US lawmakers weigh in on ‘net neutrality’



WASHINGTON (AP) — U.S. lawmakers are getting their chance this week to weigh in on the “net neutrality” debate that has pitted Internet activists against big cable companies and prompted a record number of public comments filed to government regulators.

The issue requires lawmakers to walk a delicate political line: Many consumers want to keep the power of cable and wireless providers in check, and they oppose the idea of paid fast lanes on the Internet. But service providers say the latest plan endorsed by the Federal Communications Commission will become a regulatory land mine that will discourage investment.

Read more: http://tech.thaivisa.com/us-lawmakers-weigh-in-on-net-neutrality/7141/

Service providers want to screw consumers, so screw them.

And let's hope the politicians who are getting paid by them to put their oar in are given short shrift, too.

Service providers want to screw consumers, so screw them.

And let's hope the politicians who are getting paid by them to put their oar in are given short shrift, too.

On the one hand I'm with you on that, but on the other I can see that if there is not a profit to be made, why would anybody invest in advances in the technology? We'll be happy with better services.

There is a middle road, I'm sure, that will reward investors but regulate prices for the consumer.

The administration is putting forth the premise that just because you are a big company with a lot of money, you should not discriminate who gets better service and who does not.

A lot of people find this reasonable.

What will eventually happen of course, is that the Government will start to decide the content of the internet, try to impose restrictions ( remember Howard Stern vs the FCC?) and of course get tax more tax money. Obama is a big Government guy who believes (along with the liberal progressives) that the average person is too stupid to decide what is best for him and that the Government should make most decisions.

The administration is putting forth the premise that just because you are a big company with a lot of money, you should not discriminate who gets better service and who does not.

A lot of people find this reasonable.

What will eventually happen of course, is that the Government will start to decide the content of the internet, try to impose restrictions ( remember Howard Stern vs the FCC?) and of course get tax more tax money. Obama is a big Government guy who believes (along with the liberal progressives) that the average person is too stupid to decide what is best for him and that the Government should make most decisions.

Of course in America you're already getting screwed for telecom costs, so you're probably used to it.

Look at what the rest of the world charges and you'll realise that the bases are already heavily loaded in favour of the telcos.

Almost worth another breakup to be honest.

The administration is putting forth the premise that just because you are a big company with a lot of money, you should not discriminate who gets better service and who does not.

A lot of people find this reasonable.

What will eventually happen of course, is that the Government will start to decide the content of the internet, try to impose restrictions ( remember Howard Stern vs the FCC?) and of course get tax more tax money. Obama is a big Government guy who believes (along with the liberal progressives) that the average person is too stupid to decide what is best for him and that the Government should make most decisions.

It's not about content, it's about bandwidth. Too many dog-whistle terms in your post to be taken seriously.