Slashdot Mirror
Americans Plan Massive 'Net Neutrality' Protest Next Week (theguardian.com)
An anonymous reader quotes the Guardian:
A coalition of activists, consumer groups and writers are calling on supporters to attend the next meeting of the Federal Communications Commission on September 26 in Washington DC. The next day, the protest will move to Capitol Hill, where people will meet legislators to express their concerns about an FCC proposal to rewrite the rules governing the internet... The activist groups are encouraging internet users to meet their lawmakers and tell them how a free and open internet is vital to their lives and their livelihoods...
"The FCC seems dead set on killing net neutrality, but they have to answer to Congress, and Congress has to answer to us, their constituents," said Evan Greer, campaign director for Fight for the Future, one of the protest's organisers. "With this day of advocacy, we're harnessing the power of the web to make it possible for ordinary internet users to meet directly with their senators and representatives to tell their stories, and make sure that lawmakers hear from the public, not just lobbyists for AT&T and Verizon," she said.
Monday Mozilla and the Internet Archive are also inviting the public to a free panel discussion featuring former FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler on ways the American public can act to preserve net neutrality.
"The FCC seems dead set on killing net neutrality, but they have to answer to Congress, and Congress has to answer to us, their constituents," said Evan Greer, campaign director for Fight for the Future, one of the protest's organisers. "With this day of advocacy, we're harnessing the power of the web to make it possible for ordinary internet users to meet directly with their senators and representatives to tell their stories, and make sure that lawmakers hear from the public, not just lobbyists for AT&T and Verizon," she said.
Monday Mozilla and the Internet Archive are also inviting the public to a free panel discussion featuring former FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler on ways the American public can act to preserve net neutrality.
No WE don't. Some of us realize the hypocrisy of this movement - and this article.
Americans are fanatic liberals, free market and stuff, so why aren't they doing another Internet Service Provider in order to hit the current ISP hard, and get back the net neutrality once for all?
Yes, it's hard to do. Can still be done. See other examples, such as https://www.ffdn.org/
"and Congress has to answer to us, their constituents,"
That's the funniest thing I've ever read...
Since most people haven't even heard about it. I learned about it reading this headline. It'll be massive like Trump's inauguration.
The rules on what's being called "Net neutrality" has never been in force. The internets the way they are today are how they've always been.
What we really need is to set our devices to operate in mesh network mode. Where is Google and Apple in this?
to hit DC
please.
Good luck with that.
This article is a barely disguised advertisement of the event. Guardian's "journalists" are making this story instead of merely reporting it....
Strangely enough, no one complains about this incident of foreign meddling in the America's political process.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Define "Massive" You keep using that word, and I'm not sure you know what it means.
Sent from my TARDIS
But I have to catch up on Facebook and Twitter, and whatever is the latest on Netflix.
"...they have to answer to Congress, and Congress has to answer to us, their constituents,"
Before you go spouting off regarding who answers to whom, remember just how much people don't give a shit about Rights anymore. Just last week, Millennial's confirmed they would gladly give up their Right to Vote in exchange for getting some college debt relief.
I am not against net neutrality per se. I am against Internet companies lying that they will provide me certain data rates, when in fact behind the scenes they are extorting a part of my Netflix fee, in essence making me pay more to them than the agreed-upon amount.
And no, hiding it in fine print, hoping people don't realize, is fraud.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
If anyone turns violent or has a millennial-style temper-tantrum meltdown, it'll be for nothing, a big waste of time. I myself would not take cying adult children seriously. Let's hope self-restraint is present along with the crowd, as it's a critical issue and I do not want numbnuts like that representing it on my behalf.
Broadband Latency Matters
>> Massive 'Net Neutrality' Protest Next Week
Are you sure? Usually we need a little more advance notice to do that for you.
>> ordinary internet users to meet directly with their senators and representatives to tell their stories
I don't think I've heard the phrase "internet users" in about 20 years. You might find that most people already in touch with their reps are already on the Internet, but sure, let's see what you dig up!
Since when do they need to answer to the public? And I do not mean where it is written when they should, but since when they actually do it and what the consequences are in reality when they don't do that.
