Slashdot Mirror
Senate Republicans Introduce Anti-Net Neutrality Legislation (thehill.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Hill: Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) introduced a bill Monday to nullify the Federal Communications Commission's net neutrality rules. "Few areas of our economy have been as dynamic and innovative as the internet," Lee said in a statement. "But now this engine of growth is threatened by the Federal Communications Commission's 2015 Open Internet Order, which would put federal bureaucrats in charge of engineering the Internet's infrastructure." Sens. John Cornyn (R-Texas), Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), Rand Paul (R-Ky.), Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), Ben Sasse (R-Neb.), and James Inhofe (R-Okla.) co-sponsored Lee's bill. FCC Chairman Ajit Pai introduced his own plan last week to curb significant portions of the 2015 net neutrality rules that Lee's bill aims to abolish. Pai's more specific tack is focused on moving the regulatory jurisdiction of broadband providers back to the Federal Trade Commission, instead of the FCC, which currently regulates them.
That would be Ron Wyden, a Democratic Senator from Oregon. He's been consistently very good when it comes to issues regarding the internet, privacy, and putting the needs and rights of users ahead of corporate (or government) ones, or at minimum on an equal footing (which feels like 'ahead' these days).
At this point the Republican party has become a full blown terrorist organization. Almost nothing in their agenda can be called even remotely beneficial to the country from climate change, wall street to net neutrality. Not to mention the lunatic in charge is hell bent on tearing down his predecessors legacy just to satisfy his ego.
I'd bet 95% of politicians are not tech-savvy. They tend to be older individuals, and also come from backgrounds not dependent in tech. There are exceptions, but most of them aren't tech savvy.
That doesn't mean it can't be explained to them: http://theoatmeal.com/blog/net...
No sig today...
The ISPs are messing with the Internet. Net neutrality is about regulating the ISPs and Carriers to not "shape" traffic. There is no regulations on the Internet, until they enter this legislation.
Tell everyone, keep congress out of the internet.
There is an additional issue. Not only are cable companies operating as state sponsored monopolies but since the deregulation of the late 90's they also tend to own both the means of production and the means of distribution. This gives them an increasingly powerful incentive to use internet services as a weapon against their competitors. That is what's driving the relatively new need for something like NN. I'm not sure if NN is the answer but I would whole heartedly support another Ma Bell'esq forced breakup of cabled companies from their ISP's and possibly from the media creation portions of the companies. You should be paying to lease a line from your cable company (or phone company, or fiber company, or local service district) and getting ISP service from a separate unaffiliated company of your choice.
The perversity of the Universe tends towards a maximum. - O'Toole's Corollary
Net Neutrality is like saying I have to use a Prius to haul 2 tons of bricks, or I have to us USPS instead of Fed/Ex or UPS.
In a world where net neutrality means something completely different, then maybe? In this world, it's complete bullshit. You keep describing your ideal system, and it sounds suspiciously like this:
the principle that Internet service providers should enable access to all content and applications regardless of the source, and without favoring or blocking particular products or websites
Which is the definition of net neutrality. Literally. You know, not favoring the Prius, in your tortured example, or the truck that would make sense, but rather treating bits as bits, regardless of source or destination. Like our transportation system does today.
All that is necessary for the triumph of good is that evil men do nothing.