According to FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai. There is a 322 page document that is not being made available to the public (the decision to keep the document secret was made by Chairman Wheeler) that would give the FCC the ability to regulate the way its citizens are allowed to access the Web. Until the documents are made public It is impossible to know how this might affect Maidsafe. This might be the way the oligarchy plans on fighting this new technology. We should keep a keen eye on this. Here is link to the article about Ajit Pai. http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/computers/item/20102-net-neutrality-is-a-trojan-horse-virus-infecting-the-internet
Its corporate terrorism in action. What’s this Patriot Act part 3? That we even know of it is the result of increasing transparency. When the FBI head was trying to say the FBI had rights and among those rights was a right to spy on the public through back doors in smart phones we have to know they fear transparency because it can botch their next false flag in ways they cant cover up. We still havent got rid of the piece of shit patriot act. Its repeal needs to be tied to the next NDAA
Ajit is a Republican- they are the ones that want top down censor media (despite Hollywood) that brought us the Patriot Act, that give us the false flags generally. Also ABC is crap even if slightly transparent in this case. And despite the cited shill democratic polling agency Hart the public supports neutrality overwhelmingly. Denying that is like saying that caps aren’t melting and warming is a myth. Like worrying about the supposed “job creators,” instead of the plight of the public at their unnecessary hands.
It is bad business and it inconveniences Internet users. But is government regulation the answer to the problem? Constitutionalists have noted that in this case the antidote is worse than the poison: granting government the ability to regulate the Internet will grant government control of the Internet.
To be honest, I’m really happy about this.
Statists on this forum have been rooting for this forever because the free market can’t fix this (because of corporatism). According to them, the solution to excessive government regulation was more government regulation.
Now the damn thing hasn’t even started, and it’s already failed. Because of “corporatism”, of course.
On this forum I’ve been consistent in my opposition to “net neutrality”, which in reality is a statist concept. The likely outcome should not surprise anyone.
Statists’ next idea: prevent corporatism by introducing totalitarianism. How original.
But we need to be clear that Obama has been pro neutrality and the majority recognize that this is pro free speech. We do need to see stuff before it becomes law to prevent a lip service outcome for something completely toxic.
Its been the right all along that wants a sponsor (censorship) based top down media to replace the open internet and free speech, its the right that brought us the patriot act
The fear with this closed act is that the it will be a bill written by the sponsors industry and cable and telecom with a nice name pinned on. We need neutrality without question and in its strictest interpretation.
Those numbers by the supposedly democratic Hart group seem quite questionable, (ABC is crap- hardly transparency but still possibly helpful in this case.) Ajit is a Republican shill, that has to be kept in mind.