QOTD: Net Neutrality

Charlie Pierce:

In the FCC's decision, there is no more  a "long-term" plot for government control of Internet content than there is in Agenda 21 an actual secret plan to steal our golfs. All the FCC is doing is making sure that greed-gobblers like Comcast don't get to decide which content to promote and which content to bury. Rarely is seen so clearly the modern conservative notion of civil liberties -- the government cannot abridge your rights, even in an imaginary sense, but its real function is to subcontract that to anyone whose bid is high enough. Not what the Founders had in mind, I don't believe.

AynRandy's Disturbing World, Internet Edition

Now the Tribble-Toupeed One is is defending Cable Company Fuckery against an open, level-field Internet.

Digby:

Whenever there's a choice to be made between Big Money being "free" to keep every last penny they touch and average people having the opportunity and the freedom to live a decent life, you know what he will choose. To the libertarian, abstract notions of liberty really just come down to property. That's all there is. That's why the words "parents own the children" trips so easily off of Paul's tongue. He literally can't see the world in any other way.

SNIP

I'm sorry Rand. I'm a hard core civil libertarian but I seriously doubt I'm ever going to join a "leave me alone" coalition that tells half the population they have a right to private ownership of everything but their own body. That just doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Neither am I a big fan of letting people die in the street. Just not my thing. But hey, I'm happy to exhort Democrats to join with Senator Paul any time he wants to co-sponsor legislation we can both agree upon. That's downright democratic.

Not Even Close to Good Enough

Three years until everyone in Kentucky is able to "tap into high-speed internet" is complete and total bullshit.

 

Right now, everyone is Kentucky is able to "tap into high-speed internet."  For a price. Equal to your entire annual income due every month.

 

Availability of "high-speed internet" is not the problem.  AFFORDABILITY of high-speed internet is the problem, you lying motherfuckers.

 

And just to put the vomit icing on this shit cake, "every corner of the Commonwealth" really means just eastern Kentucky, and the contract is going to a private company, which means it will cost 10 times as much and take 10 times as long and complete 10 percent of intended service as it would if Kentucky just told Bell South and Verizon to fuck and die and built statewide broadband itself.

 

Jack Brammer at the Herald:

By 2018, all parts of Kentucky will be able to tap into high-speed Internet service, a move state leaders say will propel the state in education, economic development, health care and public safety.

 

At a news conference Tuesday in the state Capitol with Gov. Steve Beshear, U.S. Rep. Hal Rogers, R-Somerset, called the expanded service "the modern-day equivalent of the interstate highway system."

 

Beshear and Rogers, who are partnering to improve Eastern Kentucky through SOAR, the "Shaping Our Appalachian Region" initiative, announced that the state last Friday signed a contract with Macquarie Capital of Australia to develop "a robust, reliable, fiber backbone infrastructure to bring high-speed Internet connectivity to every corner of the Commonwealth."

 

You Can Still Stop Cable Company Fuckery

In case you missed it, here's John Oliver revving up the trolls to blast the FCC on net neutrality.



If you prefer your encouragement in written form, here it is from The Nation:

Telecommunications conglomerates often prevail in debates about the future of media by pretending that the issues are too complicated for Americans to understand. But there is nothing complicated about the current battle over the future of the Internet. Nor is there anything complicated about the need for citizens to rise up and defend net neutrality—also known as the First Amendment of the Internet, because it provides the guarantee of free speech online for all.

If the FCC allows the “paid prioritization” of some websites and communications over others—as has been proposed under a plan the commissioners recently voted 3 to 2 to consider—the basic premise of a free and open Internet will be undermined. In a digital age, this threatens a lot more than online shopping. “Profits and corporate disfavor of controversial viewpoints or competing services could change both what you can see on the Internet and the quality of your connection,” warns the ACLU. “And the need to monitor what you do online in order to play favorites means even more consumer privacy invasions piled on top of the NSA’s prying eyes.”

The threat is real. Public interest groups warn that under a plan developed by FCC chair Tom Wheeler, cable and telecom companies could shape a pay-to-play Internet, in which they charge cash-rich corporations and special-interest groups to provide high-speed service while consigning websites without billionaire benefactors to a digital dirt road. Wheeler’s plan comes in response to an appeals court ruling that scrapped a previous FCC attempt to preserve net neutrality. A Democrat, albeit one with a background as an industry lobbyist, Wheeler says he wants to maintain an open Internet. But he’s going about it the wrong way. His plan is much like the one the courts rejected: he envisions a complex set of rules that would require the FCC to constantly “scrutinize” these pay-for-priority schemes for certain websites, apps and online services.

That won’t work, legally or practically. “Unless the chairman reverses his fundamentally failed approach, we won’t have real net neutrality—and we will have rampant discrimination online,” explains Matt Wood, a communications policy lawyer who has worked with the Media Access Project and Free Press. “The FCC can’t prevent online discrimination and blocking unless it reclassifies broadband providers as common carriers.” If that happens, broadband providers can be regulated as utilities that must provide equal and affordable access to an essential service.

