What is Digg?Sponsored by FUNimation Enertainment
Bow before the frog. Sgt. Frog conquers the Earth? view!
funimation.com - Alien frogs are living among us! Vacuuming our rugs? Sgt. Frog - Season 1, Part 2 available 11/24
589 Comments
- pimpofpixels, on 10/22/2009, -18/+586John McCain and Glenn Beck are wrong as usual.
Network Neutrality is the only hope America has to emerge beyond this disgusting polarized uneducated stink hole it's become over the past few decades.
Media consolidation and Cable news have brought this nation to the brink.
The free internet will bring us back. - Cuchanu, on 10/23/2009, -9/+436I watched the Beck segment and the guy he had there used the words "far-left extremists" and "leftist radicals" multiple times in describing who is for net-neutrality. Further proof that people that watch FOX "news" don't have a clue and only need to hear "left" to know they should hate something.
- MayorMcCheapo, on 10/23/2009, -7/+324I'm reminded of a recent Alan Grayson line, "If Obama had a BLT, the GOP would try to ban bacon."
- DjOnz, on 10/22/2009, -27/+327rabble rabble rabble.
glen beck do you want to fight me you pussy? - pimpofpixels, on 10/23/2009, -9/+244It's been neutral.
The telecoms have been scheming to charge content providers for access to posting content.
If it ain't broke, but it's about to break, keep it from ***** breaking. - chippyr, on 10/23/2009, -9/+230Glenn just can't get anything right it seems.
I also heard that he did something bad in 1990, but I can't remember what it was.............. - namredips, on 10/23/2009, -3/+187Net Neutrality isn't about "fixing the internet", its about ensuring the free and open flow of information. It was once that way, and to some extent remains free and open. However that is changing.... Be warned, those who control the information. Consider that the internet has put a chink in the armor of the previous ability to control the information. If you don't know who had previous control, open up your internet bill. Again net neutrality is about regulating the power of information, and keeping it in the hands of the people.
Now how well the proposed mechanisms will keep things free and open, thats a different discussion. One that comes after first understanding the point in the first place... - RentalCanoe, on 10/23/2009, -1/+181"The Internet is an engine of economic growth and innovation because of a simple principle: net neutrality, which assures innovators that their next great idea will be available to consumers, regardless of what the network owners think about it.
No previous mass media technology has been so remarkably open. Traditional media - newspapers, radio, TV - have gatekeepers standing between consumers and producers, with the power to control content. The Internet eliminates the gatekeeper.
Now, however, the Internet's unprecedented openness is in jeopardy.
Comcast, AT&T and Verizon have been lobbying to kill net neutrality. They say they won't build an information superhighway if they can't build it as a closed system. No other industrialized country has made that devil's bargain, and neither should we. Without net neutrality, online innovation is vulnerable to the whims of cable and phone companies, which control 99 percent of the household market for high-speed Internet access. And Silicon Valley venture capitalists are unlikely to bet the farm on a whim.
Network owners say the threat of abuse is hypothetical. But actions speak louder than words. Last fall, Comcast was caught secretly blocking popular technologies that can bring HDTV to your laptop - used by everyone from the Hollywood studios to NASA. It was no coincidence: Comcast is targeting a growing competitor to its cable TV service.
After the FCC started an investigation, Comcast admitted to blocking, but thumbed its noses at the government and the public - going so far as to hire seat-fillers at an FCC hearing at Harvard University to stifle the debate.
Public, government and media scrutiny ultimately forced Comcast to stop blocking one of the file-sharing companies. But we can't expect everyone to negotiate a side deal for permission to innovate. This limits the online marketplace to ideas and commerce that don't pose a threat to network owners - a chilling prospect.
This type of behavior shows why we can't trust the future of the Internet to these companies. Just two years ago, telecom executives went before Congress vowing never to interfere with the open Internet. Their broken promises are exactly why we need net neutrality laws back on the books. Fortunately, members of Congress from both parties have introduced legislation that would do precisely that.
The threat posed by would-be gatekeepers is real and getting worse. The success of future innovation depends on an open Internet for everyone."
Lawrence Lessig is a law professor at Stanford University and founder of the Center for Internet and Society. Ben Scott is policy director of Free Press, the national, nonpartisan media reform organization ( www.freepress.net).
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2 ... - Renian, on 10/23/2009, -8/+188You don't want to fight Glenn Beck. He'll rape and murder you like he did to a young girl in 1990.
- joculator, on 10/23/2009, -1/+177Does McCain really impress anyone as a tech-savy guy? He's probably somewhere right now trying to play a CD on a hand-cranked Victrola.
- pintomp3, on 10/23/2009, -3/+124John McCain: Against net neutrality, for gang rape.
