What is Digg?28 Comments
- funhouse1970, on 10/12/2007, -1/+22The gist is Information is power. That's why meaningful protections of Net Neutrality are important. Let's not sleep through this one.
Where does your senator stand? http://www.savetheinternet.com/=senatetally
from savetheinternet.com "What's happening in Congress?"
Congress is now considering a major overhaul of the Telecommunications Act. The telephone and cable companies are filling up congressional campaign coffers and hiring high-priced lobbyists. They've set up "AstroTurf" groups like "Hands Off the Internet" to confuse the issue and give the appearance of grassroots support.
On June 8, the House of Representatives passed the "Communications Opportunity, Promotion and Enhancement Act of 2006," or COPE Act (H.R. 5252) -- a bill that offers no meaningful protections for Net Neutrality. An amendment offered by Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), which would have instituted real Net Neutrality requirements, was defeated by intense industry lobbying.
It now falls to the Senate to save the free and open Internet. Fortunately, Sens. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) and Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.) have introduced a bipartisan measure, the "Internet Freedom Preservation Act of 2006" (S. 2917), that would provide meaningful protection for Net Neutrality.
On June 28, the Snowe-Dorgan bill was introduced as an amendment to Sen. Ted Stevens' (R-Alaska) major rewrite of the Telecom Act (S.2686) [now HR.5252]. The committee split down the middle on the measure, casting a tie vote of 11-11.
Though meaningful Net Neutrality protections were not added to Stevens' bill, the fight for Internet freedom is gaining serious momentum as the bill moves toward the full Senate later this year. Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) has threatened to place a "hold" on the entire legislation unless it reinstates Net Neutrality and prevents discrimination on the Internet.
Heading into August recess, the Senate Commerce Committee reclassified the Stevens bill as the "Advanced Telecommunications and Opportunities Reform Act" (HR.5252) to speed it to conference committee should it pass.
Call Congress today: No senator can in good conscience vote against Internet freedom and with the telecom cartel." - Jawood, on 10/12/2007, -0/+17How do you tell if a politician is lying?
His lips move!
Just go by that premise, unless proven that they're telling the truth, and you won't go wrong. - jimbabb, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7I have my own truth detection algorithm: If a politician speaks, it's a lie.
It's 99% accurate. - milarepa, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6digg for truthiness
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Try this search: http://www.google.com/search?q=homework+services&start=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official
They may also provide very detailed information for your employer, girlfriend, enemies. - pintomp3, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5though i often do it myself, there's something funny about going online for fact checking. i guess "it's on the internet so it must be true" wasn't so far off.
- tazmeister, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Maybe this will force the so-called journalists to start checking their facts before publishing.
- geekworking, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Search results:
Politician A's ***** (75%)
Politician B's ***** (25%)
At the end of the day, it is still all *****. - jefree, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2You are all missing the point. The internet is changing how well informed we are. Of course not everything you find and read is true, but like everything else you use your ***** radar and we all figure out what is really going on. The current crop of politicians is mostly clueless how big of a parade that is going to get crashed. I love it.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2According to your site:
'Bob dole' 'invented' the 'internet' (55%)
'Al Gore' 'invented' the 'internet' (75%)
'President Bush' 'invented' 'peace' (0%, but true)
'Moses' 'killed' 'god' (55%)
So, even if it's your idea... it doesn't work.
Dugg down for a reference that doesn't even work - FTLJohnson, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1A vote AGAINST anything SaveTheInternet has to say is a vote FOR freedom. It's a vote to maintain the status quo. Save the Internet is the group of people that are calling for NEW laws which would grant more power to the government to place restrictions over what can and cannot happen on the internet. HANDS OFF THE INTERNET
.com - milarepa, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I think I broke your machine. I asked if my wife hates fish..."Jessica Hates Fish" and it just kept thinking and thinking. Everything else it answered no problemo.
But, no one knows the answer to that one, even jessica. One day she eats it, the next she swears it off for life. Even truthsayer is confused! - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -6/+7I hate the GOP, but modded you down. You're being played by both sides, and "wasting" your vote on a third party is your only escape.
- karn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Used your site...
Statement: "Al Gore ...invented...the internet"
Answer: "True"
Too funny..haha
Damn, beat me to it.. - pardonmedoug, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1One problem with this kind of idea is that it'd be subject to the same kind of gaming we see every day on Digg, e.g. stories criticising Bush being labelled inaccurate, etc.
If you want a "Google Truth Machine" to tell you that, e.g. Foley is a Democrat, you'd just have to get 1000 blogs to say "Foley is a Democrat." There would be ways to discount those kinds of sites' weight, but then you're opening yourself up to claims of partisanship.
Which ISN'T to say you're wrong, mind you. That's one big logical fallacy that Republicans are exploiting pretty well at the moment: "Since you're not giving our lies the same weight as the opposite claims, you're biased toward the liberals." Well no, you're just lying. Jackass. - garyh84, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The whole 'Al Gore invented the internet' just shows the power of the right-wing. He never said that, he said he helped fund a committee which oversaw the development of the internet. Not that he invented it. However, of course CNN and Fox News along with any other media outlet got ahold of the statement and fabricated it.
- ichbinladen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Buried for stupidity.
- joybran, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1When he says "politicians' statements will be tested against historical fact," whose version of historical fact is he talking about?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2I'm just afraid that because of google's algorithm, "miserable failure" will always return Bush, though the truthfulness of that statement isn't supported by facts, but simply by google bombed links.
- cpgawron, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0I think they took (stole) my idea :-)
http://www.truthsayer.us - scott1, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2The series of tubes can really hurt politicians strategies to get them more money form lobbyist.
Google is once again protecting demoracy with the tubes! - Misesean, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Ha. Anyone read The Truth Machine? http://heritagecoins.com/ttm
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1deleted
- cpuenvy, on 10/12/2007, -17/+5It's gonna be really hard for Democrats to win if people actually use this...
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is