11.07.06
Posted in Hypocrites, Net Neutrality at 7:50 pm by Joe
New Here? You may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!
Today, I saw a TV commercial that made me mad and laugh at the same time. It was on my CABLE network.
In it they said, that Net Neutrality was Bad for the Consumer.
I was only 30 seconds long, but in it they presented so many lies it was hard to count. They were portraying Net Neutrality as a take over by the Major Providers of Information (like Google, Yahoo, MSN) in order to CHARGE for their searches and results.
If anyone has followed the Internet and been involved in it’s usage, they know that these services are FREE. The only Companies that would benefit from the loss of Net Neutrality are the TELCO’s, CABLE Companies and every DSL Provider.
They want to charge companies like the Major Search Engines for preferential treatment of their information as presented to the public. If these owners of the “pipes” get their way, then we will be paying just to look up a homework assignment, find the latest news on the Space Station, find a friend or anything else we want to find. AND we will only get the information THEY see fit to give us, as long as we pay.
Â
If you believe the Telco and Cable TV Ads, think about this…
Cable wants to not only own the pipes to what you see, they want access to your phone line, and your internet connection. They make it sound as if you will get a cheaper price for a package deal, when they charge individually for each service. BUT it is on ONE BILL.
The Telco’s want the same thing… They want to control what information you get and how you get it. For a price.
Â
The Internet has always been an open source of information, don’t let them charge you for something that is YOURS, NOT THEIRS.
Permalink
10.16.06
Posted in Censorship, Net Neutrality at 11:06 pm by Joe
The Death of Net Netruality was almost approved this week. If we allow the telco’s to have their way, we will all lose. If they merge they will control the Internet access for almost everyone in the U.S. Then there is only one more step before they control the WHOLE INTERNET. Becoming a Monopoly once again.
The AT&T-BellSouth merger hands over incredible power. THE MERGER ESTABLISHESÂ A DE FACTO MA BELL DSL MONOPOLY IN 23 STATES, that is to say the new enterprise would be the principal or the only provider available. The Judiciary Committee has already approved the deal, avoiding a court review. The FCC came close to letting it go through this week, but postponed their response at the last minute, because of letters from people like us.
Â
We’ve got about two weeks to stop what they’ve already said they will do.
William L. Smith, chief technology officer for Atlanta-based BellSouth Corp., told reporters and analysts that an Internet service provider such as his firm should be able, for example, to charge Yahoo Inc. for the opportunity to have its search site load faster than that of Google Inc.
Ed Whitacre of AT&T told Business Week last fall. “Now what they would like to do is use my pipes free, but I ain’t going to let them do that because we have spent this capital and we have to have a return on it. So there’s going to have to be some mechanism for these people who use these pipes to pay for the portion they’re using. Why should they be allowed to use my pipes?”
[via Savetheinternet.com]
Â
Send a letter to help STOP the Loss of Net Neutrality by clicking the logo below.
 Â
If you value the Internet and all the advantages you enjoy through it’s use, you will want to keep it open to all. Not just the ones who can afford to buy the pipes to their sites.
Â
Source:Â Successful Blog
Permalink
Posted in Audio, Net Neutrality at 7:49 pm by Joe
There are some people that are still trying to save Internet Neutrality. I have seen this around the web and thought you might like the song by BroadBand.Listen to the song, they are not that bad, and have something to say.
Three singer/songwriters met at a Los Angeles recovery center for those
suffering from internet-related anger issues. How could Congress vote to destroy
one of the only good things left in America? This made no sense! How could so
few people be enraged? What were people doing to keep network neutrality the law
of the land?
They realized that they had found kindred spirits in one another and needed
to work through their newfound political rage. Their counselor suggested that
they could channel their frustration through song, interpretative dance,
screaming or simply calling Congress over and over. When they discovered that
Michelle was afraid of morons, they decided to just do the singing part. And
thus The BroadBand was born.
Permalink
06.09.06
Posted in Net Neutrality at 9:28 pm by Joe
67% Don’t think Paying for Premium Access is a Good Idea.
33% Apparently don’t mind paying Premium Prices for Access.That was the result of my little poll.
It doesn’t really matter at this point because the US House of Representatives doesn’t vote in your interest. They vote in the name of Big Business Telco’s and Cable Companies.
By a 269-152 vote that fell largely along party lines, the House Republican
leadership mustered enough votes to reject a Democrat-backed amendment that
would have enshrined stiff Net neutrality regulations into federal law and
prevented broadband providers from treating some Internet sites differently
from
others.
Of the 421 House members who participated in the
vote that took
place around 6:30 p.m. PT, the vast majority of Net
neutrality supporters were
Democrats. Republicans represented most of the
opposition.
So, if you voted for your Congress(wo)man in the hopes they would look out for your interests, think again. They have always listened to the MONEY.