Because what I now see is that there is no accountability. They are being re-elected, so there is no reason for them to listen.
It is like saying to kids they are not allowed to take a cookie and they do it. If there are no consequences, they will take another one. You can moan and yell and be upset and point at the house rules and say to wait till daddy comes home and put out the jumper cables, but as long as nothing happens and the kids know nothing will happen, it is just stress for you and more cookies for the kids.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
Who modded this down? Mod parent up! Payed RUSSIAN trolls will not prevail here. Fake mod, REVEAL YOURSELF!
"they have to answer to Congress, and Congress has to answer to us" HAHAHAHHA what fantasy world do YOU live in? Once they get to DC, they could give crap about anyone. It's a little club...once you are invited in, and play along with their rules, you are there FOR LIFE, and become rich beyond your wildest dreams!
Don't ruin the internet for the rest of the world either, FCC.
Requiem for the American Dream
What kind of metals did they use? Gold I hope.
I thought the jugalos were a few days ago.
You are being incredibly dishonest by claiming that censorship hasn't been has a constant worry in every net neutrality discussion on Slashdot. Claiming the EFF is pro-censorship is FUD and you know it.
Americans Plan Massive 'Net Neutrality' Protest Next Week
Don't people normally protest against an action or idea? If they support a given cause, it's usually called a rally.
A recursive sig
Can impart wisdom and truth
Call proc signature()
Gold I hope.
Showers
And you think it would be different without net neutrality? Without, you get that on top of corporations censoring and shaping to their benefit.
If anything, we need true net neutrality. All and any content must be delivered by those that transport it without any kind of discrimination. Only the endpoints may decide to disallow any kind of content to stem from them or be delivered to them.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Even if the censorship legislation were to be removed, it doesn't prevent the beneficiaries of Net Neutrality from censoring content THEY don't like. Ultimately, Net Neutrality is a redistribution of power.
I have a solution. The infrastructure "generally" belongs to the ISPs, right? I'm on board with personal freedom, so I tend to side with property owners to do with their property as they will. Yes, I know that would suck for the customers, but I have a solution for that...
Congress pass a law which allows privately held ISPs to filter and shape traffic however they will. Same bill would explicitly allow city/county/state/fed entities to setup their own infrastructure AND create a federal fund that these entities can apply for to help build out their own infrastructure. ISPs would be barred from making any changes for 5-10 years, during which time they pay a new tax into the "build out" fund.
Private property is private property, and no one should be forced to restrict their use of such. So we make the infrastructure public, and introduce serious competition into the market. :D
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
Unlawful means "Not explicitly written in law", not illegal
That's both a strawman argument and false semantics, to boot. "Unlawful" means "not permitted by law", like copyright infringment or child pornography. Under your misinterpretation, copyright infringement and child pornography would have no laws covering them, which is obviously both stupid and wrong. However, that aside there is no such clause in Net neutrality legislation in the US. You are spouting completely fabricated nonsense, and almost certainly a shill.
Have any of you fucking morons read and understood it?
In your case, the answer is at least 50% "No". You can read the final form of the US legislation here, and a quick search will indicate the phrase "hate speech" is not mentioned, not even once.
Go away, you pathetic treacherous little shill.
You can read the final form of the US legislation here [federalregister.gov], and a quick search will indicate the phrase "hate speech" is not mentioned, not even once.
And they promised us that the USA-PATRIOT Act would only be used against radical Islamic terrorists, that the US TLAs won't/don't engage in mass domestic surveillance, and that the US Federal Income Tax was only a temporary measure.
Holy shit! How fucking gullible *are* you!?
It's not that I don't think the ISPs should notbe given control of the internet. The ISPs have shown that they shouldn't be given control by their bad behaviour.
I'm just not so interested in fighting the ISPs so that Google can control the internet.
----
The greatest trick of Google was proving to the world that it was not evil.
Net neutrality regulations simply setup government as the controller with open pockets to big business. Let the internet be free. If you don't like what a provider is doing, don't subscribe to them. Use your wallet to vote, not give government even more power.
They came for $X, but I didn't say anything because I wasn't $X
I'll trade them net neutrality for dropping crap binding arbitration practices.
