If there was no other reason to oppose the government power grab and favoritism of so-called “Net Neutrality” it would be that it enhances Google and its ilk’s “struggle” to understand (define) truth- There is nothing ‘neutral” about Google’s opposition to truly free internet
- Algorithms my ass, Google wants to limit, encumber define what is truth and their business model is to make companies, and you, pay for what they effectively present as the truth
- So called “Net Neutrality” is the governments tool to do the same
- The FCC chaired by Trump appointee Ajit Pai to vote whether to undo the government takeover
Below are three articles all via Drudge that are of seminal importance and should have received more prominence. More so than an annual Thanksgiving travel report. Our discerning readers will see the implications. Excerpts provided as you are quick on the uptake but in each case the entire article offers additional insight.
FCC Head Ajit Pai: Killing Net Neutrality Will Set the Internet Free Promises that “we’re going to see an explosion in the kinds of connectivity and the depth of that connectivity” like never before. (Reason Magazine excerpt)
. . . Pai stressed that regulating the Internet under a Title II framework originally created in the 1930s had led to less investment in infrastructure and a slower rate of innovation. “Since the dawn of the commercial internet, ISPs have been investing as much as they can in networks in order to upgrade their facilities and to compete with each other,” he says. “Outside of a recession we’ve never seen that sort of investment go down year over year. But we did in 2015, after these regulations were adopted.” In a Wall Street Journal column published today, Pai says Title II was responsible for a nearly 6 percent decline in broadband network investment as ISPs saw compliance costs rise and the regulatory atmosphere become uncertain. In his interview with Reason, Pai stressed that the real losers under Net Neutrality were people living in rural areas and low-income Americans who were stuck on the bad end of “the digital divide.”
Proponents of Net Neutrality maintain that rules that went into effect in 2015 are the only thing standing between rapacious businesses such as Comcast, Verizon (where Pai once worked), and Spectrum and an Internet choking on throttled traffic, expensive “fast lanes,” and completely blocked sites that displease whatever corporate entity controls the last mile of fiber into your home or business. Pai says that is bunk and noted that today’s proposed changes, which are expected to pass full FCC review in mid-December, return the Internet to the light-touch regulatory regime that governed it from the mid-1990s until 2015.
“It’s telling that the first investigations that the prior FCC initiated under these so-called Net Neutrality rules were involving free data offerings,” says Pai, pointing toward actions initiated by his predecessor against “zero-rating” services such as T-Mobile’s Binge program, which didn’t count data used to stream Netflix, Spotify, and a host of other services against a customer’s monthly data allowance. “To me it’s just absurd to say that the government should stand in the way of consumers who want to get, and companies that want to provide, free data.” . . .
Pai says that one of the major mistakes of Net Neutrality is its pre-emptive nature. Rather than allowing different practices to develop and then having regulators intervene when problems or harms to customer arise, Net Neutrality is prescriptive and thus likely to serve the interests of existing companies in maintaining a status quo that’s good for them. In terms of enforcement of anti-competitive practices, Pai says the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is better equipped to deal with problems. “The FTC can take action even in the absence of finding harm, consumer harm,” he notes, “so even if consumers aren’t harmed, if [FTC regulators] deem a particular business practice, any business practice to be unfair or deceptive, they have authority under Section 5 to take action against it. So that’s a pretty powerful tool that they’ve used even in the last couple of years against telecom providers and others in the internet economy whom they believe are not protecting consumers.”
Praise be! In spite of Mozilla and all the rest, opposition to government (liberal) takeover is succeeding. Jerome Corgi writing at Infowars.com — excerpt:
FCC to Free Internet from Obama’s “Net Neutrality” Rules
Soros’ pro-censorship coalition floods FCC with “bot-generated” campaign to keep Obama “Net Neutrality” rules . . .
A study by Washington, D.C. information specialist Emprata demonstrated that more than 7.5 million comments opposing the repeal of “Net Neutrality” rules – the largest percentage of comments on any FCC topic, fully 36 percent of all FCC comments – “appear to have been generated by self-described” and “disposable” email domains attributed to FakeMailGenerator.com and with nearly identical language.”
Adjusting the 13 million total comments who opposed repealing “Net Neutrality” rules for “Bot-generated” fake comments, Emprata found the legitimate comments supporting Pai’s move to repeal “Net Neutrality” beat the legitimate comments wanting to keep the Obama-era rules by 61 percent favoring the repeal of Title II Internet governance, versus 38 percent wanting to maintain the “Net Neutrality” rules that would retain Title II governance of the Internet as a telecommunications utility.
Among the 7.5 million unverifiable comments in support of the Obama rules, an unusually large number, 1.72 million, were attributed to foreign addresses that Emprata could not verify, with the vast majority of those comments (99.4 percent) opposed to repealing Title II.
Emprata found the largest number of foreign comments supporting the Obama-era rules came from Russia, followed by Germany, France, India, and Canada.
Obama-era “Net Neutrality” allow Google, Facebook, Twitter censorship
Those arguing for the repeal of the Obama-era “Net Neutrality” rules argue Pai’s campaign to end Title II regulation of the Internet is a “noble cause” – a move that does not “kill net neutrality,” but rather reverses the unprecedented power grab of the Obama-era FCC in conjunction with the tech left forces in Silicon Valley, Soros’s Open Society Foundation, and the Ford Foundation.
Trump supporters backing Pai note the Internet’s growth, explosive innovation, and flow of free expression occurred free from public utility regulation.
Ironically, since the 2015 rules were put in place, instances of blocking and censoring have only occurred at a rapid pace on platforms owned by Facebook, Google, and Twitter, which all lobbied hard for the 2015 “Net Neutrality” rules, which were carefully crafted so as to not touch those companies.
Via CNBC – Alphabet (Google’s) hand wringing crocodile tear lament
The truth is what Google makes prominent, most accessible — funny how that mostly ends up being liberal spin. How about this Eric — don’t list regurgitation of a wire service story i.e. the same story over and over again, giving the same story prominence pages deep, as if it were unassailable truth, or the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
R Mall
