What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Can't get enough Dragon Age: Origins? Check out new footage. view!
DragonAge.BioWare.com - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
46 Comments
- felchdonkey, on 10/10/2007, -4/+51When the public's tax dollars go to subsidize a corporation, like they do with AT&T, the corporation has responsibilities to the public.
Just because a corporation isn't democratically elected like a government, doesn't mean they aren't as powerful as one sometimes. - inactive, on 10/10/2007, -2/+35AT&T paid money to host the webcast in hopes of making money from the venture, I am sure that if AT&T had mentioned beforehand that they were going to be censoring artists, they would not have been given the rights to broadcast the show.
I'm glad this is getting so much exposure, large corporations siding with right wing administrations and censoring dissent is not a good thing.
It's also good to see that Pearl Jam is still one of the best live bands in the world. - inactive, on 10/10/2007, -4/+23What pisses me off is how AT&T was broken up for being a monopoly, and here they are again 20 years later.
Great country we have...
Keep in mind AT&T also allowed the government to data mine its customers (ongoing case for it currently).
They are a corrupt and twisted company, which is why all those morons who bought iPhones are... well, morons for supporting AT&T. - misterpony, on 10/10/2007, -2/+15However it makes the FP, it's still important. Of the thousands of MrBabyMan's stories, it's one of the most important. Like Commissioner Cobbs says, "Nobody should have that power to do that [censorship] and then be able to exercise distributive control over the distribution and control over the content too."
- j0keR, on 10/10/2007, -2/+11You're right, but that's a better argument against subsidizing cooperations than one for a neutral internet. Remember: the only reason your local ISP is a monopoly is because it is government-subsidized, contracted and comes with exclusivity agreements.
- DangerCollie, on 10/10/2007, -1/+10Censorship is related to the net neutrality debate because it's the next logical step down that road. If you can charge for what people send through your tubes...even though in AT&T's case we all paid to build those tubes....then you can start varying the toll based on what's in the packets. There is no bottom to this slope.
When exactly did AT&T turn into the assbags of the universe? They helped Bush spy on Americans without a warrant, want to charge content providers for what flows across their network and their iPhone billing is a freaking nightmare. - schestowitz, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8Digg the story for its worth, don't whine.
- bloodorange, on 10/10/2007, -2/+9The problem is the agreement that was signed supposedly was for censorship over profanity, not content.
And yes Pearl Jam is one of the best live bands in the world. - quaxon, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7i hope you are being sarcastic, if not youre a ***** moron.
- MadEnvoy, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7I'm not a "friend" of MrBabyMan but I dug this because it's important so I'm pretty sure most other diggers, you excluded, will feel the same way regardless if they are "friends" with MrBabyMan.
- skyshock1, on 10/10/2007, -3/+9The Pearl Jam censorship issue has nothing to do with AT&T throttling packets that directly compete with services they offer, or giving preference to packets for services they do offer. Tell me why again is this correlation being attempted? Does the FCC understand the concept of Net Neutrality, or is this just a bunch of morons throwing out buzzwords to sound knowledgeable?
- fanclerks, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Try ever since the Ma Bell era. The scary part is it has come again. The Bells were split up to provide competition and this administration has allowed them to scoop them all up again.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5I buried it for you.
- fanclerks, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3I get the distinct feeling he wasn't either. It sounded quite reminiscent of a straight up Bush lover. I just want to know what exactly happens to people like this. Do they get a lobotomy or something that takes away all of their reasoning skills?
- carpespasm, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4i was thinking the same thing. anticompetative business practices and free speach censorship don't seem to go together. that being said, AT&T is slimy for both.
- lazyfisherman, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Patriotic companies don't stifle free speech and criticism of their friends in government. If Ed wants to call Bush names in his music, he should be allowed to do so without censorship and to deal with the consequences of his actions. And for some reason I don't think opiophile was being sarcastic.
- dasboot, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3From C-SPAN:
The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco heard oral arguments in two cases on the government's warrantless wiretapping program. Hepting v. AT & T is a class action on behalf of a group of AT and T customers who allege that the company intercepted their phone calls and electronic mail, then disclosed the information to the NSA.
video ( .rm format)
rtsp://video.c-span.org/project/ter/ter081507_hepting.rm - nakani, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Ever hear of Woodstock? I don't suppose you think that was a failure.
- thecatfish111, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Rock music has firm roots in political dissent. If anything, there needs to be more politics in rock and in music in general. I dread a time where the lyrical content of music is noting but dried out stories of lovers, ex-lovers, and hook-ups. I say we need more Eddie Vedders in the music world
- Tabris, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I'm making MrBabyMan my friend just to spite you.
- Opiate, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4Yeah, because rock music had nothing to do with pulling out of the last quagmire.
- AeonTorpor, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2The only reason they even have a "network" at all is because of the ridiculous promises that they've broken to us to borrow Billions of our tax dollars. They owe us Fiber lines. These bastards owe us $10 20Mbps lines. But these ***** give us nothing, take our money, make promises and then forget about them. I say tear that company down to the ground and seize all of the upper managements money. _That_ should be the punishment for ***** over the American people.
