Members Coaster Posted January 11, 2011 Author Members Share Posted January 11, 2011 ok, this thread is done, i'm requesting it be closed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ernest Buckley Posted January 11, 2011 Members Share Posted January 11, 2011 Honestly, I can`t wait. I think the Internet is completely out of hand. There are things on here that no one should be allowed to see. And I`m sure I have only seen about 1% of it but thats enough for me. We`ve had similar discussions in the past about regulation but I think it`ll be something the FCC should definitely have some hand in. It`ll be interesting to see how its done but I know the problem is huge and its been out of hand for some time. I for one, am for more more regulations across the board. Call me a Socialist/Communist if you want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members spokenward Posted January 11, 2011 Members Share Posted January 11, 2011 ok, this thread is done, i'm requesting it be closed. Threads don't inevitably make a beeline for the truth. I understand the fundamental complaint about FCC regulation of the web. I also understand why Congress wants to get involved in the worst way (literally). This issue exposes some ugly truths about political influences. Cable vendors built their businesses on the purchase of political influence. And you can certainly make a case that the FCC is captive to political control as well. So, if this matters to you, explore your position and ignore posts that you feel attack you personally. Or let this one slip. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members blue2blue Posted January 11, 2011 Members Share Posted January 11, 2011 I'm definitely not for internet censorship. One can censor his own internet connection (for the sake of his own or his household's sensibilities). The means are there and they're pretty good. It doesn't mean bad stuff can't occasionally sneak through. But I simply can't imagine any sort of prior restraint system for the internet that could prevent anything bad from happening, even if we did have draconian, nanny-state type censorship. That said -- and with the understanding that some folks are quite reasonably worried about slippery slopes -- the current net neutrality regulations were set up to help assure the free flow of content and competition free of constraints put on content provision competitors by companies that comingle internet service provision with entertainment content provision (like subscription cable TV channels, etc). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members sventvkg Posted January 11, 2011 Members Share Posted January 11, 2011 I don't see this as being a political rant in the least. It's completely pertinent and important to us as Americans and to us as musicians and artists. Why are you so reactive? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Anderton Posted January 11, 2011 Members Share Posted January 11, 2011 Well, I have the definitive answer on this subject. As I mentioned, the Feds monitor the political forum thread and you'll be thrilled to know that the FCC thinks I have a bitchin' moderating style, and they've asked if I'd be willing to moderate the entire internet. I said yes, and they sent me this nice little certificate signed by (seriously!) the President himself. And you should see what I get to do beyond banning!! This is going to be fun! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members the stranger Posted January 11, 2011 Members Share Posted January 11, 2011 Sounds like a free for all, without the "moron" thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Coaster Posted January 12, 2011 Author Members Share Posted January 12, 2011 Well, I have the definitive answer on this subject. As I mentioned, the Feds monitor the political forum thread and you'll be thrilled to know that the FCC thinks I have a bitchin' moderating style, and they've asked if I'd be willing to moderate the entire internet. I said yes, and they sent me this nice little certificate signed by (seriously!) the President himself. And you should see what I get to do beyond banning!! This is going to be fun! **horse** -- ** hockey** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ernest Buckley Posted January 12, 2011 Members Share Posted January 12, 2011 Well, I have the definitive answer on this subject. As I mentioned, the Feds monitor the political forum thread and you'll be thrilled to know that the FCC thinks I have a bitchin' moderating style, and they've asked if I'd be willing to moderate the entire internet. I said yes, and they sent me this nice little certificate signed by (seriously!) the President himself. And you should see what I get to do beyond banning!! This is going to be fun! Craig, As long as you`re in charge, I`m not worried about it. EB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members philbo Posted January 12, 2011 Members Share Posted January 12, 2011 I'm all for giving Craig control of the web! Let's do it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Philter Posted January 12, 2011 Members Share Posted January 12, 2011 i will admit i did make the mistake and mixed up red/blue in the matrix movie. i apparently forgot which color did what and i sincerely apologize if this bothered you so deeply that you needed to call me mentally ill. i regret that.obviously this is all my fault, in every way imaginable.once again, is this how you repsond to everyone who has a different opinion that yourself? i cant imagine that works too well for ya buddy. Conspiracy theories everywhere are not quite the same as just "different opinions." Some people lose touch with reality over them. It doesn't mean that they're never true, but it's not the same as just a difference of opinion. The burden of proof falls heavily on the one calling conspiracy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Coaster Posted January 12, 2011 Author Members Share Posted January 12, 2011 Conspiracy theories everywhere are not quite the same as just "different opinions." Some people lose touch with reality over them. It doesn't mean that they're never true, but it's not the same as just a difference of opinion. The burden of proof falls heavily on the one calling conspiracy. i never brought up the words conspiracy theory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Philter Posted January 12, 2011 Members Share Posted January 12, 2011 i never brought up the words conspiracy theory. I could say that I thought the US government brought down the WTC on 9/11 without saying "conspiracy theory" too. ( I don't.) "The first step to the FCC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Coaster Posted January 12, 2011 Author Members Share Posted January 12, 2011 there is no way i can prove something you have made up your mind against. sooo, ever heard of china? i've been there. done any google searches there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Philter Posted January 12, 2011 Members Share Posted January 12, 2011 there is no way i can prove something you have made up your mind against.sooo, ever heard of china? i've been there. done any google searches there? Our own government has been openly critical of Chinese censorship and the lack of Chinese democracy and civil liberties. That seems to contradict your claims, not support them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Coaster Posted January 12, 2011 Author Members Share Posted January 12, 2011 yes our government is wonderful arent they. