What is Digg?175 Comments
- 16x9, on 10/12/2007, -2/+64We get the government we deserve. After all, we voted for 'em.
Here's a fun question: how many of you reading this "Save the Internet" submission will actually take the time to register and vote these pricks out of office? - SpacePirate, on 10/12/2007, -2/+35When someone doesn't vote, they should shut up and take what they get.
- TigerX, on 10/12/2007, -0/+26I'll add it to the list of issues I consider when appraising candidates.
- kimos, on 10/12/2007, -1/+26@EmileVictor: Manditory voting would force hundreds of thousands of uneducated, unqualified, idiots to randomly vote. Not any better...
- starmanjones, on 10/12/2007, -0/+22i think what we do is look to wireless mesh systems. it feels like that solution might be difficult but before the internet their was fidonet. it worked. if it worked then we can refine wireless mesh to work better.
- eggo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+22Here is a copy of what I wrote to my congressman, feel free to use my wording in your own letters:
"To The Honorable Kenny Marchant,
Your fellow congressman, Joe Barton has recently proposed a bill which will change the rules regarding the inner workings of the Internet. Up until now, the Internet has been a level playing field. Everyone could have a voice, and that voice was just a loud and easy to spread as any other, regardless of creed or stature. With this new bill, the so called "Communications Opportunity, Promotion, and Enhancement Act of 2006", that would all be thrown away.
This issue can be a bit difficult to understand, so allow me to provide some background: Today--and indeed since it's inception--Internet access has been sold much like telephone service; that is, one pays for access, and thereafter has all the same rights and privilege as anyone else with access (you can call any number and get the same service regardless which company the called party uses for service, etc). I can call the mom-n-pop pizza place down the street and call Pizza Hut at the same time, and my calls will ring at the same time. This is because both the mom-n-pop and Pizza Hut have equal standing in regards to telephone service.
What the proposed bill would do, to extend my pizza analogy a bit further, is insure that the business with more money to lay out for phone service will get my call first, and thus my business. How is a business to start out under such conditions?
The beauty of the Internet is in it's openness; the reason it is so useful today, is that the barriers to entry have been minuscule. The "Communications Opportunity, Promotion, and Enhancement Act of 2006" would unfairly slant the table in favor of the large, established online businesses and place roadblocks in the way of up-and-coming innovators. I urge you, should this bill be put before the house, reject it. Convince your peers to do the same.
Aditional information can be found here: http://www.savetheinternet.com
Thank You,
[My Name]
Computer Technician, Voter
Irving, Texas" - returnofmalv, on 10/12/2007, -5/+23Vote with your guns.
- soogy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+19Do something dramatic... Like not allowing a single nation's government control the Internet?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+19I am registered to vote.. and i take it a step further than most.
I vote locally, i vote for State, House, Senators, and Presidential elections.
Not only that. But i refuse to vote for corporate owned dickwads. Give me Greens for my Liberals and Libertarians for my conservatives thank you very much. I'll take a run of the mill independent as well taking they somewhat line up with my values. And only then after all of those efforts are exhausted, will i pick a lesser evil between the Republocrat one party system.
Also may i add the fact that "manadatory voting" in a democratic - Republic (america is not a democracy, Athens Greece was a democracy) that values FREEDOM and LIBERTY, is just a wee bit hypocritical. - foxhoundadmin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+16kinda reminds me of ipac. i don't mean to spam, but http://www.ipaction.org .
- Junpei, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12Let your voice be heard and e-mail your congressmen for your area. I filled out the form and added my own comments to it. I don't want my free internet to be ruined by greedy companies.
- neverender, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12""Just like high oil prices and the RIAA suing everyone in the country, the big Bells with get their way thanks to their lobbiests moneybags. American citizens matter little next to the bottom dollar. They will get their way......""
and that's exactly what they want you to think. i have the power to raise my voice, and i will. they want you to feel small and powerless. its much more comforting to know that at least I tried to stand up rather than just bitch about big corporations and lobbyists. if you want change, change it.... - barbobot, on 10/12/2007, -8/+19"When someone doesn't vote, they should shut up and take what they get."
Wow that was quite insightful, what about if a person doesn't feel like any of the candidates fit the role? - funkpucker, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12Our constitution secures us a republic, not a democracy. It was set up that way so the common man could vote for who he thought best represented his views. The representative actually votes on specific issues, theoretically on the basis of the opinion of those he represents. It was a good system back then, and still works fairly well today.
