Government regulators who killed net neutrality became top cable industry lobbyists

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by macUser2007, Jan 19, 2014.

  1. macUser2007 macrumors 65832

    Joined:
    May 30, 2007
    #1
    Government regulators who killed net neutrality became top cable industry lobbyists

    Sadly, it is true. Not unlike the USPTO revolving door, which results in all sorts of "funny" patent applications being approved, with the hope that later on there is a lucrative private sector job, based on having being a good and cooperative "buddy."
     
  2. NT1440 macrumors G4

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    Hartford, CT
    #2
    Anyone who thinks the government isn't owned and operated by Corporations needs to have their head examined. This kind of stuff has been happening for decades upon decades.

    Will the country ever wake up? I fear that the PR campaign won far long ago and now people are too concerned with trying to stay afloat than trying to change things for the better.
     
  3. G51989 macrumors 68030

    G51989

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2012
    Location:
    NYC NY/Pittsburgh PA
    #3
    No, America will never wake up. It is owned by Wall Street and for Wall Street.

    The mega corps won, America lost. America will be bled dry for every last penny it is worth, then Abandoned.
     
  4. thewitt macrumors 68020

    thewitt

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2011
    #4
    Quit electing lawyers. The government is not run by corporations, your corrupt politicians are owned by corporations.

    Follow the money.

    No one should be able to leave public office and step into a multi million dollar private sector job related to the bills they rammed thru Congress.

    No one.
     
  5. APlotdevice, Jan 19, 2014
    Last edited: Jan 19, 2014

    APlotdevice macrumors 68040

    APlotdevice

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2011
    #5
    The problem is that money... LOTS of money... is needed to run a successful campaign in the US. It's pretty much impossible for a truly honest candidate to run against someone receiving corporate "donations", as the latter can run many more ads, hold far more elaborate and numerous PR events, and hire more people to help campaign for them.
     
  6. macUser2007, Jan 20, 2014
    Last edited: Jan 20, 2014

    macUser2007 thread starter macrumors 65832

    Joined:
    May 30, 2007
    #6
    Unfortunately, this "revolving door" does not exist only in the US.

    Perhaps the most egregious example I can think of is Gerhard Schröder, the former German Chancellor, who effectively sold Germany's national security interests to Gazprom, by pushing for and signing the deal for the Russian-German pipeline, then took a job as a Chairman of the Board for the same Gazprom-controlled consortium after he left office.

    But it doesn't make it any easier to accept.
     
  7. Technarchy macrumors 603

    Technarchy

    Joined:
    May 21, 2012
    #7
    This should be a crime. It's crafty bribery at best.
     
  8. APlotdevice macrumors 68040

    APlotdevice

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2011
    #8
    It should be... but for obvious reasons it never will be.
     
  9. VulchR macrumors 68020

    VulchR

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Location:
    Scotland
    #9
    Time to develop the technology for the transfer of information from household-to-household that bypasses the telecommunications industry. Either that, or telecommunications companies should become public utilities.
     
  10. Sydde macrumors 68020

    Sydde

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    #10
    With IPv6, this could be a real possibility. Every home that wants one could have a small wireless relay server, like UWB, forming a massive mesh network. Something like long-range secure wifi bridging. But it would have to get past agencies like the FCC, which are kind of, OIDK, owned by the telecom industry. And anyway, it would be too much like communism or something.
     
  11. VulchR macrumors 68020

    VulchR

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Location:
    Scotland
    #11
    I was thinking along these lines. I wonder if this could be set up using normal WiFi frequencies. If so, the router company that can free us from greedy telecoms and from prying security agencies and hackers, is likely to make a bundle....
     
  12. zin macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 5, 2010
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #12
    I don't think that the FCC has been captured by the industry. If I recall correctly, the FCC doesn't have the necessary authority to regulate telecoms in that way. Their hands seem tied to me.

    The alternative is to beef up the FCC to protect net neutrality, but of course that would require some crazy socialist-commies to pass an economy-bludgeoning bill in Congress.
     
  13. localoid macrumors 68020

    localoid

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2007
    Location:
    America's Third World
    #13
    Sure, you could use said scheme to create an internet (with a lower-case "i") but unless at least one node has a gateway to the Internet (with a upper-case "I") you're not going to have access to the real Internet (with a upper-case "I"), e.g., Google, Apple, Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, etc.

    Getting that gateway to the Internet (with a upper-case "I") usually requires at least one contract with a "telecom", otherwise all you have is a private network.
     
  14. Sydde macrumors 68020

    Sydde

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    #14
    You make a valid point. But if such a movement were to start up and get to critical mass, the commercial players would eventually have to get in on it. One person harvesting YouTube videos from his DSL and posting them on his server node will cause a sort of infestation, as other users grab the video and repost it. Under proper circumstances, people could well be ready en masse to go back to a home-grown-style internet similar to its very roots, forcing the big players to join in. I am not really seeing something like this happening just now, but it could, and what a field-leveler that would be. Even cell companies would have to fear such a development, as much of their infrastructure would start to become redundant (relay servers would eventually become able to move voice communications as well).
     
  15. NT1440 macrumors G4

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    Hartford, CT
    #15
    I strongly suggest people watch the half hour documentary "Free the network" about activists who set up free internet access for the protesters in Tahrir Square in Egypt a few years back.


    There is no reason (other than the privatization of the Internet in the Clinton days) that corporations have to be the gatekeepers. Distributed networks are more than feasible, it just requires enough people running their nodes. I think we'll actually see an "under net" spring up as the internet continues to get further and further clamped down.
     
  16. localoid macrumors 68020

    localoid

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2007
    Location:
    America's Third World
    #16
    Sounds extremely _s_l_o_w_ and limited, and too much like the "good old days" that I remember in the '80s and very early '90s, which actually weren't very good. :eek:

    Back then, at home, I had to use UUCP store-and-forward protocols to send/receive anything from the Internet, including e-mail. It was painfully slow, and in two words, "It sucked."

    I couldn't wait to get back to my workplace or to stop off at a university to get a few minutes worth of "real time" Internet access.

    I ended up buy a 1-meter dish and a satellite receiver so I could have one-way access (downloading) to Usenet groups. But still, to reply, I had to use UUCP via a dialup to a university server. It still was a very _s_l_o_w_ process.

    Back then, there were private networks, include big "global" ones like FidoNet, but these networks didn't have the scope and breadth of the "real" Internet, even as small as the Internet was in the '80s.

    I, for one, wouldn't want to return to these "simpler times". ;)

    You can't "get something for nothing". E.g., someone has to have Internet access and setup a gateway, etc. Usually that means, someone has to have a contract for that connection and pay for it.

    Sure, you could try stealing bandwidth from coffee shops along the route of the network, but sooner or later the huge drain of bandwidth would be noticed and you'd be cutoff.
     
  17. NT1440 macrumors G4

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
    Location:
    Hartford, CT
    #17
    Again, I defer to the documentary. They had all this equipment that they used to provide access in an area where the government had shut it down.

    It's possible, but in the USA you'd probably be in jail pretty quickly.
     
  18. localoid macrumors 68020

    localoid

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2007
    Location:
    America's Third World
    #18
    Sounds great in theory... until you realize you'd still need a big "pipe" to the Internet to be able to support a large number of users Without that pipe, all you have is a crappy private network that has extremely little content and useful, up-to-date, and in-depth information would be in limited supply.

    I've been there and done that. It was called "living in the 1980s."

    If you were fighting in a revolution, and needed some method for basic communications, it would be useful in a very limited way -- but that's all.
     

Share This Page