What is Digg?275 Comments
- retrorambler, on 05/07/2008, -3/+256Good ole Oregon! Way to go Ron! Give em hell.
- DanNZN, on 05/07/2008, -3/+189We need more of these.
- RSS14, on 05/07/2008, -4/+171If net neutrality dies, the internet companies will have a tighter grip on us than they do now. Japan's internet is fast, and our cable companies can match their speed, but they choose not to, and they even place quota's on our bandwidth. ***** *****.
- TheZorch, on 05/07/2008, -3/+107About time a Senator did something for the common good rather than for special interests.
- Ethek, on 05/07/2008, -6/+95While I am normally against government regulation and interference, Telcom companies have in essence been granted a government backed monopoly. Free market does not apply here. Some type of intervention is necessary to keep the medium open.
The US has moved from a service based economy to an information based economy. What happens when a select group of companies (with all the legal rights of an individual) get to control access and dissemination of that information? It basically translates that they get to make peoples decions for them. - azimir, on 05/07/2008, -2/+55Ron Wyden is a rare quality Senator:
From an announcement by Senator Ron Wyden:
U.S. Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) today announced his intention to vote against and support efforts to filibuster the conference report reauthorizing the USA Patriot Act, citing concerns about numerous provisions that could compromise Americans’ privacy rights that would be made permanent under the legislation. Specifically, Wyden announced his intention today to oppose the legislation because it does not include sunsets for controversial powers and diminishes congressional oversight over the government’s use of these powers.
“The current version of the report strikes the wrong balance between security and civil liberties and leaves Congress with inadequate oversight,” said Wyden. “Just as troubling is the inclusion of new language that will make it much more difficult for law-abiding Americans to defend themselves from possible Patriot Act abuses. These unjustified changes do not make the Patriot Act a more effective tool for fighting terrorism and in fact, make it more susceptible to abuse. I will vote against the current version of the legislation and support efforts to block its passage.”
From: http://www.blueoregon.com/2005/12/wyden_to_filibu. ...
Yes, he did end up voting for the modified version, but not for the extending of the wiretapping provisions. - ColorBlind, on 05/07/2008, -1/+44May Comcast, Cox, ATT, and the others burn in a fiery blaze.
You continue to provide impeccable overpriced crap. - Pstmann, on 05/07/2008, -1/+35Thank the man! It takes some balls to get up in front of a bunch of suits and tell them they're greedy and short-sighted instead of groveling at their feet for campaign donations.
http://wyden.senate.gov/contact/ - novenator, on 05/07/2008, -3/+36Thank You, keep fighting for our freedom!
- mrwesticles, on 05/07/2008, -2/+25Want to thank Ron for this effort? E-mail him through a form on his site:
http://wyden.senate.gov/contact/ - klco, on 05/07/2008, -3/+25There wouldn't be an internet without DARPA... history, heed it.
- Gillos, on 05/07/2008, -4/+25Do you even know what Net Neutrality IS?
- Terr01, on 05/07/2008, -0/+20I see it as a "Regulation because it's effectively a monopoly" angle.
Some peopel go "OMG THEN IT'S CENSORSHIP LIKE CHINA OMG", which is of course like saying the First Amendment is "government censorship" because the government is meddling. - klco, on 05/07/2008, -1/+20Can we extend Godwin's law to include Stalin as well?
- Ethek, on 05/07/2008, -0/+18correction, I meant to say the US has moved from a manufacturing based economy to a service based economy based largely on information exchange.
- BXRWXR, on 05/07/2008, -0/+18Good politicians.
- thedragon4453, on 05/07/2008, -0/+17Wow, I'm from Oregon and I'm kind of ashamed I didn't know how awesome Wyden is.
- Jan33, on 05/07/2008, -1/+18wow. A US politician fighting for US citizens' rights. Awesome. Really cool! Haven't seen that for like a long time.
- inactive, on 05/07/2008, -4/+19Because it was yet another unnecessary, unrelated plug for RonPaul™ that reminded everybody why they hated his spammers in the first place.
- mrwesticles, on 05/07/2008, -1/+16Go Oregon for our caffeinated representatives! It's super-effective!
- HillerMylife, on 07/24/2008, -0/+15I'm doing my part to not support ISPs; I use my neighbor's!
- Midoc, on 05/07/2008, -2/+16This is Oregon, we do things differently here.
- McGrude, on 05/07/2008, -4/+17Dugg for the use of the word "wonky" in the article.
- jgzman, on 05/07/2008, -0/+13Correct, but it's nice to see someone pandering to ME for a change.
Besides, he's not running for anything right now, and he's helping me, who has no ability to help him. We could use more pandering like that. - fluxion, on 05/07/2008, -1/+14this is more about keeping the internet de-regulated, whether by government or private interests.