But all that democracy ***** is what all the politicians say, because it sounds better. They don't want to say: "Our government is structured in a way where I can make decisions that affect the lives of millions of people now and for many years to come. And if you don't like it, what can you do? Check the box below mine in a few years and you can pretend you made an impact."
Does it matter if you vote? Hell no. The same people will be elected anyway.
Now that's what I call power and freedom! - dkarlson, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10Done. Filled out the form and am sending in the letters. I'm so tired of corporations manipulating our government in order to revoke our digital rights.
- dracula7, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9i feel like without the internet i would have lost faith in civilization a long time ago. on my computer i feel like peter pan, and i am incredulous of a higher power's insistance on maintaining order of a platform which solely exists to freely exchange information.
- WaterDragon, on 10/12/2007, -4/+13@theblackgekko
"I voted for Nader in 2000. If only another 70 million Americans thought the way I did, the rights of the consumer would be protected."
Yeah-- thanks! The fact is, while the other 70 million were tying to get Al Gore elected (and actually succeeded), the republicans gave some financial support to Nader's campaign, knowing it would divide the votes of those who definitely didn't want Bush.
And it almost looks like, thanks to people like you, they succeeded.
But, in fact, they took it a step further, and simply stole the election, using the supreme court to stop the counting of all the votes---as well as many other corruptions at the polling places.
I am not saying the democrats haven't had their share of corruption too...it just seems a bit dfferent.
We had a democrat president who was accused of marital infidelity....and now we have a 'resident' who invades and occupies sovereign countries, has gutted the constitution, and is trying to start a nuclear war!
So, calling it the 'lesser of two evils'...sounds nice on paper, but practically, is overly simplistic, narrow thinking.
The current electoral system is based on 2 parties, and a third party candidate is nearly always just a 'spoiler' for one of the other two.
So, paradoxically, he will take away needed votes from the candidate that most closely matches his views.
I liked Nader, so I voted for Al Gore.
I actualy hoped that President Gore might appoint Ralph to a cabinet position, and who knows where he could have gone from there?
But, alas, President Gore has been in exile.
Great system, huh? You can just FEEL the laughter coming from the rest of the world. - windhawk, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9Thanks also to foxhoundadmin, I've signed up with ipaction.org -- and contributed some $$.
- phpirate, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10This is pretty selfish of the US corperations, seeing how the rest of the world also uses the internet.
- mcbarron, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9@MajorMesses:
"And sites like BarnesAndNoble.com *should* load faster than your local library's pages - they're bigger, better, and more useful. There's nothing wrong with singling out premium content, as long as you keep an open platform;"
Au contraire - your statement that a commerical site (like Barnes & Noble's) is better than my local library site is your *opinion*; with due respect I disagree strongly. I put much more credence in sites whose primary motive is NOT to sell me stuff, but to provide a public service or information (read: local library, wikipedia, etc).
The problem with singling out "premium" content is that corporations (i.e. people who are trying to make money) would dictate what is easily accesible on the web. "We the people" would not as easily be able to create meaning content ourselves (i.e. wikipedia) without a large bankroll to compete with commercial ventures. It would drastically skew the internet in favor of commerical sites. - ccanni1028, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9barbobot - That is what write-in boxes are for.
- fuzzmello, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7anyone fill out the form and send the email? making your opinion known does effect congress, you know. that's not a lie. it really will help.
- WaterDragon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Maybe, instead of trying, in vain, to get congress to actually represent the people (in this Corporat-ocracy), we should concentrate on organizing a boycott of, lets say, Verizon and AT&T products and services.
We can do that right here, on digg.
I have Verizon for my land line.
I want to see a standardized letter, perhaps collaborated on by various Diggers, that we can send to Verizon, AT&T, etc, informing them that we are closing our accounts with them, specifically becaue of their attempt to pwn the internet, and that we don't Digg what they are doing.
If they got thousands of identical letters, from various customers, closing all those accounts, they just might notice and rethink their policy.
I will HAVE to quit Verizon now, despite their low prices, but need to do it in a way that sends a clear message...and for that, numbers are needed.
