Slashdot Mirror
Why Is the Internet Association Rewarding a Pro-NSA Net-Neutrality Opponent?
First time accepted submitter erier2003 writes The decision to give a major award to House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy is curious given McCarthy's many questionable stances on Internet-freedom issues. For one thing, the California congressman is an avowed opponent of net neutrality. In May 2014, as the Federal Communications Commission debated new net neutrality rules, McCarthy—then the House Majority Whip, the chamber's third-highest-ranking member—signed a House GOP letter to the FCC warning that Title II regulation represented "a counterproductive effort to even further regulate the Internet."
The Internet Association -- which counts tech giants like Amazon, Etsy, Facebook, Google, Reddit, and Twitter among its members...
Because these companies have no interest in internet freedom as it pertains to their cattle but as it pertains to fourth quarter earnings. The internet based on these companies is a cash-in-hand libertarian pelvic thrust of states that dont see a red-cent of sales tax on anything from a website, keep their warrantless surveillance quiet, and rubberstamp their patents with a smile. This isnt an award, so much as a dollop of warm grease on an open republican wheel. this group quietly gave an award to McCarthy, the second most powerful House Republican after Speaker John Boehner, because they have a PAC that hasnt donated yet and are making it known to anyone looking for upcoming election year bucks.
Good people go to bed earlier.
Woosh... xOra's point was, government's intervention causes harm.
And what you don't get is not whether government regulation is a bad or good thing, but what kind of effort do we put into *good* governance. You know, like what everyone else on the planet does, from countries to corporations. Ever hear about "corporate governance"? Ever think of countries as just large corporations? It's an over-simplification (by far) but I think it's the only way to illustrate the "all regulation is bad" idea as lunacy.
The way broadband is sold in this country, the legality of what ISPs do in their contracts are just shy of outright fraud.
But hey, all regulation is bad.
You people want to toss out everything and leave anarchy behind. Forget about good governance, let's just have more burning rivers, consumer fraud, and land-grabs using private armies.
--
BMO
I was recently reading a very interesting article about paid Russian trolls. They'll go to all the small-town Russian blogs and post the same types of rants. But they don't just post pro-gov't rants. They've got this whole cast of characters and script where one person makes a seemingly-well-reasoned pro-gov't argument, while the anti-gov't "villain" will respond with something ridiculous or completely off-point.
It's not enough to make your side seem strong, you also have to make your opponents look foolish.
So when I see a seemingly-well-reasoned-but-wrong "government regulation is bad" argument followed by a "higher taxes and more expensive ISPs are good" argument - both by Anonymous Cowards - I think Soviet Russia. You guys are the worst kind of scum.
Last post!