- Stemnin, on 10/23/2009, -6/+127"Internet Freedom Act of 2009"
Hopefully your dems (I'm not a United Statian) don't lose their spines when they read the word Freedom in the title. - DDRSkata, on 10/23/2009, -4/+119I heard he raped and murdered a girl. I don't know if it's true--in fact, I don't think it is true--but it is strange that he hasn't denied it.
- rmkrmkrmk, on 10/23/2009, -1/+114"McCain, who introduced the bill to undermine the new rules, has received some $894,379 in contributions from AT&T, Verizon, Comcast and other broadband interests over his career."
I don't understand? How can people take this guy seriously? He doesn't even know how to email. ...Another crooked politician on the take (sighs). - Trigonometron, on 10/23/2009, -3/+111Oh whoa whoa WHOA. Wait up Beck.
Don't ***** with my INTERNET.
You have been warned. - pimpofpixels, on 10/23/2009, -0/+108Right. We've been free to do what we want on the internet. The point is keeping it that way.
This is not about creating network neutrality. It's about protecting it. - cntlscrut, on 10/23/2009, -1/+105John McCain hardly knows how to use a computer or even what one is. Why the ***** would I listen to him on issues such as the Internet?!
I'm sorry, but anti- net neutrality advocates need to pull their collective heads out of their asses and realize that the internet does not belong to just us it belongs to everybody and it's time get over trying find some kind of proprietary excuse to slap the US "brand" on it.
pathetic - DiomedesTydeus, on 10/23/2009, -2/+97Also understand that billions have been given by the government (read, by the tax payers) to the providers to build those networks.
To now claim that they "own the tubes" and want the government to stay out is pretty two-faced. - PhilliesBlunt, on 10/23/2009, -1/+88Every thing I hear coming from Fox is something about the far left. Everyone, all the time. Some more than others. No wonder these people who watch Fox think everything else has a liberal bias when people who they think are legitimate news anchors blame everything on the far left voice that doesn't exist!
- pintomp3, on 10/23/2009, -2/+87Net neutrality isn't about regulating or fixing the internet. It's about not letting the telcos regulate and break it. The internet is great and works the way it works because it is neutral. Net neutrality is about keeping it that way. The anti-government right-wingers seem to forget who created the internet in the first place.
- Hetman, on 10/23/2009, -0/+82Since I have been on digg almost every article about net neutrality is in support of it.
- Mujokan, on 10/23/2009, -3/+78Who wants to bet Beck's eventual obituary is going to mention the phrase "accidental drug overdose"?
- PhilliesBlunt, on 10/23/2009, -1/+75You're missing the point. The telecoms want to push a tiered bandwidth internet. All this does is declare that they can't do that. Incidently, the internet's already full of rules; case in point, I didn't goatse you in response. :(
- Falldog, on 10/23/2009, -6/+78Well, McCain voted against Franken's "rape bill" and Glenn Beck possibly raped and murdered a girl in 1990, so it makes sense that they'd be against maintaining freedom.
- DDRSkata, on 10/23/2009, -0/+72I could see Beck now. "Why's Obama eating bacon? Shouldn't his Marxist ideas be forcing everyone to stay healthy? I guess he's above his own values, eating bacon while the rest of us are supposed to eat light."
- valetudomexican, on 10/23/2009, -1/+73***** AT&T
- bmdubya, on 10/23/2009, -1/+72FTA "McCain, who introduced the bill to undermine the new rules, has received some $894,379 in contributions from AT&T, Verizon, Comcast and other broadband interests over his career, many of those dollars directed to his 2008 presidential campaign, according to the Sunlight Foundation."
Yeah, it makes sense now why he is against net neutrality. - acknotSW, on 10/23/2009, -0/+70I don't know if he did or didn't, but he certainly hasn't denied it.
- cupid311, on 10/23/2009, -3/+62Did Glenn Beck rape and murder a young girl in 1990?
- depro9, on 10/23/2009, -3/+54Oh look the retarded Right has something to say about the tubes. LOL
- ProfessorSYM, on 10/23/2009, -0/+50@AnotherDiggGuy:
There is a reason that bandwidth capacity hasn't grown and it has to do with the telecoms not wanting to outlay the expense to improve their networks.
It's all about the bottom line, and this "there is nothing wrong with the Internet" line is ridiculous when talking about this issue. If the telecoms have their way, as PhilliesBlunt pointed out, tiered bandwidth will take over and then we begin the slippery slope into unregulated ISP control of what their customers can and cannot see.
And if people are "brainwashed" into thinking that companies are greedy that is because certain companies have done things to warrant that perception. Allowing companies to do anything they want would be like giving the President total autonomy with no interference from Congress or the courts.
But something tells me you would be okay with that, as long as the President isn't a Democrat. - ProfessorSYM, on 10/23/2009, -0/+50It is clear you do not understand Net Neutrality (a lot of people who do not).
