The Most Important Free Speech Issue of Our Time

[Clubfoothead]

Um, no it's not. Big business is still subject to market forces. Government is not. Big business does not have to power to place you in prison if you don't comply. Government is the last entity that you want to give more control to unless absolutely necessary. Why don't you people get it?

 

 

Big business answers to nobody. Market forces are pretend.

[SEC=UGA]

 

Big business answers to nobody. Market forces are pretend.

 

Then tell me this, with regard to market forces. The NoCal small Josh Gordon growers were worried about carte blanche Josh Gordon legalization due to what, the fact that the price of Josh Gordon would be driven down due to larger growers being able to produce Josh Gordon, though subpar, more economically than they. So you may have a point about big business, but your point about market forces fall flat.

[SEC=UGA]

I have never visited the Huffington Post or any left-wing rage...trust me, I can develop my own opinions without the input of braindead sheep.

 

Most urgently, we'd both lose our porn.

 

But to your point...if big business got a hold of the internet, couldn't they too manipulate its content to "suit the ideology of those in power"? Or, in their case, prevent you from viewing articles/ads that might lead you to opt for a different provider of services similar to their own (or similar to those with which they have aligned?

 

I'm not looking for the government to control what I see....I'm looking for them to make sure others cannot.

 

My apologies to you in making assumptions about the outlets from which you derive your information. It would have been funnier if you had said " I don't read those left wing rags... I don't need any help from them in developing my leftist, anti-capitalist, ideology."

 

I'm actually more concerned with government censorship than business censoring the info on the innernets. Governments have a longer track record of filtering info. But, yes, I suppose corporations could filter and skew info, too, kinda like Fox does with their news...

[bpwallace49]

I'm actually more concerned with government censorship than business censoring the info on the innernets. Governments have a longer track record of filtering info. But, yes, I suppose corporations could filter and skew info, too, kinda like Fox does with their news...

 

Really? I think that preventing people from censoring info is vastly different that saying "the evil gubment will censor your info".

 

I see it as akin to saying "The second amendment says the evil gubmnet will come an take my guns away" that is . . . it doesnt make sense. The second amendment says that people can bear arms (very roughly here guys) so then people can own weapons. That doesnt give the gubmnet free reign to censor or control all the guns in the US, but prevents others from trying to censor or control guns. Kinda like how the handgun law was stricken down in DC lately. The gubmnet protected the rights of its citizens from LOCAL EVIL GUBMNETS. I see the net neutrality as protecting the citizens from the evil corporations so they dont extend their reach . . .

[Furd]

casting dispersions

 

aspersions

[SEC=UGA]

aspersions

 

Just stop already...

[cre8tiff]

aspersions

 

We don't like any Persians, right?

[Ursa Majoris]

Are there cases of abuse by Internet providers so far?

Comcast are reputed to have deliberately dropped Vonage packets on their network some time ago because they run their own VoIP phone service.

[billay]

Are there cases of abuse by Internet providers so far?

 

Comcast de-prioritized particular users who were uploading data to BitTorrent without telling those users they had done so.

[Ursa Majoris]

The main point of Net Neutrality isn't bandwidth. Bandwidth is a purchasable commodity. Large companies have gigantic pipes like OC-12s and up that they pay handsomely for. This makes sense because they have much more traffic to cope with both inbound and outbound. Anyone can buy whatever bandwidth they feel they need. Again, bandwidth is not the issue.

 

The first issue comes with preferential treatment of certain traffic on Internet routers controlled by the carriers. The carriers would like to be able to get e.g. Amazon to pay for having their traffic packets prioritized over everyone else.

 

The second issue is as has already been stated - selection of traffic for blocking based on whatever a carrier's whims are. This could be for commercial reasons (like forcing the use of a carrier's own app instead of another one) or political, as the Chinese do it.

 

Any degradation of net neutrality, IMO, is a defeat for the Internet itself and the first step on a very slippery slope.

[redrumjuice]

Comcast are reputed to have deliberately dropped Vonage packets on their network

 

Their gonna take meh guns!

[Perchoutofwater]

first issue comes with preferential treatment of certain traffic on Internet routers controlled by the carriers. The carriers would like to be able to get e.g. Amazon to pay for having their traffic packets prioritized over everyone else.

 

I'll fully admit I'm ignorant in this, but wouldn't the routers be about the same as the bandwidth? In order to to increase service wouldn't additional routers be needed which cost the companies more money? If this is the case it makes sense to me that it would be in the companies best interest to provide service to those that pay the most for it. So while I may not have had the terminology right, wouldn't this still be the same scenario as my bandwidth scenario discussed earlier?

[Ursa Majoris]

I'll fully admit I'm ignorant in this, but wouldn't the routers be about the same as the bandwidth? In order to to increase service wouldn't additional routers be needed which cost the companies more money? If this is the case it makes sense to me that it would be in the companies best interest to provide service to those that pay the most for it. So while I may not have had the terminology right, wouldn't this still be the same scenario as my bandwidth scenario discussed earlier?

Not necessarily. In the event of a queue building up, routers have queuing mechanisms that allow prioritization of one kind of traffic over another. Inside our company, we prioritize real time traffic like phone calls over e.g. printing. Once our traffic reaches the Internet though, we are in the same boat as everyone else.

 

Additional / replacement routers would usually be paid for by simply upping the service cost for everyone, same as your company covers the cost of new equipment. Alternatively, you build enough into the price so that when replacement time comes round, you already have enough to pay for the equipment so don't need to raise the price.

 

You are right that it is in the carrier's best interest to provide the best service to those that pay for it. That is the point. It's not in Joe Public's interest, though.

 

What would you think if FedEx and UPS trucks were always able to turn traffic lights green regardless of how long you'd been waiting at red?

Edited December 21, 2010 by Ursa Majoris

[Perchoutofwater]

What would you think if FedEx and UPS trucks were always able to turn traffic lights green regardless of how long you'd been waiting at red?

 

I wouldn't like that very much, particularly if it was on a public street. Now if they got preferential treatment on a private street and were paying extra for that preferential treatment and I was offered the opportunity to pay for the same preferential treatment, but chose not to then I wouldn't have a complaint against it. I understand the argument about the free and open airwaves, but that information has to be transmitted and received on someone's equipment. Just like with radio, if I want my voice heard, I have to pay the going rate for advertisement. I don't see this as any different. Think of it as paying for advertising or if you are an individual paying to drive on a toll road.

[cliaz]

If it makes everyone feel better, 80% of the internet traffic in the US traverse through datacenters, smart centers, ect that I am the business continuity coordinator for

 

Give me the word, DMD and the Huddle can cripple the US internet

[Kid Cid]

aspersions

Pre-coffee.

[Kid Cid]

I wouldn't like that very much, particularly if it was on a public street. Now if they got preferential treatment on a private street and were paying extra for that preferential treatment and I was offered the opportunity to pay for the same preferential treatment, but chose not to then I wouldn't have a complaint against it. I understand the argument about the free and open airwaves, but that information has to be transmitted and received on someone's equipment. Just like with radio, if I want my voice heard, I have to pay the going rate for advertisement. I don't see this as any different. Think of it as paying for advertising or if you are an individual paying to drive on a toll road.

 

But what if the price structure was such that the individual or small business couldn't afford their info to be prioritized? Or Microsoft was willing to pay Comcast a large enough sum to keep small emerging competitors from gaining access to their bandwidth? It seems to me that a "pay for play" model could set the stage for monopolization by the large entities.

[Big Country]

business continuity coordinator

 

I am so glad that business continuity is no longer one of my main job duties. Being involved with some of the initial planning and process documentation was painful enough. Granted, the tabletop exercises we did were fun reviewing mitigation plans for various disasters.

[Perchoutofwater]

But what if the price structure was such that the individual or small business couldn't afford their info to be prioritized? Or Microsoft was willing to pay Comcast a large enough sum to keep small emerging competitors from gaining access to their bandwidth? It seems to me that a "pay for play" model could set the stage for monopolization by the large entities.

 

If there is enough demand there will be more routing centers opened by competing firms to offer services to the ones that are currently being neglected due to cost. People need to realize that business are actually in business to make a profit, not make everything better for everyone. If a business can make a profit by selling space for lack of a better word to small businesses and individuals someone will provide that need. I don't know where people get the idea that businesses are in business to improve humanity or for their convenience. Should radio stations sell me ad time for less than they sell it to KBR just because I can't afford to pay as much? How does this differ?

[cliaz]

I am so glad that business continuity is no longer one of my main job duties. Being involved with some of the initial planning and process documentation was painful enough. Granted, the tabletop exercises we did were fun reviewing mitigation plans for various disasters.

 

I am one of those rare people who love BC, BCP, EM, DR, ect. If my job title was solely for emergency management (all hazards, all phases and all planning) I would be in heaven. I can honestly say that the day this becomes my sole function is the day I can tell people that I do my hobby for a living. I love all aspects of it and volunteer with local government whenever the opportunity arises.

 

I mean, how can someone not get a stiffy working in any of the areas below:

 

Risk Analysis & Hazard Assessment (All emergency planning starts here)

Vulnerability Zone

Evacuation Hazards

Hazard Exposure

Physical Vulnerability

Human Vulnerability

Structural Vulnerability

Financial Vulnerability

Risk Reduction Analysis

Acceptable Risk

Individual Impact (optional)

Departmental Impact

Division (or business unit) Impact

Situational Analysis

Resource Analysis

Operational Analysis

 

Emergency Operations Plan (Jurisdictional & Private Industry)

EOP Planning Management (developing and maintaining the planning team)

Basic EOP Plan

Functional Annexes

Hazard Specific Annexes

Concepts of Operations

For government, regulations and legislation

Organizational Capability Analysis Map to Hazards

Recovery Plan

Activation rules, authority, personnel development

 

Both of these go hand in hand:

Continuity of Government (COG): This deals with measures that ensure a level of government survives during and after a disaster

Continuity of Operations (COOP) (government and private sector): Addresses the measures that ensure that a government department or corporate department can deliver essential services during and after a disaster

