Casteele
Posts: 655
Joined: 12/10/2011
From: Near Sacramento, California, USA
Status: offline
|
FR.
I'm just a simple man here in this case, and confused by all the arguments, debates, mud slinging, name calling, and so on. What, objectively, is the issue here?
From what I understand and read, some are objecting not so much over the issue itself, but because of that word "regulation". It is as if "regulation" means "manipulation".. But.. isn't that what the Big ISP's are already doing, and the FCC is trying to slap their hands and tell them "No, bad ISP! Preserve Net Neutrality!" or am I truly misunderstanding the concept here? And please don't give me politically tainted opinions, fallacious arguments and conclusions; I want objective facts.
Frankly, I believe there is a time and place for "anarchy", "free market", and so on, just as there is a time and place for "government intervention, regulation and control". I see people make the claim that the government does not do it's job of protecting them from the criminals, but those same people get their blood pressure u the moment the government tries to step in and do what needs to be done to provide that protection. It just doesn't make sense to me.
Last year, I dumped Comcast because they started to run transparent proxy services.. which happened to block some sites which pushed political agendas that Comcast disagreed with. Comcast denied and still denies that they did that.. Claiming it was some technical problem with the websites, nothing to do with Comcast. But I'd switch to my Clear Internet dongle, and those websites would load without a single problem. Same when I switched to FIOS; Those websites loaded fine since then. While I have no proof, all the evidence does suggest that Comcast was indeed filtering and controlling what content I was allowed to see, not allowing me free access to the information I wanted in which to make up my own mind. They only wanted me to be able to see the information that supported their views, and block anything which challenged them. How is that net neutrality? How is that free and open market? How is that encouraging general innovation, rather than only innovation which supports their agenda? How is that any different than the claims that "government regulation" will stifle competition of opposing views?
It was Comcast that was filtering and censoring, telling me what and how to think.
And I see the FCC decision as the government slapping them on the wrist and saying "No, you cannot do that!" I see the FCC not as trying to censor the Internet, but as trying to ensure that no single company is allowed to have the power to censor it.. not because the government wants that singular power, but because the Big ISP's have already shown they already ARE abusing that power, an shown that they want to CONTINUE to do so, by controlling the availability, ease, speed and cost of content that either pays them big money, or that which they "approve" of.
But Ill also admit that this is just my opinions based on my limited understanding of the issue and my own personal experiences. I do not have a listing of hundreds of sites which "prove" or "back up" my single view, while ignoring the other hundreds that provide contrary data. I simply look at each as trying to push their own agenda, and none of them as being the "ultimate, unbiased, objective proof".. because let's face it.. almost every source of information out there is in one way or another, just another form of "Fox News".
The only solution, IMO, is to read and understand both sides, exercise my own thinking abilities, and make up my own mind, not ask them to make it up for me.
|
RE: FCC votes 3-2...Internet is a utility. - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread