US blocking freedom of speech? Have you seen this yet?

[techie]

Is this the way we are going?
http://www.google.com/help/netneutrality_letter.html

A Note to Google Users on Net Neutrality:

The Internet as we know it is facing a serious threat. There's a debate heating up in Washington, DC on something called "net neutrality" – and it's a debate that's so important Google is asking you to get involved. We're asking you to take action to protect Internet freedom.

In the next few days, the House of Representatives is going to vote on a bill that would fundamentally alter the Internet. That bill, and one that may come up for a key vote in the Senate in the next few weeks, would give the big phone and cable companies the power to pick and choose what you will be able to see and do on the Internet.

Today the Internet is an information highway where anybody – no matter how large or small, how traditional or unconventional – has equal access. But the phone and cable monopolies, who control almost all Internet access, want the power to choose who gets access to high-speed lanes and whose content gets seen first and fastest. They want to build a two-tiered system and block the on-ramps for those who can't pay.

Creativity, innovation and a free and open marketplace are all at stake in this fight. Please call your representative (202-224-3121) and let your voice be heard.

Thanks for your time, your concern and your support.

Eric Schmidt

 

[techie]

Of course, minutes after posting this I walk past my tv with cnn news on it.
Information from the LPG Golf tour is further disturbing.

I guess if youre' a really good Japanese, Chinese or Korean golfer, you wouldnt be allowed to play tours in the US anymore, unless you study English first so they can interview you.

Apparently they dont like to use interpretors to much in the US and subtitling would just be to much of a headache.

It could have something to do with the fact that 13 % of highschool students fail reading and writing , and perhaps before banning foreign golfers for not speaking English, they should teach their own kids to speak it first.

Sorry folks, i'm just on a rant streak today am I not (^^)


Edit: Someone got to do something I guess so it migth as well be me...
and why not you... http://protest.nasrack.com/

 

[monkey306]

I think that would be rather insane. It would just be choice censorship. It angers me that people who do things like this are simply control freaks. Things dont always have to be one way where one person has all the control

 

[Sakunyuusha]

The Battle for Net Neutrality has been brought to the forefront in the United States courtesy of the lawsuit(s) filed in the last year against Comcast, the United States' #1 provider of cable Internet service.

The reason that Google is getting involved, I believe, stems from several factors:

1. Google styles itself as "a people's company." That image strengthens with steps like this and crumbles with the opposite.
2. Google needs popular support if its own megalomaniacal schemes are to come to fruition. This is another way Google can rally people to its cause and subconsciously convince them that "Google's on our side!" or "Google's one of us!"
3. And then let's face it: Comcast's Sandvine technology did interfere with customers' ability to access Google 24/7. No doubt Google suspects intentional sabotage, the result of a buddy-buddy relationship between Comcast and Microsoft; and thus Google is prepared to burn bridges, publically declare war against Comcast, and seek retribution -- if also not some restitution.

But really? Fundamentally? This isn't Google's fight: this is the fight between Net Neutrality proponents and the cable telecommunications cartel in the United States. In effect, millions upon millions of little people versus several hundred disgustingly wealthy businessmen, lobbyists, and senators.

You can read more about these lawsuits here:
November 14, 2007 - Wikipedia - first lawsuit successfully filed in the state of California; later evolved into a federal lawsuit
November 14, 2007 - Ars Technica - same lawsuit, different presentation
January 08, 2008 - Ars Technica - FCC agrees to investigate consumer complaints against Comcast
February 07, 2008 - Ars Technica - Comcast modifies ToS, customers have no say in matter
February 22, 2008 - Ars Technica - Washington, D.C. citizen joins the fight
March 18, 2008 - Ars Technica - Comcast calls the FCC's bluff and challenges "You have no authority to tell us we can't do this"
June 03, 2008 - Ars Technica - Comcast explains plan to use "protocol-agnostic" bandwidth smashing, heavy P2P users still SOL
July 09, 2008 - Ars Technica - Comcast pulls a 180° and says "FCC, you do have the authority, my bad!" in an attempt to weasel out of yet another lawsuit
August 01, 2008 - Ars Technica - FCC defends Net Neutrality, submits legal order against Comcast
August 28, 2008 - Ars Technica - October 01: Comcast's 250 GB/mo bandwidth limit goes into effect
September 04, 2008 - Ars Technica - Comcast sues FCC, appeals previous case

 

[techie]

The really funky thing is that whe you look at the balance sheet for google you soon see that Time Warner owns 90% of them and AOL 5% and Time Warner owns 100% of AOL so in other words...

TW owns 95% of Google, and Google still keeps them at bay.

Thats pretty cool.

 

[Sakunyuusha]

Chalk up one more reason not to trust Google in this fight for net neutrality.

One of the major arguments being thrown out here by the people is that the telcos want to generate an artificial bandwidth shortage in order to compete amongst themselves inexpensively (i.e. without having to expensively lay down new lines). It seems odd given what we know: that the United States lags behind other nations in terms of its technologically-permitted maximum bandwidth, and that the international community is gobbling up bandwidth faster than new transoceanic lines can be laid down; but I have heard it said that in the United States, we're only using somewhere between 30% and 40% of our actual bandwidth at any given point in time and that the rest of it goes unused. I can't remember where I first heard this claim, but I know that I most recently saw a mention of it somewhere on a news website (either on my Wii's news feed or on cnn.com or bbc.com). I'm trying to find evidence for or against this claim but am having a hard time. :\

 

[techie]

True and we only use about 20% of the trans atlantic cables, which by the way are doing 10 GBps now, in over 96 strands from three harbors or more.
So there is no shortage and most of them are owned by Telia or other non US based Telco's anyway.