Julius Caesar At FCC Wants To 'Regulate' The Internet (Drudge Headlines)

Reuters ^ | October 22, 2009 | John Poirier

[visualops]

Actually what you are describing is what the government will allow the providers to continue doing. But other than those “reasonable” restrictions, the network backbones will ostensibly not be allowed to regulate traffic over their networks. I think this is a problem not because the big network providers should be allowed to rule the roost so to speak simply because they have the means, but because anything the government gets involved in- especially in the interest of “fairness”- they invariably break and twist to suit their own needs. What this will end up doing, is taking away content control from private business and free enterprise, and putting it in the hands of the government. I believe the big companies like Google are for this because it will just have the government do their dirty work for them in opening doors to more consumers by leap-frogging over the competition.

[okie01]

I believe the big companies like Google are for this because it will just have the government do their dirty work for them in opening doors to more consumers by leap-frogging over the competition.

Historically, Big Business has been very comfortable with Big Government.

One the one hand, Big Business is confident that they can influence and maintain control over Big Government.

On the other hand, nothing stifles competition like Big Government. And one thing Big Business does not like is competition.

Think about it...

[visualops]

Yep

[Vermont Lt]

I spent 15 years of my life building cable plant around the country. That construction project was the largest and most sophisticated network that has been completed without government funds.

Yes, we used the public way and we paid handsomely for it. Yes, we made a ton of money on it as well.

But, we funded it and we managed it.

Now the government wants to control it.

Thats just nuts.

[safetysign]

My name is Brutus. We need Caeser’s head.

[jackmercer]

Are you totally insane? Net neutrality is actually capitalistic freedom, it’s a means to increased competition, efficiency and expansion of the fiber infrastructure.

The various carriers are opposed to this because of potential bottlenecks and router jams that will make them throttle speeeds and raise prices. Customers will get choosy and go shopping for a cheaper, faster carrier.

This will cause the companies to have to put in more dark fiber and become more efficient and competitive to keep their customers as the bandwidth and router speeds across the country expand and develop. I’m not pulling this scenario out of my ass, this is exactly what happened in the mid to late nineties as broadband started catching on.

This is good news for the internet infrastructure in the U.S. We are finally using up the excess fiber built in the tech boom and ready to start moving to the next generation of the internt, and that as always, is being driven by fierce competition.

The only regulation the FCC is doing here is blocking CORPORATE regulation of traffic so they don’t have to get busy being capitilists, i.e., working on effieciency, investing excess capital in infrastructure, competing with one another etc.

Drudge’s headline makes no friggin sense. He’s a dolt.