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Philter Posted January 12, 2011 Members Share Posted January 12, 2011 yes our government is wonderful arent they. If you can't handle any kind of adversarial criticism of your beliefs, how founded in reason can those beliefs be? If they're well-founded in reason, then let's hear it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Coaster Posted January 13, 2011 Author Members Share Posted January 13, 2011 If you can't handle any kind of adversarial criticism of your beliefs, how founded in reason can those beliefs be? If they're well-founded in reason, then let's hear it. [video=youtube;rC7YE3KBxMo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rC7YE3KBxMo&feature=related go ahead and ski pahead to 8 minutes if you cant bear to watch this. oh, and if questioning the governments actions, statements, and cover stories makes a conspiracy theorist then color me with a big crayola. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Cry Logic Posted January 13, 2011 Members Share Posted January 13, 2011 Who's that RT host? She's hot! :thu: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members spokenward Posted January 13, 2011 Members Share Posted January 13, 2011 oh, and if questioning the governments actions, statements, and cover stories makes a conspiracy theorist then color me with a big crayola. When it comes to questioning governments, C., just as a point of information RT's operating budget is a hole plugged the Russian Federation. The Russian media environment is thought to be narrow. 6 national TV stations with the federal government owning 1 and holding a controlling interest in a second; state-owned Gazprom maintains a controlling interest in a third national channel; government-affiliated Bank Rossiya owns controlling interest in a fourth and fifth, while the sixth national channel is owned by the Moscow city administration; roughly 3,300 national, regional, and local TV stations operating with over two-thirds completely or partially controlled by the federal or local governments; satellite TV services are available; 2 state-run national radio networks with a third majority-owned by Gazprom; roughly 2,400 public and commercial radio stations (2007) okay, my source is the CIA factbook, but The Official Lapdogs at the BBC confirm this: An international English-language satellite news TV, RT, is state-funded and aims to present "global news from a Russian perspective" so, you know what they say - "question more." My only beef is with your sourcing. Infowars, Fox News and RT, are a wobbling three legged stool. They all have axes to grind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Surrealistic Posted January 13, 2011 Members Share Posted January 13, 2011 The FCC is out to "crush internet freedom?" Can I just say that as I live in the UK I have only a very vague idea of what the FCC is and seriously doubt that anything they do or say can have any real impact on my internet freedom. At worst they (I'm just guessing here) could impose some sort of control over American ISPs and/or American based websites but please remember that the USA only represents a very small fraction of the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Croakus Posted January 13, 2011 Members Share Posted January 13, 2011 go ahead and ski pahead to 8 minutes if you cant bear to watch this.oh, and if questioning the governments actions, statements, and cover stories makes a conspiracy theorist then color me with a big crayola. No. Suggesting that the attacks in September 2001 were not the work of terrorists and that the media is lying and manipulating the public makes you a conspiracy theorist. In addition, attempting to prove your point by quoting a source like RT makes you naive and proves that you are easily manipulated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Coaster Posted January 13, 2011 Author Members Share Posted January 13, 2011 let those who have ears, listen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Croakus Posted January 13, 2011 Members Share Posted January 13, 2011 let those who have ears, listen. Well who could disagree with such a compelling argument? Avoiding the challenge for proof further undermines your credibility. If you have actual reliable proof of your claims, produce it. For example, actually reading the bill yourself would be a good start. It's freely available online for all U.S. citizens to read and make their own decisions. Here, let me help you with a link: http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-s773/show Edit: In case you don't like OpenCongress for some strange reason, here's the actual Library of Congress site where all bills are published for review: http://thomas.loc.gov/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members spokenward Posted January 13, 2011 Members Share Posted January 13, 2011 Well who could disagree with such a compelling argument? Avoiding the challenge for proof further undermines your credibility. If you have actual reliable proof of your claims, produce it.For example, actually reading the bill yourself would be a good start. It's freely available online for all U.S. citizens to read and make their own decisions. Here, let me help you with a link:http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-s773/showEdit: In case you don't like OpenCongress for some strange reason, here's the actual Library of Congress site where all bills are published for review:http://thomas.loc.gov/ Links like this one can lead to a more informed analysis. Like this one reviewing the "security" aspect in a magazine piece It will be a windfall for those involved in cyber security certification, and academics who have been left in the dust by advances in cybersecurity being developed by entreprenurial firms. If enacted it will create a guild of government certified security professionals that have the luxury of taking the time to qualify. And of course, those that vote for this Act will be able to point to the proactive stance they took when the next cyber embarassement occurs. They will not have done anything to prevent the next cyber incident. But they will have covered their Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.