What is Digg?90 Comments
- dsoleil, on 04/27/2008, -3/+19Of course Big Media wants the inside track. Big media, big brother, big government, big mac... is there a pattern here?
- SniperGX1, on 04/27/2008, -3/+15The "fine print" is irrelevant. Comcast touts their speeds in their commercials and "Unlimited" access. That's the deal.
- maiku00, on 04/27/2008, -4/+15Barack Obama is a fierce supporter of Net Neutrality
- adml_shake, on 04/27/2008, -1/+12The problem with that though, is most people don't have enough cash to get their Senator attention.
- lordzelo, on 04/27/2008, -0/+10I'm so sick of Big Media/Main Stream Media, they are all corrupt. The best part is that it's easy for everyone to post a comment on their story and complain, but actually opening up their mouth and doing something about the problem is another story, that's where most people Fail miserably.
That's what happened to Ron Paul, everyone was excited to see someone that promised change and had the history to back it up. You get 4000+ people to one of his rallies and he gets only 50 or so votes for that region? WTF?
Lazy people that scream change but aren't willing to make it happen. America is on it's way to being a truly messed up country and all the LAZY(majority) of people are letting it happen.
I'm glad I married a foreigner and have family in Europe, when the time comes I have a place to go. Sorry about the rest of you though. - BrandonMills, on 04/27/2008, -1/+8If anyone is being manipulated, it's you. Hate to break ruin your "Republicans have always been for no regulation" dream, but some of the best Republican presidents in history have made themselves so by regulating the market. Had we properly regulated the home loans market, we might not be in this recession to begin with.
I just get so tired of idealistic fantasy-land nonsense. Corperations cannot and will not regulate themselves when it would be more profitable to not do so. They're moved by profit, not by what's good for society. When they have such a firm grip on the market ( such as internet providers ), there is absolutely nothing the 'free market' can do to compete with them. I live in Boston, a major city, and here the choice is Comcast or nothing if you're outside FIOS. ( which I am. ) There is no 'choice' to be had here. There is no free market to self-regulate. It's a giant ****ing monopoly where any competition is quickly squashed by corperations in league with each other. - Akyan, on 04/27/2008, -0/+6Thank god some are standing up for themselves:
"In his BBC blog last week Mr Highfield laid out a 19-point plan of action for ISPs, and warned they should not try to charge content providers. "Content providers, if they find their content being specifically squeezed, shaped, or capped, could start to indicate on their sites which ISPs their content works best on (and which to avoid)." "
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7336940.stm - KiraDnote, on 04/27/2008, -0/+6That's all well and good if you have a lot of providers to choose from. The fact is, most people have little or no choice of broadband providers.
- inactive, on 04/27/2008, -4/+9Don't just talk, act. Contact your Senator and make it CLEAR that you want to see Senate Bill 2917 OUT of committee and to a positive, passing vote. Here's the link to quickly and easily reach your Senator(s).... www dot senate dot gov slash general slash contact underscore information slash senators underscore cfm dot cfm. (damn Digg for not allowing links!)
We all know these 'leaders' of ours only respond to noise. So let's give them some. Isn't it worth it? - WTFppl, on 04/27/2008, -1/+6As soon as Verizion High Speed comes into my area, I wont have to worry about this *****!
- endlessoul, on 04/27/2008, -0/+4Yeah. Big Money. Corporations. Lobbyists.
- bitcloud, on 04/28/2008, -0/+4Sorry to comment abuse, but people need to understand one thing about this debate:
Every telco and every ISP right now has ONE SINGLE THING on their agenda:
"We don't want to be 'DUMB PIPES'"
And every citizen who uses the internet needs to understand that what we need, what this entire debate is about is our NEED to have "DUMB PIPES".
Our data get's sent from one computer and MUST arrive at it's destination at the fastest possible route. If there is any opening those packets of info and filtering/thottling, it's not only a violation of our privacy, but a violation of the fundamental tenets of the internet.
Demand "dumb pipes" if they can't provide dumb pipes, we need to create our own infrastructure. - DMDekoth, on 04/27/2008, -0/+4A lot of us do not have ISP choices anymore.
- Kratos76, on 04/27/2008, -0/+4I hate that this digg uses a picture of Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann, political show hosts on MSNBC who have said nothing for or against net neutrality and were certainly not featured in this article.
- DavidGX, on 04/27/2008, -0/+3Until verizon starts doing it.
