Net Neutrality

[longknife]

For those of us sitting here before our screens and either typing in words or reading them, this should be a very important subject. But, how many of us understand what this means? Or even what the Internet is? This is one of the most informative articles on the subject I've read. The main thing it points out is:

To summarize, the Internet comprises two types of things: public domain ideas, such as the TCP/IP protocol and HTML coding language; and private property, such as personal computers, servers, and fiber optic cable.*

And, using this, there is a huge, FREE interchange of ideas and information. That being the case, just what is “net neutrality”? Here's another summary:

Plainly stated, net neutrality is the idea that the Internet is “public property”; thus, the government must ensure that online content is delivered in a “neutral,” non-preferential fashion.

This informative – and frightening – article can be read @ Net Neutrality: Toward a Stupid Internet - The Objective Standard

 

[The Great Goose]

Nothing is private and the neo-stasi are NOW.

 

[TheCrusader]

Good god neither of you know what you're talking about.

The creator of the Internet himself said that Net Neutrality is necessary to prevent the bifurcation of the Internet into two tiers like they have in "China". You want a Chinese Internet? Where one tier is the "preferred tier" for the socially connected, or the wealthy, and the other tier is for the masses who are spoon fed propaganda?

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/10/08/tim-berners-lee-web-creator-defends-net-neutrality/?_r=0

“It’s all predicated on a neutral network,” said Mr. Berners-Lee, in a reference to the heated debate around so-called net neutrality, a principle according to which everyone should have equal access to online content.

“Net neutrality is really, really important,” he added. “Never before have you had something in the system that could throttle your app.”

The intervention of the founder of the World Wide Web, whichcelebrated its 25th anniversary this year, comes as both sides of the net neutrality debate are sharpening their claws.

Cable providers and cellphone carriers are demanding that they be able to charge companies like Netflix for better access to their networks because of the high amounts of available bandwidth they use.

In contrast, content providers, search giants like Google and consumer groups have led an outcry against the proposals, saying that the creation of a two-tiered Internet would go against the fundamental principle of open access for all.



By Natalia V. Osipova and Carrie Halperin 2:53
How Net Neutrality Works
Video
How Net Neutrality Works
The future of protecting an open Internet has been the subject of fierce debate, and potential changes to the rules by the Federal Communications Commission could affect your online experience.

By Natalia V. Osipova and Carrie Halperin on Publish DateMay 15, 2014.

• told a Brussels conference last week.
  
  Speaking to an audience of telecom operators, he added, “We shouldn’t have to pay for your network if you don’t have to pay for our content.”
  

What is two-tiered Internet? - Definition from WhatIs.com

Stop promoting corporate dictatorship.

Net Neutrality is designed to keep the Internet ONE TIER, as it is now currently known in the Western Free World.

Now go bugger off.

 

[TheCrusader]

Also. THE INTERNET IS PUBLIC PROPERTY.

All those "Privately owned cables" you talk about that connect the users of the Internet, are PHONE CABLES and TELEPHONY TECHNOLOGY hosted by the Telecoms whose technology and their services are REGULATED BY THE FCC.

The fact that they tried to claim the Internet was not a telephone service is just further proof that these companies HATE YOU and HATE FREEDOM.

 

[waltky]

Granny says, "Dat's right - dem Russkies an' Chinamen wanna take over the interweb...

Russian Censorship Group Seeks Chinese Help to Control Internet
April 29, 2016 — Russian authorities are seeking greater control of information on the internet, with some who favor tighter restrictions looking to China.

Russia's Safe Internet League, an influential lobby, hosted a first-ever forum Wednesday in Moscow with China's top internet censors, including Fang Binxing, known as the "Father of the Great Firewall of China." Comments from speakers at the event underscored the desire for authorities to further limit and control information online. Fang lectured on “cyber sovereignty,” arguing that countries’ borders apply to the online world as well and foreign “interference” should not be tolerated.

