Slashdot Log In
New 'Net Neutrality' Bill Introduced
Posted by
ScuttleMonkey
on Wed Feb 13, 2008 06:11 PM
from the politics-the-fastest-way-to-foul-something-up dept.
from the politics-the-fastest-way-to-foul-something-up dept.
I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property writes "Reps Ed Markey (D-MA) and Chip Pickering (R-MS) introduced the 'Internet Freedom Preservation Act of 2008' (HR 5353) this week. The proposed legislation [PDF] would not legislate what is and is not 'neutral'. Instead, it would add a section to the 'Broadband Policy' section of the Communications Act which spells out principles the FCC is expected to uphold, in addition to having them hold summits which would 'assess competition, consumer protection, and consumer choice issues related to broadband Internet access services' and make it easy for citizens to submit comments or complaints online."
Related Stories
Submission: New 'Net Neutrality' Bill Introduced by Anonymous Coward
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
...make it easy for citizens... (Score:5, Insightful)
Those comments are always ignored, apparently.
Re: (Score:2)
This seems a bit toothless (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Enforce the laws we have? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
from "Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech,..."?
Maybe I don't know what "abridging" means to lawyers, but m-w.com [merriam-webster.com] defines it as " to shorten in duration or extent ".
How does restricting the
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Just try to say the words "shit" or "fuck" on the radio. No images, movies, or pictures there, but somehow you can get fined for that. That is very specifically a free speech issue. Maybe someone who is about to get a bunch of negative publicity could change their name to "Mr. Shit Fuck", and then you couldn't be featured in the radio/TV at all.
This is a good thing (Score:4, Interesting)
By extending the scope of the FCC, changes can be made much more quickly. Bad rules can be repealled quickly. New guidelines issued. Explicit behaviour prevented as soon as it starts.
Re:This is a good thing (Score:5, Informative)
In 2005 the supreme court reclassified ISPs as "information providers" rather than "telecommuniactions providers." Those terms have specific meaning under the tariffs that regulate the telecom industry. Essentially "telecommunications providers" have a set of rules they must abide by that include most of the concepts generally referred to under the umbrella of "network neutrality" while "information providers" are not so regulated.
Brand X [wikipedia.org]
Parent
lawful purposes (Score:2, Insightful)
Interesting that they stuck the word "lawful" in there, as well as "unreasonable interference". This bill won't change anything.
Hmmm.. (Score:2)
I'm not unhappy to see him sponsoring the bill - he's my Congresscritter - but he's not going to be around next year, so he doesn't have a lot of votes left to swap support for.
Freedom this, freedom that... (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm really sick of these 'patriotic names' which usually have little or nothing to do with what the bill encompasses,
Re: (Score:2)
e.g.
Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (USA PATRIOT ACT) Act of 2001
Full Text [loc.gov]
The captcha word was 'litigate' - hilarious.
Re:Freedom this, freedom that... (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
COMplaints are non-neutral so ... (Score:4, Funny)
"The remote server timed out. Try again later."
just a hypothetical... (Score:5, Interesting)
the way i'm seeing things right now, more choice would lower costs to consumers (which naturally the telcos would oppose), but if an ISP was caught doing something shaky (traffic shaping, etc), consumers would have other choices than their cable or phone company. having competing infrastructures strikes me as having to choice which company's sewers i flush my toilet into. it would make things simpler to have the one infrastructure.
Bill would put NET under FCC jurisdiction (Score:3, Insightful)
Bill to do nothing? (Score:2)
I don't like to be cynical, but I wouldn't get any hopes up over this bill. Remember that this is an election year, so even passing it (and making the FCC "study" the issue) is probably just about making a show of concern, rather than actually changing anything. (Or even heading off any threats before they happen.)
When I get time, I should write a journal entry about how I became a neutrality violator, too. (I promise that the issue is more complex than it might appear.)
Re:Non news (Score:5, Insightful)
Why don't you do the same?
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Non news (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Non news (Score:5, Insightful)
No vote, no difference.
You may as well stop talking altogether, really, though--because if you choose not to vote, then you're letting all those people who do vote choose what to do with you. As such, you're going to have to live with what we say.
What do I say?
Put up or shut up. Unless you're prepared to get off your lazy duff and -do- something about it, don't bother complaining about it.