Consumers Union policy counsel Delara Derakhshani calls reclassification “the best way to ensure an open Internet and to protect consumers.” But getting that protection depends on what the five commissioners hear from the public during the four-month comment period that’s now open. Feeling the heat from Free Press, Common Cause, the Future of Music Coalition, leaders of the Congressional Progressive Caucus and Internet firms like Google—and tens of thousands of letters and e-mails from concerned citizens—Wheeler opened up more space for discussion. The two GOP commissioners, who want to hand the debate off to Congress, will resist. But Democrats Jessica Rosenworcel and Mignon Clyburn are actively encouraging citizen involvement, with Clyburn urging the public to see the comment period as a “call to action.” Americans must answer that call (to do so, go to FCC.gov). All five commissioners—especially chairman Wheeler—should hear the public demand that net neutrality be saved. Then broadband providers can be reclassified and regulated in the public interest, and the Internet can remain free.

Privacy, Spying and the Lost Cash Economy

I'm not yet eligible for Medicare, and yet I can remember when it was not just possible but common for people to live a middle-class life without a credit card, loan or even bank account.  They got paid in cash or checks they could cash at the grocer, and paid cash for everything, including rent and a used car. The utility companies had local offices at which you could pay your bills in cash. You could even travel by air using cash to buy your ticket at the airport. Hotels accepted cash without ID. Unless the store clerk knew you personally, there was no way for anybody to find out what you'd bought or how much you paid for it.

Sure, it was more trouble and time-consuming than clicking a mouse, but there was no paper trail - or rather pixel trail.

Now the cash economy is no more.  Unless you are willing to live on the very margins of the economy, you cannot survive without a bank account and credit cards.

Which means that soon Homeland Security will know everything about every penny you get and every penny you spend.

DS Wright at Firedoglake:

As the Obama Administration continues to expand the policies of the Bush Administration, the newest theater of the War on Terror is your checking account.

The Obama administration is drawing up plans to give all U.S. spy agencies full access to a massive database that contains financial data on American citizens and others who bank in the country, according to a Treasury Department document seen by Reuters.

Is the real war on privacy or on restraints of State power?

Financial institutions that operate in the United States are required by law to file reports of “suspicious customer activity,” such as large money transfers or unusually structured bank accounts, to Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN).

The Federal Bureau of Investigation already has full access to the database. However, intelligence agencies, such as the Central Intelligence Agency and the National Security Agency, currently have to make case-by-case requests for information to FinCEN.

The Treasury plan would give spy agencies the ability to analyze more raw financial data than they have ever had before, helping them look for patterns that could reveal attack plots or criminal schemes.

Now let’s talk about why this is hilarious and has nothing to do with stopping terrorism financing.

There is a company called HSBC that laundered money for Mexican Drug Cartels, Iran, and Al-Qaeda. They even helped launder money for the bank that helped fund the 9/11 attacks. So you would expect a government really concerned with terrorist’s financial activity would crackdown hard on a bank facilitating terrorist attacks on the United States right? Wrong.

HSBC paid a small fine representing a few weeks profit and went on about their business. No jail time for money laundering for terrorists and drug cartels and not even a hint that their charter to operate was in jeopardy. And that makes sense if the War on Terror is about preventing dissent in America, not stopping terrorist attacks. Now intelligence agencies will be able to track your every purchase and transaction to ensure you are a good citizen.

Emptywheel has more on “this batshit crazy plan”.

Internet Civil Liberties Getting Weaker By the Day

This is not so much about corporate and Wall Street power as it is about the Obama administration gratuitously hippie-punching because it can.

 

Kathleen Geier at the Washington Monthly:

Last week brought the disturbing news that 25-year old coder and internet activist Aaron Swartz was being charged with nine new felony counts for violating the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act by downloading too many academic journal articles. Swartz, who helped invent RSS and was a co-founder of Reddit, was also among of the founders the liberal activist groups the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, which works to elect liberal members of Congress, and Demand Progress, which has campaigned for net neutrality and other progressive causes. Swartz now is facing a total of 13 felony counts and, if convicted, the possibility of decades in prison plus a $1 million fine. 

 

SNIP

The severity of the punishment Aaron faces is wildly out of proportion with the actions he has committed. After all, the journal articles he downloaded were never publicly released, no harm was done, and at least some of the “victims” were urging the feds not to prosecute. It’s hard not to believe that Aaron is being targeted and set as an “example” by corporate interests and others who want to shut down the open access movement.

The abuse of prosecutorial discretion here is completely outrageous. What’s particularly infuriating for progressives is that, for the charges to get to this stage, it’s inconceivable that Obama’s Justice Department and Attorney General Holder have not signed off on this. Like Henry Farrell, I strongly urge that “those who agree, and who have access to some kind of public platform, or otherwise can exert influence should do what they can to push back against this.”

You may also want to donate to Aaron’s defense fund, which is here. The charges are a horrendous abuse of civil liberties and a threat to anyone who cherishes the right to use the internet freely. This must not stand.

