Net Neutrality (USA)

[rrroberts]

Curious if anyone here has been following Net Neutrality (USA) and have similar ideas.

Correct me if I am wrong or overly simple in my understanding, just seems too blatant (makes me think of chocolate ration in Orwell's 1984).

1. ComCast/Verizon challenges Net Neutrality in U.S. Supreme Court (major ISPs want to be able to charge for prioritizing data packets for certain customers)
2. U.S. Supreme Court agrees, gives FCC time to develop response
3. FCC proposes application of some 1934 rule to continue Net Neutrality (its purpose is to continue equal treatment of data packets)
4. So-called Conservative U.S. Congresspeople are on bandwagon to stop U.S. Government (FCC) takeover of Internet, as if it is some evil government plot. (Suspect K Street Lobbyists, hired by ComCast/Verizon et al, fueled this into something Patriotic)

Permit me to emphasize here I am NOT comfortable with Big Government, though it is usually a slightly lessor evil than Big Business, and step 3 above appears to be designed to continue status quo of Net Neutrality - preventing takeover of U.S. Backbone by Big Business.

Or have I "come in for a landing with gear up and locked" on this one?

 

[Genesis]

What does net neutrality mean?

How I understand it is that all information stays public, and if someone should decide to have it private they need to pay for it?

BUT - as far as I can see Big Corporation owned Government in the US already owns the Internet. We're restricted in the information we may put up on the Internet - i.e. YouTube. US can even police the Internet at a distance by closing down Websites. US Government also has the right of access to our e-mails, if they are with a US owned e-mail provider. Check out what happened to Lavabit in the US about two years ago:

[video=youtube]

So I see the "debacle" of net neutrality just as a smoke screen to pretend there is freedom of the Internet, whereas it already has evaporated a long time ago.

 

[Yozora]

Net neutrality means that no ISP can give preference to certain sites (e.g. by making certain sites take a lot longer or shorter to load, or charging extra fees). After Snowden, I've certainly become more sceptical about internet freedom as a whole here though.

 

[pan1]

I dont know about Internet policies in USA but just for information, almost all of ISP in Indonesia blocking certain type of website (e.g porns, pirates). But of course except for Facebook. Mark Zuckenberg has meet and greet with our president, and he said he wanna help to grow ecommerce here.

 

[Genesis]

Good point. Large number of countries have blocks in place. US also does it, but just differently.

 

[pan1]

I think the concept of democracy doesnot exist in internet. Its always big power or capital who rules the cyber world.

 

[rrroberts]

Yozora hit it dead on with definition of Net Neutrality, which is unrelated to being free of Internet eavesdropping, surveillance, and censorship. My bad, should have been more explicit.

U.S. Government internet surveillance has been going on for YEARS, really took off after Carnivore (FBI packet sniffer) began operation 10/97. F.Y.I., even before then there was some U.S. Government surveillance.

Blocking certain content is Censorship. Censorship requires surveillance of content.

One consequence of ending Net Neutrality would be an Internet "tax" in U.S.A. for content providers, payable to ComCast/Verizon etc. This tax would be money or time.

ComCast/Verizon et al, who could not get their own way in overthrowing Net Neutrality in U.S., are now taking a "patriotic" anti-government approach in their 2nd attempt in overthrowing Net Neutrality. Which I find super hypocritical, since U.S. companies are gutting U.S.A. technology base through H1-B visas (bringing in temporary foreign STEM workers due to alleged shortage qualified U.S. STEM professionals) and offshoring; these practices rob U.S. STEM professionals of jobs and exploits foreign STEM workers.

 

[Genesis]

ComCast/Verizon et al, who could not get their own way in overthrowing Net Neutrality in U.S., are now taking a "patriotic" anti-government approach in their 2nd attempt in overthrowing Net Neutrality. Which I find super hypocritical, since U.S. companies are gutting U.S.A. technology base through H1-B visas (bringing in temporary foreign STEM workers due to alleged shortage qualified U.S. STEM professionals) and offshoring; these practices rob U.S. STEM professionals of jobs and exploits foreign STEM workers.

I'm very cynical about those large corporations rrroberts. Almost certain they already have their way. They will get it "legalized" sooner or later.