Vote. Write your congresscritter. Write letters to the editor. Participate in the system--yes, even if you disagree, because, frankly, unless you know how to work the current one, you've got no chance of making it better or changing it for something else.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately, you're implying the converse when the converse isn't really true. The fact is: vote, but still no difference. This can be mathematically proven but the dogma of democracy is above such silly notions as "proof".
Re: (Score:2)
Unless you want an armed rebellion, voting is the only way to change things.
In any case, giving up your vote is saying that it's OK to be in a dictatorship where people cannot choose their leaders. It's amazing how hundreds or even thousands of people in other countries give their lives so they can choose who they want to rule their country - and in the US people just give away that right.
Another thing - if voting isn't enough, then PROMOTE YOUR CANDIDATE! This way
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The basic idea is, in a sufficiently large election, there's a fantastically low probability that the vote will be tied (or within 1 vote of a tie) but for your vote. Since this is the only case in which your vote actually makes a difference, the probability of your vote making a difference is fantastically low, and thus there's a correspondingly high probability that your vote will make no difference. There are a few ways of getting around this: one is by making multiple thresholds of your vote mattering,
Bad definition of "counting" (Score:3, Insightful)
It's obviously clear, assuming that democracy is worthwhile, that everyone sh
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well.. they were stupid. I didn't ask for them to die, and I seriously doubt many of them were dying to defend freedoms- probably most of them died because they were forced to by the draft. I don't know what was up with the revolutionary war militia, but I certainly don't owe anything to them. Have you ever seen Full Metal Jacket? I like the scene where mother laughs in the reporter's face and asks incredulously "You think we're dying for freedom?"
Remember, there are those who fought in real wars so t
Re:Non news (Score:4, Interesting)
Every year, I would vote for the local school district levy, and every year it would fail. Ever since I first entered high school, I recognized how poorly the local public schools were doing: the books were falling apart, teachers were being laid off, extracurricular activities were being canceled, less teachers for classes meant more useless study hall periods, etc. For over ten years, the levies consistently failed, so the school failed to receive funding to support many of its most basic services.
During my senior year, I remember my homeroom adviser telling the class how the levy failed by a margin of only ~20-30 votes (I think it was). Since we were all of voting age, she said that if a single classroom of students would have just got off their asses and voted for the levy, it would have succeeded. That's a real, quantifiable number of people who could have made a change in a sea of tens of thousands of other voters.
Then the unthinkable happened. Last year, the levy passed by a margin of three votes. It was incredible, but then they issued a recount. After the recount, it still managed to pass by a margin of only TWO votes [enquirer.com].
Of course, there were only tens of thousands voting, rather than tens of millions. And yes, one vote didn't really matter--two did. I wasn't necessarily one of those two votes, nor possibly anyone in my family.
But that didn't stop my younger brother from marching into class the next day, staring at his history teacher from across the room, and boldly proclaiming, "You have MY family to thank for your pay-raise. We accept cash only."
Parent
Re:Non news (Score:5, Insightful)
Going beyond voting, every message that the congresscritter receives from his or her constituents supporting this bill will indicate to them that it is an important issue, and that if they want to be re-elected they may want to pay attention.
Yes, my opinion individually may not matter much, but it still contributes.
I do not need to stick out in a crowd. I have no desire to stick out of the crowd--it's more trouble than it's worth, frankly. But forming a part of the 'mountain'? That's worthwhile.
It doesn't take much time to send an email to your congresscritter (make sure to include your snail addy, o'course, and your name and phone number). If net neutrality isn't important enough for you to take a couple of minutes to support it, then don't complain when all you can get is throttled-to-hell packet-shaped crapwidth instead of decent broadband.
I vote. I write my congresscritter when I hear about something that I find important. My opinion has been heard on more than one occasion, and as a result, I am content to participate in this democracy.
Does it always go my way? Of course not. But that's the way these things work, and sometimes what is best for me is not best for everybody else.
Parent
Re:Non news (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:Non news (Score:4, Insightful)
Or perhaps that's why the Libertarians can't ever get a candidate in office--because none of their alleged supporters bother voting?
Sorry. If you don't vote, you don't matter. What people see are the numbers--and if there's no opposition because of broken people like you who don't bother voting, then any opposition to the status quo that might exist will never show up.
So by all means, have your lofty pie-in-the-sky Libertarian ideals. Don't expect anyone else to give a flying bacon sandwich for 'em, though, if you don't put action to it and actually do something with it.
You don't vote? You don't matter.