As many have said before me, the internet is just the latest frontier of the war  for civil liberties war, as once pamphlets, newspapers, radio and television were before it. The fight is what it has always been. We defend free expression online or we lose it everywhere.

Internet Kill Switches Are For Dictators

Brad Friedman:

Here's what happened (Thursday) night in Egypt:



And with that, Egypt effectively "vanished from the Internet" yesterday as the uprising against a repressive, U.S. backed regime began to take full bloom and, as of this hour, continues to rage.

Meanwhile, back in these United States, folks like Sen. Joe Lieberman are pushing a bill, the "Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset" act, to make provisions for a U.S. government "Internet Kill Switch" to allow them to do the same. Now why would folks like Lieberman want that?

The latest revision of this bill, according to FastCompany, "bans judicial review over executive decrees" to take down all, or portions of, the Internet.

Read the whole thing.

Speak Up for Net Neutrality

All the White House brickbats in the world won't stop Faux Noise if the telecoms stop net neutrality. Fox will pay ATT millions for instant downloads, while your favorite local blogger - or even big liberal sites like Kos and Firedoglake - languishes in unable-to-access hell.

Sign CredoAction's petition now to save Net Neutrality.

Who do you want to decide which websites you can visit or what Internet content you can access -- you or a big telecom company?

That's what the fight about network neutrality is all about. Net neutrality is the principle that Internet users, not Internet service providers, should be in control.

(Yesterday), the Federal Communications Commission (proposed) net neutrality rules to ensure that the Internet is free from blocking, censorship and discrimination by powerful telecom companies.

But the pushback from Big Telecom has already begun. Telecom lobbyists have begun an all-out effort to stop the FCC. Last week, eighteen Senators (all Republicans) sent a letter to the FCC opposing net neutrality. One Republican senator even announced an effort to prevent the FCC from spending funds to enforce the new rules once they go into effect. Separately, 72 House Democrats sent their own letter to the FCC opposing net neutrality rules.

This type of pressure from Congress won't go unnoticed at the FCC so now's the time to speak out and fight back.

Without strong net neutrality rules, we might have to rely upon the good will of large telecoms to protect our access to the diversity of political perspectives. We might have to trust companies like Comcast, which actively and secretly interfered with users' ability to access popular video, photo and music sharing applications; AT&T, which censored anti-Bush comments made by Pearl Jam's lead singer during a concert; and Verizon Wireless, which blocked text messages between a pro-choice reproductive rights group and its members.

We can't let the corporate lobbyists win. What good is free speech if powerful corporations have the power to stifle viewpoints they find objectionable?

Show the FCC that there is strong public support for net neutrality. Sign our petition today.

And don't be fooled by Lying Loser McCain's "Internet Freedom Act." Like "Clear Skies" and "Healthy Forests," its actual purpose is to achieve the exact opposite of its name.

KY Rep. Charlie Hoffman Eats Boogers - Pass It On

And probably lots of other gross stuff that I'd love to specify, but I promised my mama I wouldn't get arrested for anything except civil disobedience.

Yep, you guessed it - the Georgetown, KY Democrat wants to make it a crime - punishable by jail time - to say rude things on the Internet.

Is he trying to bring the world economy to a screeching halt?

As David Adams at the Bluegrass Policy Blog puts it:

Rep. Charle Hoffman Eats Boogers

The headline you just read could get me thrown in jail for up to ninety days if the above-referenced booger-eater from Georgetown has his way.

HB 281 prohibits communication via the internet "which causes annoyance or alarm and serves no purpose of legitimate communication."

And since I'm clearly unrepentent, my soon-to-follow second offense would land me in jail for up to a year.

In 2008, it should go without saying that we err on the side of liberty and thick skin on the internet.

Given that it costs municipalities in Kentucky up to $88.44 a day to put someone in our already-overcrowded jails, maybe we can call this the Thin Skinned Tax-Raising Ninny Act of 2008.

Page One Kentucky jumps on the bandwagon (Click the link to see Page One's hysterical photo of Charlie Hoffman virutally eating virtual boogers):

Charlie Hoffman Really Does Eat Boogers

This man. The one pictured right here. He is a known booger eater. Because of him we’re inciting a riot, encouraging annoyance and alarm. Get to it! Go start fights in Hoffman’s name.

As David Adams reports, Rep. Charlie Hoffman (D-Waste of Time) is pushing worthless legislation that would prohibit online communication that causes “annoyance or alarm” and serves no legitimate purpose.

Like David says, telling the peeps on that scary internets about Charlie Hoffman and his booger eating ways could land a blogger in jail for up to 90 days. A second offense carries up to a year in jail as punishment.

Yeah, that’s the ticket. Let’s stifle free speech because a few booger eaters in Frankfort can’t handle criticism. We’re not suggesting that people go crazy by publishing defaming and false material, but come on. What century is this?

Charlie Hoffman. Time and money waster. Another Democrat deserving of a primary opponent.

The late, great Molly Ivins always said the most effective political attack is ridicule. So, everybody, all together now:

Charlie Hoffman Eats Boogers!

Pass it on.

Cross-posted at BlueGrassRoots.