Monday, January 15, 2018

Obama's so called "Net Neutrality" was a Big Fat Lie. Not Neutral at all.

Net Neutrality is a horrible law. Look past all the leftwing screaming and the death threats, the end isn’t coming; yes, humans will die, but not because of ending Net Neutrality. The law is flawed, clearly biased; it gives distinct advantage and power to an exclusive segment of the Internet industry, what is called the “edge” providers.  Google, Facebook, Twitter, you get the picture.

Know this; Net Neutrality is not neutral; it is not neutral at all.  It is a reasonable argument that the choice of its name was a tactical lie. And the masses of ignorant Americans, led by a shallow and often times worthless press, lapped it up.

In my informal surveys I find very few people that have a clue what Net Neutrality is all about; most articles I’ve read in the mainstream press are superficial and talk generalities in ways that support the lie of neutrality.  It’s pathetic.

Where to Start
Proponents of Net Neutrality talk about protecting against “throttling” and blocking and censorship. But they stop there, by an large they don’t explain any details, I will.

Blocking and Censorship
First off, I agree, blocking and censorship are big concerns, very big concerns. These are fundamental. Corporations do not have the right to usurp the principles of our country. They do not have the right to censor or control the subjects of open forum content.    … Hear, Hear! Human rights exceed corporate objectives and interests, always.  That’s how I see it.  

That said, the throttling issue is way over hyped, Wow, just think a little past the basics here. Why wouldn’t I want the opportunity to trade speed for cost? Why is that so important? It’s not! This is mass propaganda, likely from the leftwing tech giants.  It’s over hyped and incredibly effective brainwashing. To witness such stellar mind control is scary to anyone that uses his or her brain. 
Misunderstood and poorly considered by many people (almost everyone I’ve asked). As far s I am concerned, the idea of controlling speed or providing preferential speed from the ISP is not a big concern. It wasn't to people back in 2015 when the rules went into effect either.  So why is it such a big concern now? Brainwashing, that is all.

So let’s get to the details of Net Neutrality, the details that matter.

Who was Governed by Net Neutrality?
The Internet is composed of two principle components the “access point” and the channels to content, called the “edge”. 

The access point is the business of “Internet Service Providers” or “ISPs”.  Large ISP's like Comcast and local service providers like Bend Broadband in Central Oregon, my ISP.

The other component of the Internet is the “edge” companies, where you land when you hit the Internet, Google for instance is my home page, That is the first edge of the internet for me. Twitter, Yahoo, Facebook. These are edge companies too, many others. 
As for principles of Net Neutrality Think about this, it’s all over the news. These companies have been known to censor, block, throttle and much worse. They can do so because Net Neutrality rules for the most part do not apply to them, only the ISPs are covered by the Net Neutrality regulations. That is wrong.

There it is the belly of the lie. It might come as a shock to you, after all these companies were such vocal supporters of the law.

They lie, they cheat, they deceive, they manipulate, they use psyops tactics to manage you. What more do the techno corporatist  have to do to get you to stop listening to them?

Think Outside The google 

This is what is relevant, who is and who is not governed; others will talk about Title Two and the Communications Act of 1934 bla bla. Bla. It is all smoke, irrelevant smoke. The idea that the Internet be governed by laws that originated 85 years ago is fodder for fools. 

The Internet needs to be looked at for what it is, now in todays world with an eye towards tomorrow’s potential. Getting hung up on what laws from the past should apply indicates you’re dealing with the wrong people. We must stop the thinking of the past and reanalyze the methods of the past. 

Future Planning
I believe that the Internet does need to be regulated; but there is no immediate rush, just as there wasn’t anything pressing back in 2015 when Net Neutrality was imposed. A measured reasoned and fair set of rules applied to all would not be detrimental in my opinion. Speed options with competitive pricing would be great too.  

Unfair, unbalanced and patently biased, the old Net Neutrality rules, that is bad, bad for the Internet and for society future itself. 

Regulations must be done in an even handed way. Full transparency is possible today and the society should have access to these discussions. The full light of day will keep the fascists away.  

No comments:

Post a Comment