A user of Russia’s leading social network internet site VKontakte, poses holding an iPhone showing the account page of Pavel Durov, the former CEO and founder of VKontakte, in Red Square in Moscow, Russia​

China’s cybersecurity and internet policy chief Lu Wei said that online freedom was not a right but a responsibility to be kept in check lest it lead to terrorism, according to a tweet from a Financial Times reporter. Lu echoed Kremlin rhetoric, saying Western media were waging an “information war” against their countries. Both Chinese and Russian speakers lamented American companies’ dominance of the internet. Konstantin Malofeev, who is chairman of the Safe Internet League and is linked to both the Kremlin and the Russia-backed rebels in eastern Ukraine, said Russia should learn from China’s internet censorship practices and assert its sovereignty online.

Struggle for control

Russian internet experts said the forum’s timing and high-profile guests demonstrated an urgency in the Kremlin's struggle to control information ahead of parliamentary elections later this year and presidential elections in 2018. “I think this reflects their level of desperation inside of the Kremlin,” said Andrei Soldatov, co-author of "The Red Web: The Struggle Between Russia's Digital Dictators and the New Online Revolutionaries," who spoke to VOA via Skype. “They have these coming elections. And, it seems they need desperately to find some sort of solution to be absolutely sure that they can control the internet before the elections.”

A protester holds a flyer reading "We need Dozhd" during a rally in support of the independent television station Dozhd (TV Rain), in Moscow​

Russian authorities increased scrutiny of online social media after they proved key to organizing mass 2011-2012 anti-Kremlin protests. “They thought if you control the television stations, I mean, like the major TV stations, then you’re good. Then you control the public opinion,” independent TV Rain’s digital media chief Ilya Klishin said to VOA. “At that point they found out that even internet news websites and people on the Facebook and Twitter can actually organize 100,000 [-person] rallies [in] downtown Moscow.” The movement against the Kremlin, sparked by allegations of election-rigging, petered out as arrests and intimidation fractured the opposition. A crackdown on media ensued.

Heavy fines and jail time have been introduced for anyone posting online comments deemed extremism, an incitement to hatred or an insult to revered groups such as Orthodox Christians. Prominent bloggers have been forced to register their real names. Anton Nosik is a Moscow-based blogger and Russian internet pioneer who, just a day before the forum, was charged with extremism and inciting hatred for posts he made about bombing Syria and comparing President Bashar al-Assad’s government to Nazi Germany. He faces a fine of thousands of dollars and up to four years in prison if found guilty.

Perceived as enemy

 

[SixFoot]

TOR, Tribler, Root Access, full disk encryption, etc.. A sheeple craves not these things.

 

[waltky]

Uncle Ferd heard dey flog ya fer usin' the internet in Mooslamic countries...

Report: Global Internet Continues to Become Less Free
November 14, 2016 | WASHINGTON — For the sixth year in a row, the global internet became less free as governments around the world re-doubled efforts to limit free expression, ban encryption technologies, and punish users for posting or sharing material deemed unacceptable by national authorities.

Those are just a few of the findings of the annual "Freedom on the Net" report published by Freedom House, a pro-democracy think tank in Washington D.C. Freedom House researchers now estimate that just over two-thirds of all internet users in the world live in nations that actively restrict online activity and where users face harsh penalties for their posts, including prison and whippings.

The survey of 65 nations determined that China, Iran, Syria and Ethiopia were the greatest abusers of internet freedoms, followed by Uzbekistan, Cuba, Vietnam and Saudi Arabia. Some nations, including North Korea which has a long record of flagrant human rights abuses, were not included. Among the nations that saw the biggest declines were Uganda, Bangladesh and Cambodia. Only 14 nations saw marginal improvements. Just three nations - China, India, and the U.S. - account for roughly 40 percent of all the world's online users.