It is equally clear that you are not remembering things correctly; even if there were some people on Digg who supported it, by and large a tech-oriented community (as Digg was when it started) is not going to be inclined to support tiered pricing and throttling of service by ISPs. - AgeofMastery, on 10/23/2009, -0/+50He's the guy who admitted his wife had to turn on the computer for him. Now he's an expert on the Internet...
- marcb83, on 10/23/2009, -3/+51he raped and murdered a teenager
- ProfessorSYM, on 10/23/2009, -0/+46If the media companies and telecommunications companies have their way, you won't be free "todo" what you want "todo" on the Internet. Unless of course you want to pay extra fees to be able to access things like video, streaming music and other bandwidth intensive applications.
- Ascus, on 10/23/2009, -0/+45Net Neutrality = Not allowing ISPs to censor the internet.
It does not give any government any powers at all other than giving FCC authority to ensure ISPs do not do censor it. IT does not allow the government to censor anything.
It closer to ADA for the internet, as it assures that even small operators have the same access to internet and the big ones do. - Dreeon, on 10/23/2009, -0/+44I would bet that if the Obama Administration would be against Net Neutrality, Beck would blast this agenda as being Fascist or Socialist or whatever other kind of scary -ist ideology he feels like using on any given day.
- TheMeatball, on 10/23/2009, -2/+44This really needs more attention.
- ironhide, on 10/23/2009, -2/+43bullcrap
- firesights, on 10/23/2009, -4/+45You're clueless (not an insult, you just don't understand how net neutrality works) and anyone digging you up is equally clueless about how the internet functions.
- AnonymousSkull, on 10/23/2009, -4/+44If I'm a "leftist radical" or "left-wing extremist" for supporting Net Neutrality, then so be it. Oh, but I also like guns and exercise my right to own and carry. Does this make me a "right-wing extremist"? What the hell! Our 2-party "system" is too goddamn polarized.
- boombye, on 10/23/2009, -1/+41Are you retarded? Net Neutrality is keeping the net neutral and free from practices like throttling and such.
- zip000, on 10/23/2009, -1/+41This doublethink crap terminology that the Republicans use is so infuriating!
The "Internet Freedom Act" which makes the internet less free (unless you're a multimedia conglomerate)
The "Clean Air Act" which made air pollution much worse.
Do they know how disingenuous it is? How can they deal with the cognitive dissonance of it? - PhilliesBlunt, on 10/23/2009, -0/+39I want some of what you're smoking.
- sugarazor, on 10/23/2009, -0/+39"Tonight on Hannity! Barack Obama's eating bacon... why does the president hate Jews?"
- DDRSkata, on 10/23/2009, -1/+40Is anyone surprised Beck is speaking on behalf of the corporations?
- guyincognitoo, on 10/23/2009, -0/+39But that wont stop him from introducing one written by time warner lobbyists.
- TVarmy, on 10/23/2009, -1/+39My theory: Glenn Beck is anti-net neutrality because he wants to pay off the telecoms to block http://glennbeckrapedandmurderedayounggirlin1990.c ... . I don't mean to create a tenuous analogy, but remember when the USSR and Hitler burned all the books they didn't agree with?
I think it's happening again. - emrys7, on 10/23/2009, -1/+39McCain, John - (R - AZ) Class III
241 RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON DC 20510
(202) 224-2235
webform: http://mccain.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseActi ...
Sample Script:
Dear Senator McCain,
My name is ________, and I am a United States citizen from _________. I'm contacting you about your recently proposed bill that would block the FCC from enforcing "net neutrality." I want you to know that I disagree with your bill, because the concept of net neutrality will actually help to defend my 1st amendment rights as an American. With net neutrality policies in place, the government, the ISP's, and the telecommunications companies will not be able to control what I say on the internet or how people receive what I say. This would not force any bloggers to devote equal time to opposing viewpoints, or any ridiculous claim like that, only protect my right to send and receive information freely over the internet and not be silenced by those with more money than me.
I am puzzled by your opposition to something as American as free speech, but I was struck by a report I read on America Online's service "Daily Finance," which states:
"McCain, who introduced the bill to undermine the new rules, has received some $894,379 in contributions from AT&T, Verizon, Comcast and other broadband interests over his career, many of those dollars directed to his 2008 presidential campaign, according to the Sunlight Foundation."
I hope you will rescind your bill and put American citizens before your own private interests.
Sincerely,
__________ - ToddSchishler, on 10/23/2009, -0/+36Net neutrality = good.
No net neutrality = providers throttling certain kinds of traffic, and giving preferential treatment to other traffic, which is bad.
You're confused as to what net neutrality is. -
Show 51 - 100 of 597 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is