Get your checkbook ready, House votes down Net Neutrality |
First saw Warner post this disappointing news. 
The U.S. House of Representatives definitively rejected the concept of Net neutrality on Thursday, dealing a bitter blow to Internet companies like Amazon.com, eBay and Google that had engaged in a last-minute lobbying campaign to support it.
What will this mean? That all internet traffic does not have to be treated as equal. Get ready for internet fast lanes. Those in support of Net Neutrality — and I’m one of them — believe without Net Neutrality being maintained and regulated the customer experience will suffer. Those who pay more will get an “enhanced” experience. Those who oppose Net Neutrality, and you can guess where the greed lies there, say it is impeding getting higher speed connectivity deployed. Somebody get a shovel.
The 269-152 vote wasn’t even close with mostly party line voting, instead of common sense. The oh shit moments during the Bush administration continue on. What do we do now?
Did this post make you go hmm?
(Hmm, no ratings yet)
Loading ...
[…] This is a from TDavid explaining what will happen to the web now that the House has rejected “net neutrality” — this is representative of the many arguments in favor of net neutrality. […]
Pingback by Publishing 2.0 » Those Who Pay More Will Get an Enhanced Experience — June 9, 2006 @ 2:24 pm PST
Good. Am I supposed to shed tears for poor ol’ Google, Microsoft, and Moveon.org now? Ha.
So why do I need to get my checkbook out? The law didn’t just change — you’re the one who wanted the government meddling with more regulations. Because we all know what a great job the government does at controlling costs.
But yeah, I guess my stance has nothing to do with freedom — I’m just greedy, right? Well, I guess that’s another thing I won’t miss now that this is done with — bullshit arguments from “net neutrality” supporters who FUD up their arguments with things like the Cox/Craigslist brouhaha and act like the only way someone might not actually want more and more government regulation is if they’re collecting a check from those evil telcos. Get bent.
Comment by Stu — June 10, 2006 @ 2:04 am PST
Stu - not trying to see more legislation implemented here, just trying to see the status quo remain, well, the status quo. Mark my words that without net neutrality the only thing getting bent will be equal access to all.
Comment by TDavid — June 10, 2006 @ 3:05 am PST
BTW, stu, you might want to read the follow-up post on this here where I go into much more depth about my specific concerns: http://www.makeyougohmm.com/20060609/3427/
You might think these are unfounded or call this FUD. We won’t know the answer right away. I remain skeptical. Time will tell who is right here.n
Comment by TDavid — June 10, 2006 @ 3:12 am PST
Although I agree with you that net neutrality is critical, I feel a need to remind you that Bush has nothing to do with the votedown. Anybody who has passed 5th grade social studies can tell you that we have separation of powers in this country and that means that the executive branch (Mr. Bush) has nothing to do with drafting legislation.
Please keep the crosshairs of this blog on their intended target, which at this time is the legislature.
-jX
Comment by JimXugle — June 10, 2006 @ 10:32 am PST
Jim - what part of “during the Bush administration” did you not understand?
Comment by TDavid — June 10, 2006 @ 11:02 am PST
Of course I could have said during the week of 6/6/6 and probably would have been lectured that Satan has nothing to do with the House of Representatives either.
Comment by TDavid — June 10, 2006 @ 11:07 am PST
I agree 100% with Stu. The law is not changing. Just greedy Google, Microsoft, et al wanting to keep the money and stiff the phone companies and cable operators. Those who disagree with Stu are just another bunch of authoritarian / elitists who want things their way and think they know better than anyone / everyone else. If anyone else makes money or has control, they go berserk. These demi-despots babble along telling us how they would make the world better, by making the rest of us slaves to their desires (”I want cheap, fast internet, and if I don’t get it, you are all evil”) and greed, all dressed up by telling us we are too stupid to know better and that we are being screwed by the evil, LARGE, PROFIT-DRIVEN, GREEDY CORPORATIONS. Of course, they consider me stupid and brainwashed - probably by the Bush administration - because this happened DURING THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION! I cannot believe someone brought up the Bush Administration in this discussion! Before you get your panties all in a wad, the rejection of this law PRESERVES the status quo (of law, not cost) which has existed since BEFORE the Bush Administration. And, if you think I am an apologist for the Bush Administration, you should consider I am gay, atheist, and a libertarian.
When will people ever learn from history that free markets and freedom of action has benefited mankind infinitely more than government controls. And when will people ever learn that “this time” or “this product / service” is “different” is repudiated by history. Most disappointing were the “counter-arguments” presented by Tdavid that you could not compare luxury goods or higher-priced goods (cars, airline tickets, etc.) to internet service. These “differences” presented were completely without meaning or logic. Speed is a product like anything else no matter how hard you try or wish.
But logic and history will NEVER convince people like this. Their minds are made up, their superiority self-affirmed, their vision is righteous. Mini-dictators all. Gotta have it their way or the highway.
Comment by Todd — June 16, 2006 @ 5:38 pm PST
Talking about going off topic, Todd, I\’m not sure what being gay, atheist, and a libertarian has to do with anything you just wrote so I\’m going to leave that stuff alone. Thanks for sharing, not. You scored points for passion but seem to be painting with some pretty wide brushes.
Also I never said \”you could not compare luxury goods or higher-priced goods (cars, airline tickets, etc.) to internet service.\” I suggest you re-read my post again. In fact, I\’m saying exactly the opposite. I\’m listing specific things that are related and the deconstruction is in response to Mr. Karp questioning my sentence above on \”enhanced\” services.
Hope that gets you back on track again. Mini-dictators? Riiight.
Comment by TDavid — June 16, 2006 @ 6:25 pm PST
[…] Since recent posts here on Net Neutrality sparked some passionate responses, I thought there might be additional interest in learning more about Net Neutrality and the surrounding issues. You might note that Kushnick thinks the recently proposed Net Neutrality law that was voted down was “hogwash.” Though I support the Net Neutrality bill that was voted down, I’m curious what Kushnick has to say in his book and whether it’s believable or Get Oliver Stone Now (conspiracy theorist) material. […]
Pingback by Make You Go Hmm: » $200 Billion Broadband Scandal ebook free until June 26, 2006 — June 20, 2006 @ 11:50 am PST