Happier Abroad Forum Community

The first step in censoring in the internet just happened.

Net Neutrality Passes
http://www.fromthetrenchesworldreport.c ... ual/124361

How does this affect us?

I understand that the carriers want to get paid more if you download a lot, is that right?

Does this allow them to do the "throttling" where you get slowed down if you have downloaded too much? Or can they already do that?

If there is throttling or per-MB (metered) charges, will it occur at my home, or does it happen at the server I am downloading from?

Oh and - why is it called Net Neutrality?

In theory, "Net Neutrality" is a very positive thing for the general public because the alternative - "Non-Net Neutrality" would allow the ISPs to vary bandwidths and speeds to various websites according to how much the firm's behind those websites could afford to pay. A classic case of the powerful get even more power and the smaller and weaker players get squeezed.

But it looks like the concern according to this article is that Google managed to convince FCC Chairman in the eleventh hour to insert some subtle changes to wording of some of articles within new regulation. Of course, many are speculating that Google pulled a trick by throwing in some stuff it can later get it's legal team to twist the situation into it's favor somehow.

Rock wrote:In theory, "Net Neutrality" is a very positive thing for the general public because the alternative - "Non-Net Neutrality" would allow the ISPs to vary bandwidths and speeds to various websites according to how much the firm's behind those websites could afford to pay. A classic case of the powerful get even more power and the smaller and weaker players get squeezed.

But it looks like the concern according to this article is that Google managed to convince FCC Chairman in the eleventh hour to insert some subtle changes to wording of some of articles within new regulation. Of course, many are speculating that Google pulled a trick by throwing in some stuff it can later get it's legal team to twist the situation into it's favor somehow.

So the carriers already get paid by all of us who are connected, but they want to ALSO get paid EXTRA by YouTube etc etc?

OK, got that.

SO Net Neutrality is a GOOD thing, it purports to preserve the status quo and PREVENT the carriers from charging a toll.

Right?

And the concern we have about the bill is just what crap Google and others might have gotten into the details, which noone has read before passage.

OK.

But Google is the GOOD guy here, aren't they? Because I want to continue googling away, and I do NOT see why ATT et al. need to be able to charge tolls on the internet. To paraphrase Obama, "you didn't build that."

It's like when some mysterious company wins the right to charge tolls on a freeway that the public already paid for.

Right?

Jester wrote:

Rock wrote:In theory, "Net Neutrality" is a very positive thing for the general public because the alternative - "Non-Net Neutrality" would allow the ISPs to vary bandwidths and speeds to various websites according to how much the firm's behind those websites could afford to pay. A classic case of the powerful get even more power and the smaller and weaker players get squeezed.

But it looks like the concern according to this article is that Google managed to convince FCC Chairman in the eleventh hour to insert some subtle changes to wording of some of articles within new regulation. Of course, many are speculating that Google pulled a trick by throwing in some stuff it can later get it's legal team to twist the situation into it's favor somehow.

So the carriers already get paid by all of us who are connected, but they want to ALSO get paid EXTRA by YouTube etc etc?

OK, got that.

SO Net Neutrality is a GOOD thing, it purports to preserve the status quo and PREVENT the carriers from charging a toll.

Right?

And the concern we have about the bill is just what crap Google and others might have gotten into the details, which noone has read before passage.

OK.

But Google is the GOOD guy here, aren't they? Because I want to continue googling away, and I do NOT see why ATT et al. need to be able to charge tolls on the internet. To paraphrase Obama, "you didn't build that."

It's like when some mysterious company wins the right to charge tolls on a freeway that the public already paid for.

Right?

I'm outta my depth on this one. HELP somebody...Momopi, are you there???

I seriously doubt this is good news.

Net Neutrality: We Lose Our Liberties Because We Give Them Away
http://modernsurvivalblog.com/governmen ... them-away/

This just in.

The Day The Internet Died
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nh0I2E-mwcA

Thanks Taco for what you do. Mike Maloney is one of my favorites and very professional in what he presents and all his presentations. Our rulers do not want him getting out of the bag anymore so and know people like him must be isolated.