www. O S N E W S .com
News Features Interviews
BlogContact Editorials
.
The internet is fucked (again)
By Thom Holwerda on 2017-07-12 13:37:27

FCC chairman Ajit Pai is fond of saying that "the internet was not broken in 2015" when he argues for repeal of our nation's net neutrality rules. This is particularly funny to me, because in 2014 I literally wrote an article called "The internet is fucked".

Why was it fucked? Because the free and open internet was in danger of becoming tightly controlled by giant telecom corporations that were already doing things like blocking apps and services from phones and excusing their own services from data caps. Because the lack of competition in the internet access market let these companies act like predatory monopolies. And because our government lacked the will or clarity to just say what everyone already knows: internet access is a utility.

Most of these things are still true, even after the Obama-era FCC under Chairman Tom Wheeler reclassified internet access as a Title II telecommunications service and imposed strict net neutrality rules on wired and wireless internet providers. And most of these things will get even worse when Pai pushes through his plan to rescind Title II and those rules, despite widespread public outcry.

Hey look, another case of corporations actively working to undermine society by bribing politicians with huge amounts of money that individuals would never (or only rarely) have access to. As long as politicians' power is derived not from the people, but from money, shit like this will continue to happen. Trying to stop Pai's obviously horrible and destructive anti-consumer plans is a noble goal, but these plans are only a symptom, not a cause. We're playing whack-a-mole, while they are playing Jenga.

These corporate criminals and their political lapdogs will keep throwing money at the wall until it breaks - and they have more money than we have bricks and mortar.

 Email a friend - Printer friendly - Related stories
.
Read Comments: 1-10 -- 11-20 -- 21-30 -- 31-40 -- 41-45
.
RE: Comment by kurkosdr
By kwan_e on 2017-07-12 23:58:16
> Which of course means the 50.1% of idiots can rule over the rest 49.9%. So... cut the benefits of poor uneducated people so they can't reproduce, I guess? Make having children expensive so only wealthy educated people can afford having children?

So the solution to poor uneducated people is to keep them poor and uneducated and move more people into that category? Having a whole bunch of idiots is bad for society whether or not they can vote.
Permalink - Score: 2
.
RE[4]: Comment by kurkosdr
By kwan_e on 2017-07-13 00:10:21
> Not voting means you do not want to be part of it and should be left alone, as is your human rights.

You want to be left alone, yet allowed to be participate in that society. You can't have both.

> No one has the right to force people to either vote or submit.

I believe they do, but then I do like Australia's mandatory voting at state and federal elections. Free societies have few obligations, but there are some obligations I don't think can be shirked in order to keep the rest of the freedoms.

> Voting is just there to give the illusion of choice in order to keep people docile.

People treat voting like it's supposed to be done once, decision is final, the winner takes it all. Voting is there to steer society in a direction. You can't do hard turns in society. There is no way to get the exact choice you want, you can only get a choice to steer society in a direction you want.

It's simply infantile to chuck a hissy fit just because you don't get to choose exactly what you want.
Permalink - Score: 2
.
RE[2]: Comment by kurkosdr
By _txf_ on 2017-07-13 01:13:26
Direct voting on Policy is what led to Brexit. Most people are idiots and they vote accordingly.
Permalink - Score: 2
.
.
By Meor on 2017-07-13 03:17:25
The internet won't be saved by a benevolent government. It'll be saved by concerned citizens.
Permalink - Score: 1
.
RE: Comment by Lazarus
By avgalen on 2017-07-13 09:11:05
I wanted to comment the same. That is such an elegant description of reality!

/me adds-to-main-vocabulary-sto rage
Permalink - Score: 2
.
RE[2]: Comment by kurkosdr
By Adurbe on 2017-07-13 09:11:19
If you want to see what anarchism looks like, go to Somalia and tell me that is how you want to raise your kids. It might sound trendy and "subversive" when you live in a stable western economy. The reality of it in action is truly horrendous.
Permalink - Score: 2
.
RE: To quote Mr. Garrison...
By fmaxwell on 2017-07-13 09:42:51
> "Fuck 'em 'til they're dead!"

Pretty much sums up my thoughts on the money-grubbing whores we call politicians.


When we had a Democratic administration under Obama, the FCC was supporting net neutrality. This change is the result of electing Republicans, none of whom give a fuck about the interests of the citizens of this country.
Permalink - Score: 2
.
RE[5]: Comment by kurkosdr
By unclefester on 2017-07-13 09:49:32
Australia doesn't have mandatory voting. You are required to enrol and turn up to the polling place on the election day (a Saturday). However you aren't required to vote. In practice there is no real punishment for not following the rules. At worst you will get a samll fine - but nothing happens if you don't pay the fine. The governemnt does'nt want any bad publicity or plolitical martyrs.
Permalink - Score: 2
.
RE: .
By fmaxwell on 2017-07-13 10:18:27
> The internet won't be saved by a benevolent government. It'll be saved by concerned citizens.

Yet it was being saved by a benevolent government when Democrats controlled the White House. We had an FCC that was actively fighting for net neutrality.

Trump's Plutocratic administration has no interest in the 'concerns' of citizens. They would happily throw us all into wood chippers if lobbyists for AT&T, Time Warner Cable, Verizon, and Comcast asked them to.
Permalink - Score: 2
.
RE[3]: Comment by kurkosdr
By dionicio on 2017-07-13 14:03:40
"Abstaining on a vote actually is _counted_. " Non voting actually is _counted_, also.

States have census data. Mostly public data.

A bit of confidence placed at an urn on a few self proclaimed messiahs every 4 or 6 years means nothing.

Excluding people from political weight -and visibility- is the most usual way of "faking" democracy. Becoming the new normal at XXI century.

And the reason this renewed effort on fiscalizing the WWW, the most civilian side of the Internet, is so insensible.

Don't believe Europe will follow -at least not so openly.
Permalink - Score: 2

Read Comments 1-10 -- 11-20 -- 21-30 -- 31-40 -- 41-45

No new comments are allowed for stories older than 10 days.
This story is now archived.

.
News Features Interviews
BlogContact Editorials
.
WAP site - RSS feed
© OSNews LLC 1997-2007. All Rights Reserved.
The readers' comments are owned and a responsibility of whoever posted them.
Prefer the desktop version of OSNews?