You don't work with the system? Then you'll have to shut up and accept what the system--and all those people who support it--will do to you.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Non news (Score:5, Insightful)
So let me get this straight. Your philosophy depends on other people taking pity on you and reading your mind to figure out what you want?
You want everyone else to vote for someone whom you don't even really support, just so that you can have your opinions--which you'll never actually -tell- to anyone in charge--respected?
And somehow you don't see how broken that is?
This is why nobody will ever take your alleged 'political philosophy' seriously: you're unwilling to participate in a government, but want the government to magically do what you want it to do.
If you want to fix a system you see as broken, you'll have to get into the system to fix it. Ain't nobody yet who ever fixed a broken ethernet card by sulking in a corner--ain't nobody ever fixed a broken government by whining on slashdot.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Niven was right: "there is no
Bullsh!t (Score:5, Insightful)
1. If you put pen to paper and write a concise and reasonable paragraph or two about why it matters to you and send it to your representatives, you bet they will listen. Why? Because they know it's coming from a warm body as opposed to all of the anonymous electronic spam that Political Action Committees stir up. The letter becomes a bellwether of sorts if it is similar to other handwritten letters on the same topic.
2. The U.S. is a Republic, not a Democracy. Your one vote isn't really designed to matter as much as common knowledge would suggest.
3. Maintaining the Republic requires participation. Participation means putting pen to paper, talking to people in and out of the political system. Once you know a few people and have a couple of interests it can be very satisfying.
4. No, majority does not rule. More pablum that passes for common sense.
Making up excuses like yours is simply lazy and unpatriotic.
Parent
Generally agreed (Score:2)
1) Voting is the last step in political participation which validates everything else. Voting is not where participation begins and ends.
2) Participation means engaging in a dialog with your representative and senators. This means calling their office, sending email, etc. Note that mail gets quarantined for a while and so snail mail is less of an option. However, check their web sites-- they usually have contact forms.
3) If we don't talk to our congressmen, then the only
Re: (Score:2)
I did this with an issue I had a few years ago (3 or 4). I got a hand-signed personal response from my representative (Barren Hill) in about a week.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:We need a new internet also (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:We need a new internet also (Score:4, Funny)
Or are you all talk and no action?
Parent
Re:We need a new internet also (Score:5, Interesting)
There's no way to win the bandwidth race at this point. The moment you start talking about "video", you move to a requirement that really is unrealistic.
To have the "Internet" (open access, bidirectional services and bandwidth, all-you-can eat buffet style bandwidth, unicast (or multicast)) with "Video" (continuous, "large" bandwidth streams), you have a problem.
OC-192's are the defacto standard in the Telecom industry. Even if you run multiple bonded OC-192, or have a faster standard, or any of the currently available technologies, you simply can't architect a network that could do what you suggest is so easy to do. Well, telepathy might work, but a workable implementation of mind-to-mind communications hasn't been demonstrated yet.
Now, saying that, the Telecom's are coping out with there current "traffic management", it's a pathetic implementation, and any real network engineer with more than a handful of years experience could create something better than manipulating TCP headers/windows/sessions (the minimum standard for MSS is 536 AT&T, or did you miss NewReno-IETF Standards 101 class?) or doing a DOS man in the middle attack on their customers. It's called Network Calculus, or Queueing theory, do a Google search and look it up, if you haven't blocked yourself from doing Google searches.
A simple queueing system that has a deficit round robin scheduler based on only src or dst IP address would do exactly what they are looking for (think WFQ, but only src or dst address based). With FQ, Cisco has been doing this for at least as long as I've been into networking, all that really needs to be done is for Cisco do change fair queueing to only include one parameter, the src or dst IP address. Problem solved. Customers happy. Multiflow file transfer applications running fine and not hogging the network. People browsing the web getting great performance. No lawsuits. Everybody wins.
It's so freakin' simple. Sometimes, the ISP's should just be slapped. All the Executives, managers, and engineers who go along with their BS. All in one big Three Stooges style line slap.
Oh... But you'll never truly get "Video" and the "Internet" to mix. If you think you can, I'd be glad for you to provide a potential architecture in this forum and prove me wrong.
multiplatformgeekbutmainlyjustnetworks
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
2.) Develop blistering fast optical chips and an inferace bus to manage and route all the traffic.
Eh, I suppose one out of two isn't bad...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Mind, you'd think people would have learned by now not to trust a
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)