9 thoughts on “Why does this not surprise me?”

  1. Google the guys who worked to get Obama elected are against net neutrality. Does this not surprise you as well? :) Greetings from Singapore, land of corporate rule.

  3. Is there no debatable solution other than to hand over absolute control to either a handful of federal bureaucrats or a handful of business interests? If not, then there is just no honest problem solving going on here, just empty, impotent ideological blustering.

    I have yet to hear word of anything that even remotely sounds like a solution born of intelligent, thoughtful compromise, and honestly, how can you reasonably expect anything of value to sprout from our culture of incessant and laughably hyperbolic attacks on those with whom we disagree?

    I don’t see anybody ginning up an effective solution to a problem as complex and amorphous as this one as long as the primary focus of those involved is to defend a meticulously, if not irrationally, circumscribed patch of political or philosophical turf. Is there no rhetorical gyration too bizarre, too absurd for any of us?

  4. It’s not about handing control over to the government. It’s about creating regulations that preserve the open nature of the Internet. Up to now, all online traffic has been treated equally, but the broadband providers would like very much to stop this.

    Without NN, we’ll very quickly end up in a situation where your cable provider can decide not to let you reach YouTube, or Hulu, or where a broadband provider that also sells phone service (e.g., most of them) might decide that “traffic shaping” to degrade competing VOIP services is a good idea in order to charge more for that local phone service.

    I’m not sure what question you’re actually asking here, but I’ll state for the record that the degree to which “Tea Party” positions mimic both weirdo right-fringe ideas AND ideas that corporate America loves is somewhat surprising for a supposedly “populist” movement.

  5. Well, if this means I run the risk of having my access to certain German websites constrained in any way, then I would like to, at this time, state that I am unequivocally in favor of NN. Please direct any website-specific questions to my publicist. This exhibit is closed.

    Create….regulations….preserve…open…

    It all sounds more or less intrinsically good until we consider who will be creating these as-yet-to-be-conceived preservative regulations. Who? Nemotodic bureaucrats and politicians, right? So…that’s the government, right? The way the FCC, without hesitation, kneels and sucks at the altar of Clear Channel and others should tell us all we need to know about how we can and should trust federal regulators to protect us from corporate influence.

    A critical look at top USDA officials is a worthwhile parallel exercise. Who do we find in those top positions? Monsanto, ADM, and ConAgra execs. The entire federal regulatory system works this way. Is it rational to look to this corrupt machinery for justice? Historical and contemporary shifts in party power haven’t made a dent in the way this works.

    I say let Bill Gates and Steve Jobs settle this with a rousing Turkish whip fight.

  6. “Create….regulations….preserve…open…”

    Exactly.

    “It all sounds more or less intrinsically good until we consider who will be creating these as-yet-to-be-conceived preservative regulations.”

    NN proponents are not saying “Government! Fix this!” NN proponents are actively trying to structure the rules so that the current status quo is preserved.

    That we must deal with FCC types to get this done is, of course, true, but demonizing “Government” doesn’t really help anything. Conflicts of interest of course abound, but my answer to that would be stronger laws preventing revolving-door hiring like that.

    The market alone, though, will not fix this.

  7. I take it you are not entirely comfortable with the Turkish Whip Fight as a cutting edge conflict resolution mechanism.

    Rules come with makers and enforcers. Said makers and enforcers may be known by innocuous titles like “proponents” at the outset of any given movement.

    These makers and enforcers are going to wield extraordinary power. I am confident they will not hesitate to abuse this power to reward their friends and punish their enemies, be they competitors in the arena of business or ideas.

    Who shall wield this power and why? I have no answer. I know only that the more narrowly the power is held, the worse off we all will be.

  8. So what IS your argument here? I state that the government, having created the Internet in the first place, should insist that broadband carrier not discriminate when carrying traffic. What’s needed is a simple mandate, not a complex rulebook. Simpler means less room for corruption.

    Of regulatory corruption, I can agree that trouble brews there — but mandated transparency helps a lot. Sunshine, as they say, is a great disinfectant.

  9. Having lost all control of my rhetorical vector, I am left with no choice but to attempt a dramatic diversion and hereby publicly challenge you to a Turkish Whip Fight. To borrow from the diction of Smoove B, “There will be oil.”