- Terr01, on 05/07/2008, -0/+13Because Reagan :P
(Seriously, how does he fit in there?) - TheZorch, on 05/07/2008, -1/+13Maybe I'm living in the wrong state.
- GMorgan, on 05/07/2008, -0/+12Indeed there is nothing worse than a 'free market' in a government enforced monopoly. Look at the banking cartel for the perfect example of abuse of such a monopoly.
- yojiffyskippy, on 05/07/2008, -1/+13And sometimes for the better.
- Terr01, on 05/07/2008, -1/+13Yeah, like dictating that you can't use asbestos for pillow stuffing.
- ajb2015, on 05/07/2008, -0/+12Some people have found that even service packages that claim to be "unlimited" actually have a cap.
- dsmx, on 05/07/2008, -1/+12What are you talking about? The current government intervention created the internet as it is today as was explained it that article which if you'd even bothered to read it you would of known. We have the monopolies/duopoly's for internet connections because of the policies the government put in place.
- Oronar, on 05/07/2008, -1/+11Except the whole problem of consumers only having a choice between crappy ISP A and crappy ISP B.
No one's saying "I want the government to regulate the intarwebs!", they're saying "I want the government to ensure ISPs follow net neutrality and aren't ***** with my data." - mocheeze, on 05/07/2008, -0/+10I'm going to disagree. I fail to see how complying with one's consituents' wishes is "pandering". Ron Wyden has been a prooponent of Net Neutrality for a LONG time. He's been fighting for it for years now, IIRC. If you're in Oregon, I also suggest voting for Steve Novick (D) to replace Gordon Smith (R) as our second senator. Novick and Wyden both recognize that a neutral network is in Oregon's best interests: both for citizens and our large contigency of open source and internet-based business.
- Terr01, on 05/07/2008, -0/+10I think it falls within the "All government photos tend to look terrible" phenomenon. Like your passport or driver's license. *I* wouldn't trust me based on my license photo--it looks like I just robbed a convenience store. Apparently even Senators are not immune from whatever evil sorcery or luminiferous aether that happens in the realm of "official photos".
- Rapter09, on 05/07/2008, -1/+11It's nice to see *our* guys come out swinging for once.
- yojiffyskippy, on 05/07/2008, -4/+14No such thing. You've made the sophomoric mistake of confusing "sucks less" with "good"
- PueSi, on 05/07/2008, -1/+10WTF? Ron Paul is against Net Neutrality, he's pretty much against everything
- Terr01, on 05/07/2008, -0/+9500 years of comparatively regulated markets that you despise, you mean?
- nblsavage, on 05/07/2008, -1/+10
Who subsidized all the infrastructure the ISP's use? That's right - taxpayers. - mocheeze, on 05/07/2008, -2/+11It's not Ron Wyden's fault if other people's senators are in bed with the telecom giants. Contact your senators if you want bigger results. :)
- jmkiii, on 05/07/2008, -2/+10He looks nothing like a vine to me.
- anillop, on 05/07/2008, -2/+10* paid for by Comcast and AT&T.
- Gillos, on 05/07/2008, -3/+11Way to go! Time for that man to collect his "1 free sex" coupon from that Net Neutrality for Virgins girl.
- mocheeze, on 05/07/2008, -0/+8By putting pressure on ISPs (like Comcast) they can make two choices: Face regulation, or take steps (like their recently announced "P2P Bill of Rights") to satisfy congress's urges. If you read the article, you can see that his threats are not meaningless.
- inactive, on 05/07/2008, -2/+9Looks like Sen. Ron Wyden loves him some free porn and music!!
- mocheeze, on 05/07/2008, -0/+7http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/02/technology/02onl ...
"Published: March 2, 2006
Senator Ron Wyden, Democrat of Oregon, will introduce new legislation today that would prohibit Internet network operators from charging companies for faster delivery of their content to consumers or favoring some content providers over others."
You could do SOME research before spouting off claims that this "phony" doesn't put his money where his mouth is. - greenm1981, on 05/07/2008, -0/+7You don't have to be good-looking to be an excellent Senator. Wyden is a great resource for Oregon.
- sliksta, on 05/07/2008, -1/+8I would, but that's like asking the devil to please be good.
- LordVance, on 05/07/2008, -1/+8Or perhaps so we can see true innovation on the last open front.
Let's just take a little example of what can happen once the internet begins to become regulated and shaped.
Youtube opens it's doors - Youtube is an instant success (go back before the google buyout for this hypothetical).
Comcast sees youtube is getting a lot of hits from there customers.
ComcastTube.com opens up, a rival site. Youtube beings to work 50% slower, while ComcastTube.com works 10x faster delivered at blazing speeds to Comcast customers.
Youtube goes out of business, Comcast wins again. -
Show 51 - 100 of 274 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is