- cquinnd, on 04/27/2008, -0/+3No, net "neutrality" is a good thing. Where we all pay for the use of our network connections *once*, and are not expected to have any addtional tolls to pass data over other network connections or state to national boundaries.
"Regulation" of net neutrality is what we need to be concerned with, making sure that any legislation that attempts to maintain the status quo is not also trying to make it easier to do unauthorized monitoring or restriction of content as a result. - BrandonMills, on 04/28/2008, -0/+3Comcast, Comcast, or Comcast.
Oh, don't forget Comcast.
Choices, choices! - sgtpppr, on 04/27/2008, -0/+3This is kind of the New American Way though. You elect people that are packaged and sold to you by the MSM and Federal Gov't and then we let them decide what is best. Americans have too many other concerns in life like 'how can I finance a new HDTV' or 'who will win American Idol'. When the gov't goes too far, it is ALWAYS the people's fault for letting it happen. Blame gov't all you want, but when you allow gov't to do what it wants, when it wants, you are complicit in it as well.
Even Caesar needed the support of the masses to declare himself supreme ruler. - Pg5of16, on 04/27/2008, -0/+2Are you surprised? Big media has always hung on to their old ways, while the internet moves on without them.
- Corrosionx, on 04/27/2008, -8/+10Aren't you tired of being manipulated? The government wants to regulate the Internet and they asked their Big Media friends to oppose it, the result: people support regulations to spite Big Media, and they will lose their Internet freedom in the process.
Big Government is always working with Big Media to restrict your freedoms. Every single day. It's not paranoia, it's their motus operanti. It's all about control and squeezing your work and wealth out of you.
Problem - Reaction - Solution. That's all they do. Every time they want to regulate something, that's how they do it (ie. oil companies deny global warming and appear against government regulations but they are the ones that benefit the most from them) - waspinator, on 04/27/2008, -1/+3DEATH TO BIG MEDIA!
- strOphe, on 04/27/2008, -0/+2It's all a game of chicken between the telcos and the FCC... and we're stuck in the middle.
- ripple123, on 04/27/2008, -1/+3Well! I'm gonna sit down right now and write a angry letter to just such effect! I'm sure my senator will be convinced by my argument as he sets the cigar he rolled out of 100$ bills from lobbyists alight with my unopened envelope.
- apologeticus, on 04/27/2008, -0/+2Don't forget Big Corn.
- inactive, on 04/27/2008, -5/+7Is "Big Media" replacing the term "Main Stream Media"? I really need to know so I can keep up with my Digg hater lingo.
- pigfister, on 04/27/2008, -0/+2wow. crush Net Neutrality so they can continue to be the gatekeepers and force their overpriced rubbish on us all.
The BPI Are: SONY, UNIVERSAL, WARNER GROUP, EMI.
The RIAA Soundexchange Are: SONY, UNIVERSAL, WARNER GROUP, EMI.
The IFPI Are: The same anti consumer lot as listed above!
The MPAA Are: SONY, UNIVERSAL, WARNER GROUP, DISNEY, PARAMOUNT, FOX. - P5ycHo, on 04/27/2008, -0/+2Sellouts
- wexmajor, on 04/28/2008, -0/+1This is going way too far. At what point do we stop working within the system and start busting some ***** heads?
- 33PercentGod, on 04/27/2008, -0/+1That's called sarcasm digg. ***** A.
- BrandonMills, on 04/28/2008, -0/+1Ron Paul was a giant echo chamber effect. Of course you guys thought he was about to take over the world, you only listened to yourselves. The moment anyone showed the slightest disagreement with you "aka phone polling", you said it was obviously a lie and shouldn't be taken seriously.
Indeed, if you live in Libertarian-biased forum lands sending out mass e-mails to your friends to rig polls, you might get a skewed version of reality. - 33PercentGod, on 04/27/2008, -0/+1I'm goddamn TIRED OF THIS. You ***** corporations want to own every last physical piece of material on this planet from the skyscrapers to the last grain of ***** SAND. I'm writing my senator now about this issue. I wrote my representatives about using paper ballots in the election and sure enough at the primaries there were paper and pens to cast our votes,so he does respond and keep his people happy.
Suddenly cashing my tax return and buying a 12 gauge doesn't seem like such a bad idea. - bitcloud, on 04/28/2008, -0/+1well it comes down to us wanting/needing dumb pipes...