COOP/COG Planning team requirements and team creation

Essential Functions Planning Committee

Essential Functions

Vital or Critical functions

Necessary Functions

Jurisdictional Focus

Line of succession for top level government officials or executives (based on constitution, federal, state and local laws, regulatory commissions, corporate policies, ect)

Delegation of Authority & Emergency decision makers (using same sources as Lines of succession)

COOP/COG Concept of Operations development (Conops)

Alternative facilities requirements

Emergency Relocation facilities requirements

Emergency communication plans

Physical, personnel and critical security measures

Vital records and databases protection (Mainly IT related and the easiest out of this group)

Operational and resources analysis

Activation rules, authority, personnel development

 

Recovery Operations Plan (ROP)

Recovery Planning team requirements and team creation

Short term plan expert

Long term plan expert

Impact area security and reentry

Shelter/housing planning

Infrastructure restoration planning

Facility operations during restoration event

Debris removal, restoration & demolition structural expert

Public or employee health and mental services

Disaster assistance programs and funds (government)

[bpwallace49]

I am one of those rare people who love BC, BCP, EM, DR, ect. If my job title was solely for emergency management (all hazards, all phases and all planning) I would be in heaven. I can honestly say that the day this becomes my sole function is the day I can tell people that I do my hobby for a living. I love all aspects of it and volunteer with local government whenever the opportunity arises.

 

I mean, how can someone not get a stiffy working in any of the areas below:

 

Risk Analysis & Hazard Assessment (All emergency planning starts here)

Vulnerability Zone

Evacuation Hazards

Hazard Exposure

Physical Vulnerability

Human Vulnerability

Structural Vulnerability

Financial Vulnerability

Risk Reduction Analysis

Acceptable Risk

Individual Impact (optional)

Departmental Impact

Division (or business unit) Impact

Situational Analysis

Resource Analysis

Operational Analysis

 

Emergency Operations Plan (Jurisdictional & Private Industry)

EOP Planning Management (developing and maintaining the planning team)

Basic EOP Plan

Functional Annexes

Hazard Specific Annexes

Concepts of Operations

For government, regulations and legislation

Organizational Capability Analysis Map to Hazards

Recovery Plan

Activation rules, authority, personnel development

 

Both of these go hand in hand:

Continuity of Government (COG): This deals with measures that ensure a level of government survives during and after a disaster

Continuity of Operations (COOP) (government and private sector): Addresses the measures that ensure that a government department or corporate department can deliver essential services during and after a disaster

COOP/COG Planning team requirements and team creation

Essential Functions Planning Committee

Essential Functions

Vital or Critical functions

Necessary Functions

Jurisdictional Focus

Line of succession for top level government officials or executives (based on constitution, federal, state and local laws, regulatory commissions, corporate policies, ect)

Delegation of Authority & Emergency decision makers (using same sources as Lines of succession)

COOP/COG Concept of Operations development (Conops)

Alternative facilities requirements

Emergency Relocation facilities requirements

Emergency communication plans

Physical, personnel and critical security measures

Vital records and databases protection (Mainly IT related and the easiest out of this group)

Operational and resources analysis

Activation rules, authority, personnel development

 

Recovery Operations Plan (ROP)

Recovery Planning team requirements and team creation

Short term plan expert

Long term plan expert

Impact area security and reentry

Shelter/housing planning

Infrastructure restoration planning

Facility operations during restoration event

Debris removal, restoration & demolition structural expert

Public or employee health and mental services

Disaster assistance programs and funds (government)

 

 

[cliaz]

 

 

Yeah, I know. I can't help it. My brain is wired this way.

[Square]

Free Press Managing Director Craig Aaron made the following statement:

 

“We are deeply disappointed that the chairman chose to ignore the overwhelming public support for real Net Neutrality, instead moving forward with industry-written rules that will for the first time in Internet history allow discrimination online. This proceeding was a squandered opportunity to enact clear, meaningful rules to safeguard the Internet’s level playing field and protect consumers.

 

“The new rules are riddled with loopholes, evidence that the chairman sought approval from AT&T instead of listening to the millions of Americans who asked for real Net Neutrality. These rules don't do enough to stop the phone and cable companies from dividing the Internet into fast and slow lanes, and they fail to protect wireless users from discrimination. No longer can you get to the same Internet via your mobile device as you can via your laptop. The rules pave the way for AT&T to block your access to third-party applications and to require you to use its own preferred applications.

 

“Chairman Genachowski ignored President Obama's promise to the American people to take a 'back seat to no one' on Net Neutrality. He ignored the 2 million voices who petitioned for real Net Neutrality and the hundreds who came to public hearings across the country to ask him to protect the open Internet. And he ignored policymakers who urged him to protect consumers and maintain the Internet as a platform for innovation. It’s unfortunate that the only voices he chose to listen to were those coming from the very industry he’s charged with overseeing."

[redrumjuice]

From what I have read, it sounds like a power grab for a problem that doesn't exist. typikal.

[CaP'N GRuNGe]

Yeah, I know. I can't help it. My brain is wired this way.

 

Yer doin' a heckuva job Brownie.