Is the Digg Nation ready to boycott Verizon, AT&T,etc., or do we bend over and take it from them? - affinity, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6its sickening how open our government is to taking the money of big corporations. If this were the past, there would simply be a revolution.. but now what can we do? People my age(20s) don't vote hardly, and the people who do lack the knowledge to care about the Internet. Serious problems are going un noticed and even worse, un checked. Sigh
- 1010011010, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Who are you, "geekee, joined March 2006"?
*What* "internet backbone"? The various network operators have peering arrangements. It's not like there's one big data bus somewhere that everyone taps into. AT&T sells a connection to Company X, receiving money from Company X in exchange for transferring its bits to the internet at a contractually defined rate. Company Y does the same, perhaps with a different ISP ("ISP2"). Company X's bits gets transferred to Company Y. While the bits from X are on AT&T's network, it's X's dime paying for it. When they're transferred to ISP2's network, it's Company Y paying for it. AT&T and ISP2 buy or barter connections with each other in order to exchange data. They sell that service ("connection to 'the internet'") to their customers.
AT&T is just making a big, greedy power grab because they want more cash, and want to get it by using their position of power to discriminate. - w0rd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6There are a few issues at hand, if I am to understand correctly:
1. We paid for it.
It's my understanding that thanks to government funding the net and communications system we have today was funded a great deal by the government. Ma Bell is essentially a government approved monopoly.
2. This isn't about a more reliable connection.
They aren't paying for a better connection, they are paying for priority over everyone else using the existing infrastructure.
That's what I've got off the top of my head. - linuxrebel, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Know one thing too failure to vote, is to ensure that the status quo is maintained. Call your Representative, write them (as in snail mail) and let them know you are watching and that you won't support their support of Bushanomics. Interstate commerce (which the internet is) should not be limited nor biased in any form toward one state, organization or institution, in preference over another.
I spent the bulk of the 70's working to bust up the AT&T monopoly only to watch the Bushians allow it to be re-assembled over the orders of Federal court. We fought AT&T to gain the ability to do things like use modems, buy telephones, have wireless phones, Be allowed to wire up computer or telephone networks in our own home or business without having to pay AT&T (yes folks it was illegal for 2 computers to be wired together without AT&T placing equipment in the middle and they didn't think it was worth it to bother creating the equipment.) - ccanni1028, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6I did, and this was the first message I was able to send while truthfully stating I am a registered voter. :)
- JimXugle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6I see a purchase from Cisco and Hitatchi in the near future...
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/optical/ps4533/index.html
http://www.hcm.hitachi.com/ - mtbz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5It matters because, millions, if not billions of taxpayer dollars were funneled to telecoms so that they could upgrade their infrastructure. I would agree with you if they spent only their money on the infrastructure, but in this case, we deserve better.
- TheFoundry, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5This is already in the hands of the EFF, all we can do is cheer them on and b*tch at AT&T.
- oneiroi, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Is it just me, or does AT&T seem to get more and more evil?
I just keep remembering them being associated with really negative things, like the wiretapping, etc - prthealien, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Do contact your representatives. It really does work. If Digg can take down sites in just a few minutes, we can stop these companies from charging us more and censoring our internet.
- knight007, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6.....Why are people so against someone having the option to pay more for a more reliable, higher bandwidth end to end connection?.....
WHAT!!?!?!? We ALREADY have this, genius!! We already pay more if we want a faster service. Some people just have dial up so they pay less...others have broadband so they pay more....others have faster broadband at a larger price. So I don't see your point here...plus we are not arguing about paying for faster access, we are arguing about not having limited access to sites of someone elses choosing....that is a dictatorship and I'm scared that this where we are heading. - theblackgecko, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7I voted for Nader in 2000. If only another 70 million Americans thought the way I did, the rights of the consumer would be protected.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5They see their long distance business drying up, they miss their monopoly days and are hungry for another?
- iskatebad914, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5PLEASE fill out the simple email form that sends a message that you can either write or have premade to your local senator!!! its so easy and could make a differance! remember, your representatives are more likely to read it and take it seriously if you write a unique and sincere message... http://action.freepress.net/campaign/savethenet
- acdcbag, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5"... does anyone give a *****?"
In these sketchy times, I give a *****. In retrospect, when I was a kid I wouldn't have. Now that the blinders are off I'm definitely giving a *****. - DrEbola, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4How about someone save us from Big Government?