Government restrictions

“No country is perfect,” said Adrian Shahbaz, research manager for Freedom on the Net. “We're trying to give a very nuanced evaluation of the problems that every country faces for upholding a free and open internet.” Among the factors of the best performing nations, Shahbaz said, were a free and open internet, very high levels of internet penetration, and strong protections for free speech and privacy. New cybersecurity laws in China were partly responsible for that nation's ranking as the worst abuser. Over the last several years, Beijing has made it a punishable offense to "spread rumors" or "endanger national security" online, and has severely cracked down on the use of VPN's to access thousands of blocked websites.

Freedom House researchers now estimate that just over two-thirds of all internet users in the world live in nations that actively restrict online activity.​

Report authors also say governments are censoring a wider range of diverse content than ever before, depending on the priorities of the government. For example, Thailand metes out harsh punishments for "disrespect" of the Thai monarchy based on the one of the world's harshest lèse-majesté statutes, while many African and Middle East nations ban online content criticizing authorities or discussing LGBT issues. Satiric or light-hearted posts have also come under new levels of scrutiny. Images of Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi with superimposed Mickey Mouse ears, and side-by-side photos comparing Turkey's President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and the character "Gollum" from the Lord of the Rings movies, landed those who created them, as well as those who shared them, time in jail.

Getting around encryption

 

[waltky]

Net neutrality is a simple concept but a dense and often technical issue...

Net Neutrality Advocates Speak Up as FCC Set to Strike Down Rules
December 08, 2017 — Net neutrality is a simple concept but a dense and often technical issue that has been argued over for years in tech and telecom circles. Now everyday folks are talking about it.

That's because the Federal Communications Commission has scheduled a vote next week to gut Obama-era rules meant to stop broadband companies such as Comcast, AT&T and Verizon from exercising more control over what people watch and see on the internet. The protests aren't likely to stop the agency's vote on Thursday, but activists hope the outcry will push Congress to intervene and will show support for stricter regulation down the road. Net neutrality has been a hot button before, thanks to assists from Silicon Valley and TV host John Oliver speaking out about what they see as threats to the internet. More Hollywood celebrities have been joining the cry against the agency's direction. "Long live cute dog videos on YouTube! #RIPinternet. Share what you loved about The Internet," actor Mark Ruffalo tweeted as he urged people to push Congress to intervene. Big-time Hollywood producer Shonda Rhimes tweeted a link to a story about saving net-neutrality on her lifestyle website.

Net-neutrality rules bar cable and phone companies from favoring certain websites and apps — such as their own services — and give the FCC more oversight over privacy and the activities of telecom companies. Supporters worry that repealing them would hurt startups and other companies that couldn't afford to pay a broadband company for faster access to customers. Critics of the rules say that they hurt investment in internet infrastructure and represent too much government involvement in business. Phone and cable companies say the rules aren't necessary because they already support an open internet. While libertarian and conservative think tanks and telecom trade groups have spoken up against net neutrality, everyday people have been vocal in protesting the rules' repeal.

Demonstrators rally in support of net neutrality outside a Verizon store, Dec. 7, 2017, in New York.​

Since the FCC announced just before Thanksgiving that it was planning to gut the rules, there have been about 750,000 calls to Congress made through Battle for the Net, a website run by groups that advocate for net neutrality. By contrast, there were fewer than 30,000 calls in the first two weeks of November. While Congress doesn't need to approve FCC decisions, it can overrule the agency by passing a law. Net neutrality also has triggered discussions all over social media, even in groups that typically do not discuss tech policy. In one Facebook group about leggings seller LuLaRoe, one woman's lament about the repeal triggered more than 270 responses. They included questions about what net neutrality was, links to explanations and statements of support. The discussion sprawled into the next day.

