Actually, this needs to be discussed. It is perhaps one of THE defining moments in history, right now, as the Telcos line up against the FCC and most internet-based businesses in the fight over Net Neutrality.

This fight, as arcane as it seems, will define a major component of our reality, probably for the rest of my lifetime anyway.

There was another thread on this board, started obliquely and advancing poorly until the mods killed it, that I THINK was about net neutrality, though I'm not positive.

So, my question is really very simple. Who do you think is right, and who should win this fight?

The Internet has to remain neutral and open at all costs. Why? Very simply put: it's the ultimate level playing field where everyone has a voice and anyone can exchange information.
If the telecom companies are allowed a stranglehold on the internet then all we will see are people/organizations who have lots of money and power restrict the content we have access to and decide what standards run the 'net, based on what is best for them.

They will essentially be able to dictate what we can and can't do online. I'd much rather remain a customer of the telecoms, not a consumer of their approved content. I always want to be able to decide what travels through my copper cables, thank you very much.

Can you immagine Kim Jong Il ruling the www...? or someone like him...?

N0|27|-| k0|234n5 do not know what is free internet... neither do Chinese AFAIK... can someone immagine living thinking and deciding like this ( or at least trying to... ) ?

as if that needs to be said ,

of course the FCC !

basically everybody except the telecommunication corps should win , who wants a Corporatocracy anyway ?

anything other than that would without question be a receipt for an orwellian regime !

jiml8,

If you are going to stir things up properly then please post a link to net neutrality

Otherwise there's a chance that nobody knows what you are talking about.

OK, so I already did it for you

Good point. I made the (probably unwarranted) assumption that the mostly technical crowd here would already know about the debate and have at least some opinion.

I am hoping for the FCC to win on this. Of course people will point out: FCC BAD, FCC government, FCC blah. Except that everyone has forgotten that without the meddling of the FCC, we would all here still be using services only from Ma-Bell, and allowed only to use equipment sanctioned by Ma-Bell, and paying whatever Ma-Bell dictates, and such.

I don't buy the whole scare tactic that the corporations are trying, such as 'this is nothing more but an attempt by big bad government to stifle business', actually it is the other way around. When you have a network that prioritizes what can go through, this can lead to all sorts of dark paths.

To strongly reiterate my point, I hope the FCC wins on this issue.

The government is big and evil. However, this is not about government taking over anything.
This is status quo vs. censored internet. OOPS I think I mistakenly voted for the wrong option.

Here is an article of interest..

Hey, that's a good question there, Joe.. How come we can't shut down the internet?

http://www.infowars.com/lieberman-ch...t-why-cant-we/

(Be sure to follow the link to the article on the bill)

DO NOT WANT!

Thats scary.
Joe needs to go. So do Susan Collins(R-ME) and Thomas Carper(D-DE).They are cosponsors.
This bill is an ammendment to the Homeland Security act.
Notice how every bill stealing our freedom has bipartisan support.
Also Lindsey Graham and Chuck Schumer can go home too! They will eventually introduce that biometric Social Security card bill.
Of course it ok to require every citizen to have a fingerprint attached to an id card in order to have a job. But we cant require the undocumented to carry papers.

Personally, I don't see what the debate is about. The internet must be free, period. However, probably they will soon heavily censor it and control it, like they've always wanted. Then the end will be near.

Neither side is right. Both sides have entrenched positions and will refuse to pay heed to anything that threatens to refute them. I don't actually need to read any articles to be reasonably confident this is the case.

Yup, whenever there are 2 sides, always know that they are both wrong. Chose side # 3, that's what I do.

I choose my own side.. If they will take it from me, I will rebuild it.