- drlha, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Just to note, their iPhone billing is no different from any of their other billing for Internet access. Its just that for most people in the past, accessing the internet on their phone was not something they did often because it either sucked or the cost was too high. With the iPhone suddenly you have a million plus people with unlimited internet plans.
- nakani, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1In capitalism, you vote with your money. In that respect, it's a democracy. So when you purchase services from AT&T, you are supporting their illegal wiretapping, censoring, and monopolistic attitude. Whether you know about it or care about it, you are.
- irisadler, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Screw AT&T and their censorship. Eddie Vedder's lyrics vs. Bush are all here (http://tinyurl.com/2vf3fk) as as all over the net.Censorship should always get the counter effect!
- reeder, on 10/10/2007, -4/+5Everyone needs to check out this guys profile:
http://www.digg.com/users/Leonarde/news/dugg
EVERY SINGLE DIGG is for MrBabyMan. I'm tired of people gaming this ***** site, especially when they spout of ***** like this. MrBabyMan, you ought to be ashamed. At least now we know your methods, and your REAL feelings on Net Nuetrality. Loser. - rocketdog7, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1i'm not a big fan of att&t but they funded the podcast, they own the content, and eddies management signed the contract. if the contract doesn't give eddie full control of content, and that's what he wanted, then he has a bad entertainment lawyer. people are turning this into something it's not. yes att$t is in bed with the nsa. but this is about contract law not censorship. they later posted it uncensored also.
- shampoovta, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1 AT&T is rotten to the core.
- Error601, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Dug down for the amazing inability to understand what the 1st amendment means and that only the government can violate it.
- Mittop, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Rocketdog7 is right from a purely technical standpoint, they own the broadcast, and can do what they want. However, AT&T is wrong from a moral/politcal/marketing/business standpoint. AT&T is in the middle of a battle to avoid governemnt regulation, so perception is everything. What they want is a "Trust us to handle it ourselves model" while their actions would seem to point towards a requirement for governement oversight. AT&T currently enjoys certain protections from liability for the traffic that goes across their network. By taking actions to remove content they find questionable, they are demonstrating a capability to monitor a censor the traffic on their network. This means that by taking this action, it could be argued that their liability protection should be removed. Afterall, if you are monitoring the network, then you can't claim ignorance of what is going across it. Besides, what AT&T is doing is just wrong. :)
- wehrmanweb, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Pearl Jam still around? They have only sold millions and millions of records and are still one of the best live acts to see. You should take a listen to them... If you don't like them I'm ok with that but to question if they are still around... is just crazy... I encourage you to look into any of PJ's songs lyrics... Unlike most songs / artists today PJ have songs with a message...
- NiteMayr, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1I did you a favor and buried it too; so that you are not overexposed on the internet.
- egbok, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Brain fart or typo?: "But nobody should have that power to do that and then be able to exercise distributive control over the distribution and control over the content too."
Likely the former. Nobody should distribute control over my controlling distribution? - dasboot, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0I believe the controversy here is political censorship by a government subsidized corporation, not the credibility of Eddie Vedder's opinions, or his music. the band is named after cum after all.
- dasboot, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1whoops double post. my bad.
- ColemanSever, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0If it's going to come out eventually, better have it come out immediately.
- dasboot, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1C-Span had killer coverage of the 9th circuit court of appeals hearings on warrantless wiretapping yesterday:
Hepting v. AT & T
rtsp://video.c-span.org/project/ter/ter081507_hepting.rm - drlha, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Any chance that digg comments can be used for something else than insulting iPhone users? Suddenly we're morons? Right. What phone company do you have your cell phone with? The others are no angels either after all.
- velocitychannel, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2Pearl Jam is still around? How can you censor something that nobody was listening to. Anyway, am I the only one who doesn't understand what the hell this has to do with Net Neutrality?
- emmcubed, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0And if there's any band who is attuned to what's wrong with American government, it's Pearl Jam. Even though Nader was kind of a wimpy candidate... And I third that assessment of them being one of the best live bands in the world--have seen them three times and they've never disappointed.
- reeder, on 10/10/2007, -11/+8Everyone needs to check out this guys profile:
http://www.digg.com/users/Leonarde/news/dugg
EVERY SINGLE DIGG is for MrBabyMan. I'm tired of people gaming this ***** site, especially when they spout of ***** like this. MrBabyMan, you ought to be ashamed. At least now we know your methods, and your REAL feelings on Net Nuetrality. Loser. - retawd, on 10/10/2007, -9/+4Ooooooh. Nooooooooooooo. The last thing the world needs is to give Eddie Vedder a reason to get political. God. Shut up and be a lead singer already. I don't care who you vote for, what you think, or how I can make the world better in your eyes. NO POLITICS IN ROCK.
- kra1813, on 10/10/2007, -8/+2Waaaaahhhh!!! Eddie Vedder should grow up and stop acting like a little girl!
This is as bad Metallica trying to fight people using the internet. - dasboot, on 10/10/2007, -8/+2Not bad for a band named after cum.
- sweetyfromassam, on 10/10/2007, -26/+2http://digg.com/microsoft/Windows_Live_defined
lets see how much digg my story gets - sweetyfromassam, on 10/10/2007, -30/+2MrBabyMan's story which is gonna hit the front page cause he got all the frds to dig for him like MSaleem
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is