logo 
spacer
  

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

If you have an opinion, you should share it! Register Now!

America's Debate hosts the best in news, government, and political debate. Register now to take part in the most civil and constructive debate on the Internet. Join the community, and get ready to be challenged!

Click here to start

> Sponsored Links

Register to remove these ads!
> Net neutrality is being threatened., Insurance for catastrophic individual costs.
Supposn
post Jul 25 2017, 06:59 AM
Post #1


*****
Century Mark

Group: Members
Posts: 149
Member No.: 12,766
Joined: October-19-12

Gender: Undisclosed
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: Undisclosed



Net neutrality is being threatened.

I fear that president Trump and our current U.S. Congress will eliminate net neutrality and further reduce our privacy. The ease, speed, and availability of our participation within forums such as this one will be significantly reduced.

Remember, cable TV was first introduced as comparatively inexpensive and/or less commercials. Beware of the promises made by those who would undermine or otherwise reduce the concept of net neutrality.

Respectfully, Supposn


Sorry; topic description is a keyboard error.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies
Supposn
post Jul 27 2017, 10:02 AM
Post #2


*****
Century Mark

Group: Members
Posts: 149
Member No.: 12,766
Joined: October-19-12

Gender: Undisclosed
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: Undisclosed



AuthorMusician, regarding net neutrality and confidentiality:

Utility enterprises operate as, or similar to monopolies. During president Obama’s administrations’, enterprises engaged in some facets of the internet industry were classified and legally subject to additional regulations applicable to utility enterprises.
There were also confidentiality regulations restricting clients’ confidential information that internet enterprises were permitted to collect or pass on to third parties without their clients’ permissions.

Net neutrality and confidentiality are separate concepts but their regulations common purposes are to shield internet users from abuse. Generally, proponents or opponents of regulating one of the concepts also share a similar opinion regarding both concepts.
President Trump has been (to the extent of presidential power) eliminating or reducing the effects of federal regulations regarding net neutrality or confidentiality.

Respectfully, Supposn

AuthorMusician, I believe reducing net neutrality would be net detrimental to our nation.
Reducing the extent of net neutrality is somewhat likely to increase the costs and decrease the numbers of internet forums (such as America’s Debate) and/or the speed and accessibility of access to them.

It would to some extent reduce the distribution of all sides of political discussions, hinder free speech by reducing available forums. Some of the changes that are being proposed will additionally reduce privacy of those using the internet.

Respectfully, Supposn
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AuthorMusician
post Jul 30 2017, 09:39 AM
Post #3


**********
Glasses and journalism work for me.

Sponsor
November 2003

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 6,345
Member No.: 297
Joined: December-1-02

From: Blueberry Hill
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(Supposn @ Jul 27 2017, 06:02 AM) *
AuthorMusician, regarding net neutrality and confidentiality:

Utility enterprises operate as, or similar to monopolies. During president Obama’s administrations’, enterprises engaged in some facets of the internet industry were classified and legally subject to additional regulations applicable to utility enterprises.
There were also confidentiality regulations restricting clients’ confidential information that internet enterprises were permitted to collect or pass on to third parties without their clients’ permissions.

Net neutrality and confidentiality are separate concepts but their regulations common purposes are to shield internet users from abuse. Generally, proponents or opponents of regulating one of the concepts also share a similar opinion regarding both concepts.
President Trump has been (to the extent of presidential power) eliminating or reducing the effects of federal regulations regarding net neutrality or confidentiality.

Respectfully, Supposn

AuthorMusician, I believe reducing net neutrality would be net detrimental to our nation.
Reducing the extent of net neutrality is somewhat likely to increase the costs and decrease the numbers of internet forums (such as America’s Debate) and/or the speed and accessibility of access to them.

It would to some extent reduce the distribution of all sides of political discussions, hinder free speech by reducing available forums. Some of the changes that are being proposed will additionally reduce privacy of those using the internet.

Respectfully, Supposn


Makes one wonder how we ever got along before the advent of the WWW, circa 1994. Dependence on the Internet is a perception that isn't true to reality, that stuff that happens beyond the screen. Like so many fads, people have gone overboard on how important it is to be connected to a world-wide unsecured public network.

Keep in mind that building out the Internet was a core task while I worked for MCI, former owner of a big chunk of the Internet backbone (now Verizon). I like using the service and get a lot of entertainment and information from it.

However, I also grew up with public libraries that got connected to college/university libraries along the way. If the Internet were to go away right now, I'd know what to do instead.

That's probably why I'm not all that concerned about so-called net neutrality. If the businesses charging for extra speed demand too much, they'll lose customers. But what about people's perceived need to stay connected? Well, that can change exactly because it is a perceived need, although other perceived needs have persistence -- for example the need for cable TV service. Are you ready for some brain damage?

So what about niche sites like ad.gif? Okay, what about them? Is search engine ranking a part of net neutrality, and if it is, how can we ensure that the ranking is done fairly?

There's where government oversight and regulation is needed. Google has a monopoly on search in reality, although light competition exists. It's like when IBM had a monopoly in business computing, even though plug-compatible competitors were allowed to stay in business -- an example being StorageTek, another of my former employers. Reagan's justice department dropped the anti-monopoly suits against IBM -- that would have meant curtains for StorageTek, except it happened shortly before Unix machines bumped out mainframes and the PC took off. So monopoly became a moot point for IBM. Survival became more important.

That's not happening with Google. If anything, the company is leading the world into what's next regarding search and networked computing. Tightly coupled is how revenue is generated on the Internet -- without that part, Google would have died off long ago. It has no mid-range outfit like Sun Micro breathing down its neck, no e-commerce to bring cheap computing to the masses, no real competition.

Except for Amazon in certain sectors, and there's another situation that needs attention paid to it.

It's as if the whole concept of monopoly has changed in the Information Age, as opposed to what it meant in the Industrial Age. But have the fundamental dynamics changed? I don't think so. The speed of the dynamics has increased tremendously, so they appear different. Monopolies pop up and disappear like bubbles in brew.

Overall, it strikes me that nobody understands what's happening, not us lowly consumers and not the top echelon puppies. It's moving too fast for reflection and changing too often for nailing down. What looks like net neutrality today won't look that way for long? Maybe so, don't know, hope to find out.

Another thing to keep in mind is rediscovery. For example, I've gone back to manually charting guitar arpeggios on graph paper rather than simply printing them out off the Web. The physical effort brings with it a more powerful learning experience. Some writers have gone back to typewriters for a similar reason, but it has more to do with expanding the thinking behind the writing. Wordprocessing is literally too easy. A few have even gone to writing longhand.

Ah well, maybe what all this is leading toward amounts to yet one more attempt to take shortcuts and realizing that they don't exist. Gotta pay your dues and put in the time, eh? Or as it was expressed several decades ago, shaddup and play yer guitar. The Internet can't do that for you.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post



Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

  
Go to the top of the page - Simple Version Time is now: June 20th, 2018 - 01:42 AM
©2002-2010 America's Debate, Inc.  All rights reserved.