Net Neutrality At Risk Once Again

[Raven]

There is a case before the DC Circuit that could strike down the nation’s net neutrality law, a rule adopted by the Federal Communications Commission in 2010.

Once upon a time, companies like AT&T, Comcast, Verizon, and others declared a war on the internet’s foundational principle: that its networks should be “neutral” and users don’t need anyone’s permission to invent, create, communicate, broadcast, or share online.

Verizon took the FCC to court to void the 2010 FCC rule. Verizon went to court to attack the part of the rule forbidding them from discriminating among websites and applications; from setting up — on what we once called the information superhighway — the equivalents of tollbooths, fast lanes, and dirt roads.

So that’s where we are today — waiting for the DC Circuit, to rule in Verizon’s case. In their questions and statements during oral argument, the judges have made clear how they planned to rule — for the phone and cable companies, not for those who use the internet.

http://www.wired.com/opinion/2013/11/so-...eutrality/

[Lion IRC]

Everyone one the internet needs someone else's permission in some shape or form.
There's always rulez.

[Owlix]

But this is saying that your IP will be able to determine which sites you browse with ease, vs. the sites you'll visit and wait 10 minutes to load.... EVERY TIME.... which means many will eventually give up.

[Doubting Thomas]

And in a heavily religious area, it might be hard to get to sites like atheistforums.org, if able to at all. And as soon as political parties get involved with the internet providers, they'll be determining which political sites get priority.

I'm just glad we're not using the same IP we were before, because the guy who ran that is an ultraconservative Christian who I have no doubt would censor the internet if he could.

[Owlix]

... Anyone know Cox's religious and or political standpoint?

[Walking Void]

I'm just glad we're not using the same IP we were before, because the guy who ran that is an ultraconservative Christian who I have no doubt would censor the internet if he could.

I am afraid all He would have to do is make a simple calculation to turn atheistforums.org into an IP address and find out where its server is and everything, including its traffic across various DNS servers.

[Minimalist]

... Anyone know Cox's religious and or political standpoint?

They worship the almighty dollar...like every other corporate crook.

[Doubting Thomas]

I am afraid all He would have to do is make a simple calculation to turn atheistforums.org into an IP address and find out where its server is and everything, including its traffic across various DNS servers.

Or just simply block access.

What if the guy who owns your IP is an ultraconservative Christian fundie who blocks access to all atheist sites, all non-Christian religious sites, all Christian sites he disagrees with, all porn sites, all non-Republican political sites, and anything else he disagrees with? His customers would probably bail on him in a big city where there's many different IP's to choose from, but here in small town America where the local IP pretty much has a monopoly, it's not so easy to find other access. And then if you can find other IP's, what if they block everything they disagree with?

To me, not having net neutrality is just the same as conducting book burnings at your local library. People should have access to all information, not just that which certain people agree with.