Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Obama FCC Caves On Net Neutrality

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the lets-go-spelunking dept.

An anonymous reader writes "...the rule, which will be voted on during tomorrow's FCC meeting, falls drastically short of earlier pledges by President Obama and the FCC Chairman to protect the free and open Internet. The rule is so riddled with loopholes that it's become clear that this FCC chairman crafted it with the sole purpose of winning the endorsement of AT&T and cable lobbyists, and not defending the interests of the tens of millions of Internet users."

9 of 853 comments (clear)

  1. What a suprise by AmonTheMetalhead · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Money rules this world...

    1. Re:What a suprise by oldspewey · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes

      --
      If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
    2. Re:What a suprise by spun · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It would be illegal under your scheme to give real time or streaming applications priority. Try again. How about, "No Internet provider shall discriminate based on end-points." Discriminate by type of traffic, sure. Discriminate based on where it came from or where it is going, no.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    3. Re:What a suprise by scubamage · · Score: 5, Insightful

      More importantly, what if a carrier network is carrying VoIP traffic? Your rule would make it illegal to give 911 calls priority over all other traffic, and would undermine the ideas of QoS. I agree with your rule in spirit, but it needs some amendments to be practical.

  2. Re:Pitchforks by Pojut · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No clue. yesterday, I was advocating Net Neutrality in a discussion here on Slashdot, and I continue to advocate for it. What the FCC is showing here, however, is not what I and other like-minded folks are advocating. I think the first post has it right...money runs things.

    PS: Sincere apologies to those who told me to read up yesterday...now that I have, I can see why you're calling bullshit. Please note that my support of Net Neutrality stands, but not this version of it.

    --
    Living With a Nerd
  3. Re:Color me Stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The election went the way it did because Obama never puts up a fight over anything.

  4. Re:Pitchforks by countertrolling · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Two words... Dumb pipe... That's what we're supposed to be demanding here.

    --
    For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
  5. Re:Is it really so outrageous? by chemicaldave · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Government doesn't exist to protect the rights of citizens who are consuming over those who are producing.

    This is absurd. The government should exist to serve only the needs of people. Treating a corporation like any other citizen is ridiculous, especially when you promote the interests of a corporation over those of the actual people.

  6. Re:Victory For Freedom by ZOmegaZ · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I hate to break it to the corporatist crowd, but the ISPs built those networks with our money, from government subsidies. They received those subsidies to enhance our national infrastructure. If monopolists have the same property rights as everyone else, the free market dies. And if monopolists control infrastructure without oversight to ensure equal access, democracy dies.

    --
    Former US House candidate, TN-5