FTC Chairman Endorses Net Neutrality Plan

December 15, 2010 -

Federal Trade Commission Chairman Jon Leibowitz says that he supports the net neutrality proposal put together by FCC chairman Julius Genachowski. In an interview with the Huffington Post Leibowitz said the he supports the new proposals, and sees them as the best first step in getting some kind of net neutrality rules in place.

"There's a little disconnect between the reality of net neutrality and the big fight of net neutrality," said Leibowitz, speaking to the critics that believe it is all about government control of the Internet.

The rest of the interview deals with privacy, which the chairman has been vigorously pushing for this month. Read it here.

The FCC votes on net neutrality December 21.

Source: The Hill

 


Comments

Re: FTC Chairman Endorses Net Neutrality Plan

Internet is big money now.  Everyone wants their in on how to get into it, policitians included.

 

Its just most people don't really understand how the internet works on a technicial level and so jump to conclusions and come up with thier own vision of how it works so it makes 'sense' to them.

 

A lot of crap they want to do, is at this moment just down right impossible, or more hurtful to the net than helpful.

 

 

The CIA doesn't even have the capabilities to monitor everything that goes on the net.  They like to make you thin they do, but a lot of crap slips through, or is known about but resource wise is unable to do anything about.

 

Why do you think a lot of private trackers for torrent sites stay up for so long?  Trust me the government knows about it, but they don't give any crap about it because its a small scale, hell they rarely even care about the big ones, they let the enterinment industry deal with it because why bother? 

 

The problem with the entertainment industry is that they don't have as advanced tools as the government does. So they do the next best thing....whine to the government over and over again until the government says 'shut the hell up' and puts these laws into place to shut up people from whinning about it.

 

Moral of the story?  Whine about anything for long enough and you'll get it.

Re: FTC Chairman Endorses Net Neutrality Plan

Whine? It's not about the biggest whiner. If you grease enough palms, you can get what you want. The new policy the FCC is voting on shows that they've been bought and we're going to catch hell for it. The Comcast/NBC merger is going to go through without objection and ISPs will start charging us by the megabit. Internet service will become even more expensive and slow compared to the rest of the developed nations. We're likely to slip from the 20th best network to the dead last if this goes unabated.

-Greevar

-Greevar

"Paste superficially profound, but utterly meaningless quotation here."

Re: FTC Chairman Endorses Net Neutrality Plan

The reality of this net neutrality is that its not real net neutrality, its really a plan to give ips the right to screw over there consumers with bs stats.  

http://www.magicinkgaming.com/

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Is King right? Should all games adopt the free-to-play model?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Matthew Wilsonhttp://www.giantbomb.com/articles/jeff-gerstmann-heads-to-new-york-takes-questions/1100-4900/ He talks about the future games press and the games industry. It is worth your time even though it is a bit long, and stay for the QA. There are some good QA04/17/2014 - 5:28pm
IanCErm so they shouldn't sell edutainment at all? Why?04/17/2014 - 4:42pm
MaskedPixelanteNot that linkable, go onto Steam and there's stuff like Pajama Sam on the front-page, courtesy of Night Dive.04/17/2014 - 4:13pm
Andrew EisenOkay, again, please, please, PLEASE get in a habit of linking to whatever you're talking about.04/17/2014 - 4:05pm
MaskedPixelanteAnother round of Night Dive teasing and promising turns out to be stupid edutainment games. Thanks for wasting all our time, guys. See you never.04/17/2014 - 3:44pm
Matthew WilsonAgain the consequences were not only foreseeable, but very likely. anyone who understood supply demand curvs knew that was going to happen. SF has been a econ/trade hub for the last hundred years.04/17/2014 - 2:45pm
Andrew EisenMixedPixelante - Would you like to expand on that?04/17/2014 - 2:43pm
MaskedPixelanteWell, I am officially done with Night Dive Studios. Unless they can bring something worthwhile back, I'm never buying another game from them.04/17/2014 - 2:29pm
PHX Corphttp://www.msnbc.com/ronan-farrow/watch/video-games-continue-to-break-the-mold-229561923638 Ronan Farrow Daily on Video games breaking the mold04/17/2014 - 2:13pm
NeenekoAh yes, because by building something nice they were just asking for people to come push them out. Consequences are protested all the time when other people are implementing them.04/17/2014 - 2:06pm
Matthew Wilsonok than they should not protest when the consequences of that choice occur.04/17/2014 - 1:06pm
NeenekoIf people want tall buildings, plenty of other cities with them. Part of freedom and markets is communities deciding what they do and do not want built in their collective space.04/17/2014 - 12:55pm
Sora-ChanI realize that they have ways getting around it, but one reason might be due to earthquakes.04/17/2014 - 4:42am
Matthew WilsonSF is a tech/ economic/ trade center it should be mostly tail building. this whole problem is because of the lack of tail buildings. How would having tail apartment buildings destroy SF? having tail buildings has not runed other cities around the US/world04/16/2014 - 10:51pm
Matthew WilsonAgain the issue is you can not build upwards anywhere in SF at the moment, and no you would not. You would bring prices to where they should have been before the market distortion. those prices are not economic or socially healthy.04/16/2014 - 10:46pm
ZippyDSMleeYou still wind up pushing people out of the non high rise aeras but tis least damage you can do all things considered.04/16/2014 - 10:26pm
ZippyDSMleeANd by mindlessly building upward you make it like every place else hurting property prices,ect,ect. You'll have to slowly segment the region into aeras where you will never build upward then alow some aeras to build upward.04/16/2014 - 10:25pm
Matthew WilsonSF have to build upwards they have natural growth limits. they can not grow outwards. ps growing outwards is terable just look at Orlando or Austin for that.04/16/2014 - 4:15pm
ZippyDSMleeIf they built upward then it would becoem like every other place making it worthless, if they don't build upward they will price people out making it worthless, what they need to do is a mix of things not just one exstreme or another.04/16/2014 - 4:00pm
Matthew Wilsonyou know the problem in SF was not the free market going wrong right? it was government distortion. by not allowing tall buildings to be build they limited supply. that is not free market.04/16/2014 - 3:48pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician