Why would giving the telcos control over the Internet by destroying Net Neutrality* produce anything more than massive suckitude?**
Especially since you know that as soon as they get control, they're going to start censoring everything (Via)?
I mean, they're censoring NARAL, for pity's sake, and NARAL is about as ineffectual as a money-sucking Beltway insider so-called liberal organization can be.
So what do you think they would do for us? Fuck
!
But don't worry! All the Republicans will be able to pay for their snuff flicks, 'cause they can pay the premiums!
NOTE * Right now, under Net Neutrality, you can go wherever you want on the net for free once you've got a connection, and everything works the same way and costs the same thing (i.e., nothing, once you've got your connection). The telcos want to make the Internet work like cable, where anything you really want to see you have to pay extra for, the rest is corporate swill, and some things you can see at all because of corporate censorship. The Republicans just love this idea, of course, because you're nothing but "human resources" to be exploited to them, and the Democrats are going all mushy, thinking there are really two sides to everything, and maybe we should give the corps everything they want with a figleaf or too, and besides, it'll get all those pesky bloggers off our backs...
NOTE ** Suckitude for everybody but the telcos, that is. For them, massive profits because of the suckitude.
UPDATE Matt has more. Via the Times:
Saying it had the right to block “controversial or unsavory” text messages, Verizon Wireless has rejected a request from Naral Pro-Choice America, the abortion rights group, to make Verizon’s mobile network available for a text-message program.
And you know one thing about Dirty Fucking Hippies, right? They are controversial. And deeply unsavory. Wonder how long it's going to take these assholes to start doing something like imposing Rush Limbaugh sound bytes as ringtones. Shit, they're already half-way to that with the military.
- lambert's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Front page
Comments
It isn't "If", it's "When!"
Both the FTC and the FCC have already declared 'net neutrality' a matter for the market to decide.
How ya think that's gonna work out?
A Quick Study, But A Slow Learner
Me? A Quick Study, But A Slow Learner
Except, er, it's not a market
It's a government-granted oligopoly they call a market.
And it's working out very well for them.
We. Are. Going. To. Die. We must restore hope in the world. We must bring forth a new way of living that can sustain the world. Or else it is not just us who will die but everyone. What have we got to lose? Go forth and Fight!—Xan
"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." -- Mahatma Gandhi
I knew dat...really i did...
A Quick Study, But A Slow Learner
Me? A Quick Study, But A Slow Learner
Verizon reverses course on NARAL msg
Per NYT.
Boy, sometimes shining that sunlight makes the poo decompose real quick. :)
Of course down in the sub-sub-sub-basement of the Verizon Building the flunky who made the original decision to deny the NARAL message is being spanked and/or waterboarded even as we speak. With the PR department flack shouting into his/her eardrum, "NO, you idiot, we don't start censorship until AFTER we get the bill through Congress!!"
[whack, whack, burble, cough, sob]
Verizon honcho considers abortion-rights messages spam
according to that same NYT story.
So. "Living in the future" as they referred to cell phones and IMs last night on TV, sux.
'S gonna get worse, too.
We can admit that we're killers ... but we're not going to kill today. That's all it takes! Knowing that we're not going to kill today! ~ Captain James T. Kirk, Stardate 3193.0
We can admit that we’re killers … but we’re not going to kill today. That’s all it takes! Knowing that we’re not going to kill today! ~ Captain James T. Kirk, Stardate 3193.0
1 John 4:18
S'gonna get a LOT worse, Sarah...
We've barely skimmed the surface of the bad. We've just got the frothy bad now. All the really meaty bad's still in the bottom of the pot...
when i express the opinion that the Web as we know and love it likely will not meet the '12 election cycle in anything like the shape and form it now takes, and that the changes won't betoken a wider, broader, freer, happier, more democratic Intertubes, i am always assured that the web will magically heal itself, that the mavericks will persevere, that it CANNOT be that regulated, look at porn, etc...
but what happens when there's a lawsuit that slaps an isp with libel damages for content posted on a blog originating there, and the isp starts to demand a $100,000 libel bond, or a MILLION $$$?
if it was me that wanted to shut 'em down, that's how i'd do it.
A Quick Study, But A Slow Learner
Me? A Quick Study, But A Slow Learner
*weeps for the 'net*
I suspect that at some point, due to, uh, terrorism, all "non-critical" 'net traffic will be shut down, leaving access only for banks, &c.