Posted on 03/02/2015 12:42:41 PM PST by Kaslin
RUSH: By the way, folks, just as I predicted, a bunch of liberals, a bunch of leftists have started learning what is in net neutrality, and they are unhappy. The Wall Street Journal has a headline: "Liberals Mugged by Obamanet -- Buyer's remorse is already setting in for Google and other 'net neutrality' proponents." You know what the one thing that none of these people ever figured on? None of them, none of these leftists ever dreamed Obama would do what they have now discovered is part of net neutrality.
That is: The Regime is going to regulate content.
They all thought the Regime was simply gonna punish the ISPs (the Internet Service Providers) and the telecoms for all of the throttling or for fast-lane preference to the highest-paying customers, and freezing out the little guy trying to stream whatever perversion he's watching on Netflix tonight. Instead the Regime is going to regular content. Exactly as I, El Rushbo, predicted to you.
Speaking of Google, have you seen what they want to do with their search results now? Google search results now return the most popular results. Like if you go out and search "perversion and depravity in Hollywood," just to pick a subject -- or, in other words, House of Cards. If you go search that, you'll get a list of articles based on how many clicks those articles have received. So the Google search results have nothing to do with content, per se.
I think they do. The Google guys tinker with this behind the scenes. But nevertheless, what you are seeing in a Google search result is popularity coupled with the Google guys' preference. I mean, you're never gonna see RushLimbaugh.com at the top of anything unless I'm in trouble, for example. But Google has now decided to change it. Get this. "Google wants their search results to be based on the sites that are the most factual." (interruption) No. No, no.
You might think, "Well, hey, Rush, you know it's about time. Somebody needs to police Internet for what's right and wrong out there!" Wait a second. Who gets to decide what's factual? I'll give you one subject. Look at global warming. I guarantee you that everybody in Google thinks it's real; that man's causing it. Google believes every bit of liberal drivel, propaganda about it. By the same token, anybody who doesn't, anybody considered a "denier," will never, ever be revealed in a Google search.
If indeed they get to determine what you get returned on a search based on "factual content," who gets to decide what's right and wrong? Facts are not facts anymore, particularly in politics. So whose facts? Who gets to determine that? That's what Google wants to do. Now, it's not just something I guess they can automatically do. I'll get into more detail here as the program unfolds. The basic point here is that a bunch of leftists are starting to get it.
It's slowly starting to dribble out.
They still haven't released these pages. They still haven't released the 302 pages of what net neutrality is, but some people who know what's in there are starting to leak it. So the details are slowly becoming known, and people are getting very, very worried. Like there is the ability for Obama -- the Regime, administration, government, regulatory agencies -- to regulate content. I knew it. I had a conversation with some people about this years ago.
The big concern from opponents of net neutrality was just that, that what was actually being set up here was a government regulatory agency that would police content and make sure that every point of view had equal access. It would be the same thing as if the government could regulate cable TV. Here's Fox News at #1, and MSNBC at #25. "Well, that's not fair! That's not neutral. That's not equal."
So if there were a government agency that could regulate the audiences for Fox News, they would see to it that Fox lost some audience and that MSNBC picked some up. That's what they want to do with the Internet. That's what net neutrality is, and none of the proponents even gave that a thought. They all thought it was about getting even with big corporate interests and punishing them. They all thought it was about fast lanes and the last mile and all this gobbledygook about equalizing things for the little guy.
What it really is, is the government empowered to punish points of view it doesn't agree with, and that is slowly being learned.
It's being discovered.
It's trickling out -- and they're very, very much worried about it.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Okay. We're gonna start on the phones. Peoria, Illinois. This is Brandon, Brandon, I'm glad you called. It's great to have you with us on the EIB Network. Hello, sir.
Why the dig at Netflix, I wonder- I don’t see much perversion on there.
In fact I am about to cancel it because there is rarely anything new I want to watch.
Already finished third season of House of Cards (U.S. version)?
I can see net neutrality doing real damage to online gaming which has plenty of gamers all across the political spectrum.
Typical liberals. Always slow to catch up with reality. They were warned.
Watching them cheer lead for net neutrality reminds me of when they were cheer leading for obamacare.
Fact.
As determined by Snopes, Politifact, and what. Media Matters?
No dictator can co-exist with freedom of speech.
Try as it can, the FCC’s jurisdiction would only apply to networks and servers and sites hosted within US borders, right? A site hosted in, say, Panama or Japan or India could still thumb its nose at them.
Considering foreign hosting alternatives for FR yet?
I have absolutely no use for Netflix. I have tried to sign up several times but could not find movies that interested me and when I finally found one, they didn’t have it in stock. So I gave up
The only thing worth watching on Netflix is Breaking Bad, and fargo (movie). Even the kids shows suck!
Fully expect accelerated efforts to pass a UN International “Internet Protection” treaty any time now, all in the name of:
1. thwarting terrorism / inciting violence, such as ISIS recruitment, via hate / radical / misinformation site information monitoring and filtering to label and restrict access, to “protect” us.
2. ensure privacy of world citizens to “protect” against improper use of Personal Information data - authorities will need to monitor PII / PHI data to ensure compliance.
3. protect vital infrastructure, such as banking, health, food, energy, government essential services - authorities will overtly need to monitor IP addresses.
Note, the USA ICANN ceded control of the internet
http://www.forbes.com/sites/emmawoollacott/2014/03/15/us-government-cedes-control-of-the-internet/
FCC gets control of the US internet last week.
Now Google is going to work with Microsoft and left orientated “Fact-checking” sites to “protect” US subjects from mis/dis-information.
Things are moving fast to usher in a Global Tyrannical Dem-Socialist reign.
Control information dissemination
Crash the dollar / EU
Reconstitute governments and economies to usher in a “A New World Order” (power & social structure), just as Bush I literally stated, 25 years ago...
Netfick was the big pusher of this.. they want the streaming video qos without paying for that top tier with out paying for it...it like wanting a private jet at your beck and call but at budget airlines standby rates...
There the 10 ton King Kong at the all you can eat bandwidth buffet eating with the regular people.. you’re just going to get what’s left for scraps
Information will always find a way if it wants to.
Even with all that, it’s still whack-a-mole.
On CNBC they went around asking people what net neutrality was. Very few even knew it had something to do with the internet. One guy knew. He said that the Democrats wanted to make the internet fair, but the Republicans were bowing to the big internet companies and didn’t want the little guys to have access to the internet by making it cost too much.
“Try as it can, the FCC’s jurisdiction would only apply to networks and servers and sites hosted within US borders, right?”
Wrong, because the foreign servers can be monitored for content and their IP addresses can then be filtered out at the intermediate domestic routers responsible for forwarding the IP packets. The end result would be monitoring and censoring of foreign located servers who are then unable to deliver IP packets to domestic American clients.
Then they would be no better than China, and in effect, squander their moral credibility. Whatever ways that system can be gotten around, I’m all for them.
Doesn't Google already censor search results for China and other oppressive nations?
Why do you think it will affect gaming?
Gaming takes major bandwidth and the feds are going to drive the costs out of reach for many.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.