Not over a local ISP that operates inside a town or county and does not cross the border. (Try reading the Supreme Law sometime.)
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
Once the internet is completely metered and locked down, with corporate traffic given huge priority over private traffic, I wonder if all the "free market solves everything" libertarian types will still be so anti-regulation....
The libertarian philosophy is illogical at it's heart. Taking government out of everything in our lives is not government, it's Anarchy. Once the government gets involved in anything, it's no longer libertarian. It could be conservative, but it's not libertarian. And if you think the government should only be providing national defense and nothing else, then what about police and courts? Again, no rule of law, just Anarchy within the borders.
My father is the president of his home town council. Every libertarian he's every had to deal with wants the government to stay off their land and out of their life... until their neighbor does something to piss them off, then they march in demanding action from the government. It's just not logical.
Considering the philosophy is not logical, and many of them are, IMHO, downright crazy, I seriously anything short of a holocaust will change their minds. Even some conservative Republicans continue to say the economic downturn was because we weren't conservative enough in our regulation laws, and they and libertarians will cling to statements like that until the end of days.
"All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"
>>>>>Because most Comcast companies are organized to handle INTRAstate communications. They lay their wires to serve a town or county, but don't cross the state line except at the highest level. Therefore they are can choose which websites they will, or will not carry, to the local homes.
>>
>>Bullshit. They have fiber crisscrossing state lines all over the country.
Somebody doesn't know how to read. Read the bolded part again. And read the sentence after that. The U.S. government has jurisdiction over the fibers crossing state lines. The U.S. government does *not* have jurisdiction over the local cables lying under your street. If Comcast wants to block rushlimbaugh.com from crossing over their local-area-network (buried coaxial cables), the U.S. government has no authority to force them to do so.
That power has been reserved to the State government.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
Trust me: you want the government OUT of your internet.
Let's look at the SSN; we were told it'd never be needed outside of that program. That changed.
Let's consider seat belts. Thanks to 'Unsafe at any Speed' the government had a toe-hold on the auto industry and regulated it nearly to death.
Let's think about the military; while they risk their lives, pencil-necked geeks go to the UN and write RIDICULOUS LAWS like the one that snipers must be fought from the ground, they can't climb up the tower and shoot them in the back.
Everything the government touches turns to crap.
No? Amtrack. Social Security, Welfare, Medicare, everything's bankrupt and we're borrowing more. SHOW ME ONE SUCESSFUL GOVERNMENT PROGRAM.
If the FCC gets control over the ISPs it won't stop there. Soon it'll be government control over content. "Not enough FTP is being used; you must now buy BigCo-brand FTP software to do your web browsing" and other brain-dead, not-even-veiled attempts to corner the market to make a political friend a billionaire. Again.
If you don't like Comcast's network trickery, you can cut off the account! When enough people do this, they'll be out of business.
PLEASE DON'T LET THE BLIND, STUPID STORMTROOPER IN.
Mark my words: this is one disaster that can wait.
--- For a good time mail uce@ftc.gov
>>>the FCC does have the authority to regulate inside states.
Really? Please quote to me the relevant portion of the U.S. Constitution which gave them that power. All I can find is this: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
That's pretty damn clear. The FCC has *no* authority inside states. Neither does any other part of the national government.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
How many times does that have to be said?
I'm not sure how excessive repetition will make your falsehoods true. You could probably assume you've tried enough, it'll never actually work.
Good, my choice is to vote against all regulation like your suggesting. And quite obviously, others feel the same way.
We don't need your nanny state. I can make my own choices.
If you can't, please get your own baby sitter and don't appoint one for everyone.
Anonymous comments are as pathetic as the anonymous "sources" that contaminate gutless journalism from the New York Time
I do know the difference between needs and wants. I understand the idea between surviving and living in relative luxury. I also support the idea that the FCC should regulate the Internet.
I simply hate the sloppy thinking of the entitled legions who "need" everything and "need" it provided to them.