When the Telcos and Cable Companies spend so much money to get a law passed, they will win. Unfortunately, we don’t have anything but our voice and our vote. I guess that’s not enough in the U.S. anymore.
Permalink
06.05.06
Posted in Big Brother, Censorship at 9:24 pm by Joe
Is the Government REALLY looking for Child pornography or something else?
There are already many laws in place governing and prosecuting child porn, including on the internet. Every time the Government wants to try to get a grip on the web, they cite child porn.
I’m sorry, but if you ever visited a porn site, there is no way that you will see any children being exploited. You won’t even find a male or female under the age of 18. They aren’t there because it’s against the law.
Even for the pervs that want it, there are so many stings at any given time, that they put their lives in their own hands even searching for it.
When the government wanted Google, Yahoo and MSN’s search records, they cited Child Porn. When they wanted access to change the wiretapping law to include the internet, they cited Child Porn.
Now, they want all ISP’s to keep detailed records of users activities. In other words, they want to know where you go, how long you were there and who you link up to. They want to know what you downloaded, what you saved and where you went next.
They want the ISP’s to keep records on your total Clickstream.
All in the name of saving the children.
I don’t think they have any interest in protecting kids any further than the next election takes them. They want to be able to keep an eye on YOU and what you do, where you go, who you communicate with and what was said.
BIG BROTHER didn’t happen in 1984 as George Orwell predicted, but he’s here NOW!!!
Permalink
05.22.06
Posted in Weird at 7:49 pm by Joe
I found this article on Apologetics Press. See who thinks it should be done and how this nut thinks. Read on McDuff…
Apologetics Press :: In the News
Eliminate 90% of the Human Race? by Brad Harrub, Ph.D.
Printer version Email this article
In elementary schools, it often begins with a crush. In middle schools that crush is frequently transformed to idolization. During the rebellious years of high school, we try to act as if we dislike all of them—even though we still have our favorites. Then, in college, we respect them for their education, and in graduate or professional school we oftentimes revert back to idolization. Most of us can look back through our educational years and remember teachers who really stood out—teachers that made a difference in our lives. These are the ones who made an imprint on us—and as such, we often pattern our own values, beliefs, and ideology accordingly.
That’s all well and good when teachers maintain integrity and adhere to a strong moral code. But what happens when students worship a professor who suggests that we humans are no better than bacteria? And that the world would be a better place if we had an airborne version of Ebola that would wipe out 90% of the human population—a virtual holocaust to cleanse the Earth? To make matters worse, what message are we sending when we designate such a man as the “2006 Distinguished Texas Scientist?†Read the rest of this entry »
Permalink
05.15.06
Posted in Net Neutrality at 7:56 pm by Joe
A very special Blogger by the name of ME “Liz†Strauss has been keeping a log of various articles on Net Neutrality.
Since Mid-April, she as kept a page dedicated to keeping internet users updated on the progress of the debate between the Telco’s and Cable providers vs. us.
I think that the subject is important enough and Liz’s list comprehensive enough to just refer you to her page so you can judge for yourself the status of Net Neutrality.
Here is the link to Successful Blog-Net Neutrality Page
Visit her often because she adds information every day.
Permalink
05.02.06
Posted in Hypocrites, Net Neutrality at 8:58 pm by Joe
By Robert E. Litan
Special to washingtonpost.com
Tuesday, May 2, 2006; 12:00 AM
Imagine a world in which millions of senior citizens and disabled Americans, among others, can have, if they want, their medical conditions monitored continuously by devices that communicate over high speed, broadband networks that can automatically alert them if they require immediate medical attention.
Such “remote disease management†systems not only would be highly convenient for patients, but based on evidence from the Veterans Administration’s use of systems that do not yet make extensive use of broadband, could lead to huge savings in health care costs.
I have calculated in a recent report that the health care cost savings and the reduced need for institutionalizing seniors and the disabled could top $1 trillion over the next 25 years.
Imagine that, you are going to kill your Grandmom, and get rid of all those Pesky Veterans, and the Disabled AND Save the Government $1 Trillion.
How dare you want to keep the internet neutral. Just to save yourself a couple of bucks.
If you take that seriously, you must be part of the Brookings Institute, or AT&T, or Verizon, or Adelphia Cable or Comcast Cable… or any of the other myriad of service providers that ALREADY CHARGE for high speed service but want to make premium service a surcharge.
Even if the premium service were available for an additional price, would your grandparents be able to afford it? That assumes that they can afford and use DSL or Cable in the first place.
I think that this is probably one of the worst arguments for premium service I have ever heard. The Government doesn’t take care of the Vets Now, so who will pay for their new and improved internet access?
The Government made a law to give access to the disabled, and they got ramps at the end of the block to cross the street.
Gramps can’t afford his medicine Now, how is he supposed to pay extra for his medical monitor over the internet once the broadband providers start charging more for the service?