If you guys want to shill out for Facebook and Google, go right ahead. Truth is, the only reason big corps care about this at all is because they currently hold a monopoly on your browsing habits. Don't be a dummy, use a VPN, clear your cookies, and stop using Windows.
Because if they weren't ignorant they wouldn't be protesting FOR something that takes away so much freedom.
An extra force of 3000 police officers has been contracted. Antifa and BLM are both expected to counter protest.
An extra 724 puppies, 45,000 crayons, and 1500 blankies have been ordered and to be distributed to Berkeley University students to help cope with the stress,
What percentage of the population understands what net neutrality is and what percentage of those people are big enough activists to protest?
We have 'true' net neutrality but the outcome is not what you think it is.
The protesters probably have good intentions, but the ones pulling the strings are often organizations with politic connections. In my country Net neutrality has forced politicians in the board of directors of every single ISP, network provider, content provider, electricity provider.
After the privatization we now have the worst of both systems (fully nationalized versus fully privatized), namely government patronizing, socialization of costs and privatization of profits, money grabbing politicians.
Several money grabbing scandals were revealed the last couple of years. One politician received 7,5 million euro a year for his seat in the board of directors of one of the cable providers, but he never had to go to a meeting. He just needed to communicate with the government that everything was alright with the net neutrality in that company. The politician had studied journalism and doesn't know anything about networks.
This is just one example of one politician in one company. But there are hundreds of cases of money grabbers who do not have the competence, but still receive money to keep up the appearance of true network neutrality. In practice it didn't seem to be all right with net neutrality or green energy or whatever good intention they have to protect. Some independent television on demand services couldn't deliver a steady HD stream to their customers while the service of the ISP worked flawlessly for example.
Another case was that an independent TV on demand service was banned for sharing copyrighted material which was against the ToS. While they were allowed to deliver the shows over the internet, a judge ruled that the ISP could ban the shows despite the net neutrality law since the ToS applied to the customer and not the TV service provider. But then there was the issue that the judge was affiliated with the socialist party and the politician in the board of directors of the ISP was the minister who was responsible to evaluate judges. They tried to do the same with Netflix, but Netflix was too powerful being an American company. So much for equality, our own companies cannot fight the unfairness and have to quit, American companies have their own political connections to crush competition despite the 'net neutrality'.
I really want net neutrality, but I've completely lost trust in the current political elite. It doesn't matter what party they belong too. Money grabbers have been revealed from the Socialist Party, the Liberal Democrats, the Christian Democrats, the Green Party and the National Democrats. The only party that didn't have money grabbing politicians are the Nationalist Conservatives, but they are considered Neo-Nazi by all the other parties and the media.
Another example of good intention to protect the environment gone wrong are the rigged tests in the car emission scandal, you know the thing with Volkswagen. Politicians without competence saw on their bank accounts that all tests were fine. Do you know what that does for my trust in the EU?
But do you know what the media and politicians say when you have lost trust in the EU and politicians in general? That you are a far right extremist like the brown shirts in the 30's.
But if I used this distrust to go on the streets and join the violent protests then all of the sudden I'm a far left extremist that just went a bit too far and should not be punished too hard. Or in other words, politicians like the violent protesters that have to be punished with jail time but can be forgiven by a political organization. This way they can radicalize young protesters, first protesting for the good cause, later protesting against everything that is considered fascist. And that's why you should be careful to join a protest for network neutrality. It is a recruitment tool for the extremist organizations of some political parties. It doesn't even matter if it is left or right wing. The protesters are just used as a tool to maintain the status quo.
Your problem isn't net neutrality but your politicians. Throw them away and start anew.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
The FCC doesn't care about net neutrality, they were actually put in place (Ajit Pai specifically) to dismantle it.
The Trump administration is against it. Congress and the Senate are against it (majority, which is all they need). At some level you have to think that even the citizens who voted for Trump are against it, or don't care, or don't care enough to do anything about it.
I'm not against a protest, including a march and all that. However don't expect it to change anything. All the protesters are doing is registering their opinion. It's not nothing but it also won't be enough. Not unless they keep protesting and gather some additional political support.