- MichaelHolcomb, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4If the bill makes it out of committee, your LA congressmen and senators' numbers and addresses will likely show up on the map and I hope this story shows back up on digg if that ever happens.
- VaKo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Trouble is, it probally will. And then they'll [try to] take porn off the internet. And then subversive comments, and then...
- eggo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Foe those of you who's Representatives are not listed on the map, you can still contact them: http://www.house.gov/writerep/ Enough voices against this thing before it gains steam could very well kill it.
- alandd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4The pay is already balanced based on how many bytes you send and recieve. Google or Yahoo! pay way more per month than I do because they use way more bandwidth. It's equitable because once my few bytes get on the net, they have just as much chance getting there as the big guy's bytes.
Why must everything be monetized to the extreme? Why does AT&T, etc. have to set up a tiered system after all these years? They've been doing it all this time on the "cost per any byte" model and all this time every single byte costs less to transmit. And now they are crying foul? What changed? What happened to make the bytes "worth more?" Oh, yes, some are making money off the bytes and they want a cut. And, oh, yes, their other business divisions are making less money so we must "create a new product" out of thin air to make up the shortfall.
The Internet is the current world "town square" where anyone can come and show their message. Should we now setup special access gates to the square for the special few that can afford it? Should we now segregate the square into areas where the "important" messages can pay more to have higher ground and other areas where the "rabble" have to only hope to be heard?
Yea, let's just get rid of equal opportunity and make the Internet the land of the rich and established. All those little voices don't need to be heard. If they were important, someone would pay to get them on the net, right? - anagami, on 07/02/2008, -0/+4"i think what we do is look to wireless mesh systems. it feels like that solution might be difficult but before the internet their was fidonet. it worked. if it worked then we can refine wireless mesh to work better."
I concur... but lets try not to lose the Internet neutrality in the first place :) - partyonaisle7, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4@anyone talking about voting:
Voting isn't how you participate in modern American democracy. True, we should have the right to pick who we want, but if one is interested in major and significant political change, they shouldn't expect one vote every two years to do the job.
Before you object, yes, it's true that that's not pleasant for lazy people, but if you're not lazy, it has the added benefit that your actions aren't diluted by the lazy people.
That's why there are petitions, unions, boycotts, lobbyists, and above all, scads and scads of nonprofit political organizations.
Just my guess. Maybe I'm wrong. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5 Ummm..., I still use panther and have a BBS system (wildcat) that can accept any dial-in user. Remember fidonet, etc?
With a DOS bbs system, qwikmail, and text messages, (chat) , plus the main internet and the ability to transfer files, (rapidshare.de), it's easily worked around.
The more avenues you use, the more complicated it becomes for the nazis. It's hard for them to tap your phone, then try to unencrypt the email, then find the password for the rapidshare file, then unencrypt the pgp encryption to reveal the file, plus changing the header of the file to what it really is.
Hint:
Change the PKdata at the begginning of a file to read as a bash script,exe,com,mp3,word doc, etc.
Of course only folks that know how to do this know it anyway, the rest are idiot mouseclicking retards who are spreading viruses due to the clicking of emails to enlarge thier 1 inch peeners or to enlarge their flat chest.
Women with no boobs are more attractive than those with the cow udders hanging to their knees.
I don't want to comment on the 1 inch peeners though, as most of them I've seen are on gayboys and dykes.
- AngryPenguin47, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5When will voting ever become more than just choosing the lesser of two evil politicians? We need honest people running this country, not politicians. We need people motivated by the common good and not common greed. We need people who don't expect to make a living out of politics, but who simply want to work to accomplish the task they were elected to fulfill and move on with the rest of their lives.
- lukes, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4there was a very interesting podcast produced by This Week In Tech the other week about these issues and what you can do to prevent this from happening. subscribe to this week in tech and download episode 49a, or download the mp3 here http://www.podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3?http://media.libsyn.com/media/twit/TWiT49AH.mp3
- KillerJ59J, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3They don't have the reps from Louisiana on their map to call. :( I suggest everyone call their reps and tell them where you stand on this case.
http://www.savetheinternet.com/=map - compu73rg33k, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Keep in mind the big American companies don't always like to think that there's a "rest of the world". Example: Yahoo Ads is U.S. only. Many of google's services also only come out for u.s. only in the beginning.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 173 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is