Meanwhile, net-neutrality supporters protested outside 700 Verizon stores Thursday, said Tim Karr, senior director of strategy for Free Press, an advocacy group involved in Battle for the Net. In midtown Manhattan, some 350 people came to chant slogans and wave signs. "Access to a free and fair internet is necessary for a functioning democracy," said Lauren Gruber, a writer for a branding agency who joined the New York protest. If the net-neutrality rules are repealed, she said, "it's just another showcase of oligarchy upon America." Most people don't follow what federal agencies like the FCC are doing, even though decisions can have a lot of impact on people's lives, said Beth Leech, political science professor at Rutgers University. Having celebrities speak out can help spark people's interest, she said. "Protests that draw average people out into the streets across the country are relatively rare," she said. "It's the rarity that gives them some of their power."

MORE

 

[TheOldSchool]

Plainly stated, net neutrality is the idea that the Internet is “public property”; thus, the government must ensure that online content is delivered in a “neutral,” non-preferential fashion.

WOW! SOOOOOOOOOOO fucking wrong and SOOOOOOOOOOOO stupid! Un-fucking believable.

Well you inbred dipshits are in charge now. Go ahead and kill net neutrality. When you have to extra for streaming video, or for the package that includes access to the websites you like, or for an ISP to allow people access your website, you'll probably still think Net Neutrality has ANYTHING to do with speech.

 

[IsaacNewton]

I'm no expert on Net Neutrality either but it appears to be similar to this.

Right now you pay to access the internet via cable, or DSL, or some other provider and you pay them for that. But they have no say in what you can go do, or see, or download, or upload etc...

Congress wants to hand ownership of the internet itself to these handful of service providers so they have the power to restrict your use of the internet to whatever they want. They will be able to stop people from going to certain websites, or downloading certain things, or watching videos they don't like or that oppose their financial interests.

Is there anyone alive, other than these greedy cock roaches, who doesn't think the internet should be free and unregulated forever? The best idea of humanity since powered flight and now they want to hand control of it to a few already wealthy greedy POS's. Goddamn why is there always a handful of uber-greedy fucktards just waiting to fuck up anything and everything human beings come up with.

Let Congress know that Net Neutrality must remain the standard not just now but in perpetuity.


"A widely cited example of a violation of net neutrality principles was the Internet service provider Comcast's secret slowing ("throttling") of uploads from peer-to-peer file sharing (P2P) applications by using forged packets.[6] Comcast did not stop blocking these protocols, like BitTorrent, until the FCC ordered them to stop.[7] In another minor example, The Madison River Communications company was fined US$15,000 by the FCC, in 2004, for restricting their customers' access to Vonage, which was rivaling their own services.[8] AT&T was also caught limiting access to FaceTime, so only those users who paid for AT&T's new shared data plans could access the application.[9] In July 2017, Verizon Wireless was accused of throttling after users noticed that videos played on Netflix and Youtube were slower than usual, though Verizon commented that it was conducting "network testing" and that net neutrality rules permit "reasonable network management practices".

 

[longknife]

What is Net Neutrality?

From the very beginning, the World Wide Web as we know is has been under the “control” of a private entity. It was under the Obama administration that the FCC declared it to be a utility citing an old law about controlling radio frequencies. FCC Chairman Ajit Pai, a Trump appointee, is set to deactivate the regulation and the Left is up in arms about it.

So-called “progressive” organizations have been organizing resistance to a planned rollback of Net Neutrality regulations. That included a disturbing event outside FCC Chairman Pai’s personal residence on Mother’s Day.

Now, they’re planning a day of protest on Tuesday, December 12. Using the Twitter hashtag #BreakTheInternet, it encourages everyone to put a link on their website, or otherwise use social media channels, to encourage people to contact Congress.

So, what’s the big deal?

There are several problems with Net Neutrality. The most obvious of which is that we are trusting the federal government to regulate the Internet fairly.

To me, the above is the one and only reason to deregulate the Obama system.

Read more @ What is Net Neutrality and why is the left so hell-bent on controlling the Internet? | | Media Equalizer and give us your opinion.