We can’t let this happen, if the Cable and Telephone companies charge premium prices for internet access, the only ones who will benefit is them.
Source:
The Washington Post
Â
Permalink
04.25.06
Posted in Net Neutrality at 9:39 pm by Joe
Back on March 28th I wrote an article for this Blog, SuperHighway or Toll Road*. In it I mentioned that the Broadband, Cable and DSL providers wanted to charge extra for additional speed and preferred access.There is a fledgling movement underfoot. Some of the more important ( in my eyes ) Bloggers and internet users are starting to bring the problem to light.
ME “Liz†Strauss of Successful Blog** writes of Blogging and Country Stores:
So hear me whisper this. Some folks don’t care about country stores and communities. They care about pipelines that carry bits and bytes and how much they can charge for that service. . . .
Would you read what I read today by a man named Jeff Pulver? He’s running a contest for ideas to help make people aware. Here are the rules.
I really like our country stores a lot. My life would be less without all of you. What if WE Go the Way of the Old Country Store?
Brian Clark of CopyBlogger *** writes of the Four Horsemen of the Internet Apocalypse:
The US Congress is pushing a law that would abandon Network Neutrality, the Internet’s First Amendment. Network neutrality currently prevents companies like AT&T, Verizon, Comcast and Time Warner from deciding which Web sites work best for you based on what site pays them the most. Without Network Neutrality, the scenarios outlined above are just the beginning. And it will affect people all over the world, not just in the States.
Jeff Pulver has started Viral Marketing to Save the Internet+ inviting anyone who can write or put a video together (in a professional manner), to enter his contest++ to Help Save the Internet.
If you care that you are probably going to be wedged off the internet by Big Business, with Congress’ help, then try to do something that will keep the Internet Neutral and open to everyone.
Update: There is a petition at MoveOn.org to send to Congress. If this is important to you, you may want to stop by and sign it… and be sure to send an E-mail to your friends.
Referrals:
* SuperHighway or Toll Road
** Successful-Blog
*** CopyBlogger
+ Jeff Pulver’s Virial Marketing to Save the Internet
++ Rules of contest
Permalink
04.19.06
Posted in MSM, Selling Out at 7:25 pm by Joe
Something is in the air. This is political in nature, but not necessarily about the Internet…Yet.In the Philadelpia Inquirer today, I read an article about something that may eventually lead to having to pay for information on the internet. There is an apparent contract between the world reknown Smithsonian Institution and the cable comany Showtime.
I will quote the whole article, if they want to sue me, ok, but I think it is worth the risk.
Smithsonian-Showtime deal opposed
Associated PressWashington- More than 200 filmmakers, historians and students have signed a letter asking the Smithsonian Institution to reveal details with Showtime Networks and reverse a policy of the agreement that could limit access to the Smithsonian’s archives and experts.The Showtime deal, announced last month, requires commercial documentaries that rely heavily on Smithsonian collections to be offered first to a new cable-TV venture, Smithsonian on Demand. Those who don’t want to do business with the new network could find access to Smithsonian materials denied.
In their letter to Lawrence M. Small, the Smithsonian’s top official, the academics and filmmakers said the deal would “discourage the independent filmmakers from creating projects for other media outlets.â€
Among the signers were filmmakers Michael Moore (Fahrenheit 9/11) and Ken Burns, producer of the documentaries Baseball and The Civil War.
The Smithsonian has refused to provide financial details of the agreement, citing contract confidentiality. But the filmmakers cited the museum’s federal charter in demanding more information.
The letter was released by the Center for American Progress, a liberal research organization that has also filed a Freedom of Information request.
“Closing off one of the most important collections of source materials, and limiting access to staff,†the letter adds, “will have a chilling effect on creativitiy, will create disincentives for digitization of the collections for access by all Americans, and violates the mission and purpose of the Smithsonian Insitiution.â€
“We honor our contracts,†said Smithsonian spokeswoman Linda St. Thomas. “This is a signed contract.â€
Signed contract or not, that is My, Your, Our information that they are selling. They are saying that if a student in high school, or a graduate student wants to have acess for a project, they will have to pay a Cable Company for it.
Signed contract or not, that is My, Your, Our information that they are selling. They are saying that if a student in high school, or a graduate student wants to have acess for a project, they will have to pay a Cable Company for it.Sorry, but I don’t think so.
Signed contract or not, that is My, Your, Our information that they are selling. They are saying that if a student in high school, or a graduate student wants to have acess for a project, they will have to pay a Cable Company for it.Sorry, but I don’t think so.Maybe this is because the Government has just raised the deficit instead of dealing with a budget. If they need money that bad, don’t sell out to the highest bidder, find a better way.
The internet is our last hope to stop these people from selling our history. We need to maintain what we have, not sell it to meet this presidents budget screw ups.
Permalink
« Previous entries