If we pay them to provide us with dumb pipes and they refuse then THAT's where the government needs to step in. - DavidGX, on 04/27/2008, -1/+2Maybe YOU can just switch ISPs if you want, but that's not an option for a lot of people. If their ISP starts acting like monopolistic ***** then that's it.. they're screwed. We have plenty of people who could write, or help write laws that would do a fine job. If you want ISPs regulating the internet then fine.. we can set up ***** just for people like you, let them ***** with content and services based on what large company gives them a bigger check. For the rest of us, we need net neutrality.
- sgtpppr, on 04/27/2008, -1/+2Or simply switch ISPs. But then again, you seem desperate to hand over one more portion of your life to the gov't. Be careful you don't play 'enemy of my enemy' and end up giving up more than you expected.
- WiredLain, on 04/28/2008, -0/+1He should have added the /Sarcasm tag
- bitcloud, on 04/28/2008, -0/+1they are if they want to give us something other than "dumb pipes"
- sonstone, on 04/27/2008, -0/+1it's funny that the only thing you could attack of what he said was his use of the term republican.
- Risingashes, on 04/28/2008, -0/+1He'd make a great overseer and a horrible President.
I envy people that are able to look at his policies and believe they make any kind of sense. - YuriSakazaki, on 05/01/2008, -0/+1It's ridiculous to think that ISPs will willingly do anything that won't help their bottom line, unfortunately. Look at Virgin, they literally swear in the face of fair networks.
- KiraDnote, on 04/27/2008, -0/+1Lawmakers don't give a ***** what poor people want. If you're wealthy or influential /and they know it/, they MIGHT give a damn what you want, and then again they might not.
- inactive, on 04/29/2008, -0/+1Let me put it this way -- apathy and refusal to do more than complain are certain to have no result. If everyone who said they were fed up actually took the time to do more than spend the air to say so.... digg? :)
- KiraDnote, on 04/27/2008, -1/+2Look, it's simple. Either the government is going to control it or big corporations are going to control it. Big corporations are our worst nightmare. They answer to nobody. If you cause trouble for them they can cut you off without due process. Look at AT&T. They make their customers agree not to criticize them. Where does it end? Government control is our only hope, as bad as that may seem.
- Risingashes, on 04/28/2008, -0/+1Never- if you want to go by previous trends for the current generation.
In the past people formed up and used the anger at being manipulated for protesting. Nowadays it's all used up by typing in all caps on message forums. - bitcloud, on 04/28/2008, -0/+1Well it's a double edged sword in a lot of ways... any time someone uses the term "free-market" be sceptical because it suggests that the government is not allowed to weigh in the market (ie that the government is not allowed to be a market force)
if the market is to be "free" you don't have "free-market" legislation... you just have a free market... - bitcloud, on 04/28/2008, -0/+1you've never heard of state/federal government infrastructure?
In australia we set up our own telco (which got sold off unfortunately)
the point is the citizens ALL use telecom infrastructure so it's a shared interest infrastructure, much like roads or education... - bitcloud, on 04/28/2008, -0/+1Well I think the solution lies in us all getting off our asses and coming up with infrastructure that doesn't rely on the telcos...
Creating an intranet across a city is EASY... buy a massive antennae and you can be uniting people over a 10 mile radius on the same internet... get a few people to do this, get the council involved and you have an entire city devoid of internal telco control... (free local calls, unregulated, unfiltered communications)
now figure out how to unite these intranetted cities without the telcos (through tax funded telco infrastructure for example, or through new technology) and you've got the internet as it was meant to be... free, unregulated, for the people, by the people. - bshock, on 04/27/2008, -3/+4Big Media, Big Oil, Big Pharma, Big Corporations In General. These are virtual dragons who destroy human lives for fun and profit. Time to slay some dragons... or at least the humans who enable them.
- sgtpppr, on 04/27/2008, -1/+2The problem here is that so many diggers claim to be pro-freedom, pro-liberty, and pro-free market, but immediately run to the gov't for regulations when their torrents get throttled. GO CHOOSE ANOTHER ISP. The argument here should be over a fair and competitive marketplace, not 'lets start forcing ISPs to be subject to more gov't regulation'. I can see people's hearts are in the right place, but cutting off one limb to save another isn't the way to go about fixing things. Don't complain down the road when gov't starts regulating the Internet in other ways because you already opened the door for it with this.
- jessehadden, on 04/28/2008, -0/+1Piracy refers to the act of a studio profiting off of an artists' work without properly compensating the artist. Now the studios want the exclusive fast track to keep on pirating the work of their talent, meanwhile saying it's to prevent individuals from engaging in some warped definition of "piracy." You gotta love it.
-
Show 51 - 89 of 89 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is