1
Anonymous
@soapbox
21 Dec 2010 6:36PM
• 3,113 views • 1 attachment

They'll Stop at Nothing: Dems Vote to Regulate the Net

OK, now we have the USA starting to take over the internet. This is just the beginning IMO. I really think that now that they have a foot in the door they are about to kick it wide open.
Do you honestly think that they will stop with just regulating bandwiths and shit?
I can almost see them making the internet child safe with no one allowed to swear,voice bad opinions about the Gov or even looking at porn.
I think everyone posting on sites such as this one can be expected to be tracked and perhaps prosecuted for opinions or even looking at pictures.
This is just the start to controlling the sheep they think they own.
Anyone have any opinions they want to add to this post?

reply favorite add to gallery permalink Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.

Replies 51

1
Anonymous
21 Dec 2010 6:43PM

Welcome to the USSA

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
21 Dec 2010 6:54PM

Uh, the only thing that's been voted on to do is to allow unimpeded home internet access.

I don't see how that's bad.

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
21 Dec 2010 7:01PM

Yes, i agree; welcome to the USSA...

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
21 Dec 2010 7:14PM

@ poster 2: they only see what they wanna see...

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
21 Dec 2010 7:37PM

OP, a link to an article from a known news source might help spur discussion.

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
21 Dec 2010 7:44PM

Hey dumbass, the internet was developed by the US Defense Department!

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
21 Dec 2010 7:57PM

Today, the Internet is not owned or funded by any one institution, organisation, or government, it is a self-sustaining widespread information infrastructure accessible to hundreds of millions of people world-wide. The Internet is, however, directed by the Internet Society (ISOC), which is composed of volunteers. ISOC appoints the IAB (Internet Architecture Board) sub-council, the appointed members of which decide on standards, network resources, and network addresses. The day-to-day issues of Internet operation is taken care by of curtsy of a volunteer group called the IETF (Internet Engineering Task Force).
In brief a small number of governing boards work to establish common standards, few rules or single organization bind the Internet, essentially the Internet is in the most part an ungoverned global network of networks.

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
26 Dec 2010 1:13PM

Hey dumbass, the internet was NOT developed by the US Defense Department! It was the collaborative effort of a group of University Research Departments to assist in inter communication.

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
04 Jan 2011 3:12PM

Which was GOVERNMENT FUNDED dumbass!!! While there are groups that do support the Internet it is far from open! It is in fact teir with the United States on top.
make old legal!

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
16 Jan 2011 4:01PM

What??? Don't any of you know....AL GORE said HE invented the internet! Are you guys trying to say our savior, Al Gore is a liar??? Psshhawwww! Although, I do wish his global warming would start so that I wouldn't have to go outsite right now and shovel 3 feet of snow of my walkway....

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
21 Dec 2010 7:47PM

http://news.cnet.com/8301-30686_3-20026283-266.html

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
21 Dec 2010 8:10PM

This doesn't sound all that bad. Granted I'm measuring against the general trend to 1984 style government we see in every Western country, but it's still not that bad. I found the bit about different regs for wired and wireless pretty funny. I guess cellphones have their own interwebz now?

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
21 Dec 2010 8:24PM

"The rules prohibit access providers from blocking lawful content, applications, services, or nonharmful devices. (Blocking illegal fire sharing, which, in part, kicked off the latest version of this long-running drama, is not prohibited.)

My question is this, how and who decides what is "illegal" File* sharing and what isn't. Is downloading torrent files illegal? No, not if the material downloaded is unprotected property, so does this mean that my isp is going to be able to see and watch what my torrent files are and only block the ones that are illegal?.....no its going to block all my torrents or severely choke them up, at that point where does it stop? New groups? FTP downloads? etc etc.

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
22 Dec 2010 1:44AM

No, if they block your legal torrents they're breaking the law. That's the point. This isn't perfect, but it's a step in the right direction and has almost no downside.

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
MadCamel
View posts View profile
22 Dec 2010 7:14AM

As an experienced network operator I can say that there is a LOT of misinformation on this subject floating around. It's something that is very critical to the future of communication, and will affect many large corporation's bottom lines.

Network Neutrality: We need it. People's data should flow freely and not be shaped/mangled/etc. Do you want your youtube/netflix/hulu/etc to be slow? Do you want to have ultra-slow connections to companies or individuals that cannot afford to pay YOUR provider extra money, on top of what they are already paying their own provider? Sites like this one could not exist under these conditions.

As a quick and dirty example, Comcast purposefully underprovisions connections from their network to the internet so they are congested and slow. This forces content providers to pay Comcast's highly inflated rates to locate extra servers within Comcast's network. If they want Comcast's(the largest US ISP) users to have good speeds, they must pay this extortion.

That said, 90%+ of proposed network neutrality regulation is wrong, including the ones recently brought up before the FCC. These proposed regulations are worse than nothing - they contain -large- loopholes that will legitimatise the type of behaviour mentioned above. If you care about the 'net (and as I see it the future of the way humans communicate as a whole), I suggest you educate yourself on the issues at hand and vote + harass politicians accordingly.

Also, the US is planning a country-wide internet blocklist. This is up for review again in January.. The blocklist would be managed much like the UK's blocklist, which has arbitrarily blocked motherless and many other sites without reason or recourse. If you want to be able to continue using this site, you should probably speak out against this.

Please don't let greedy asshats ruin the one cool thing us peons have left, and turn the US internet into an even bigger joke compared to what the rest of the world has. They've been trying HARD the past few months.

Resources:
http://www.eff.org/issues/net-neutrality
http://www.eff.org/coica
http://demandprogress.org/

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
22 Dec 2010 8:33AM

It's just as bad here...you get banned for posting your opinions. It isn't free here. We're used to censorship at Motherless. You can post a 5-year-old in sexy attire, but say nigger and you're banned, You can post animal sex but you can't satirize society and their mores.

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
22 Dec 2010 10:00PM

Nah you can say whatever. If you spam though, that's where the problem starts.

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
22 Dec 2010 11:27PM

Well, you said it. Now ask yourself, are you banned?

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
27 Dec 2010 4:18AM

10 times

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
22 Dec 2010 4:37PM

When liberal commies can't get free web porn, the revolution begins. Watch.

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
23 Dec 2010 2:16AM

This government will be remember in history NOT as having the first black p******** BUT the government that destroy America. People that agreed with everything this government do is blind as a fucker. They think they are above everyone and everyone else is below them. I can go on and on but basically they already did it with health care,auto industry,banks,and more that we will never find out about. They want to control everything. It won't stop with internet,next will be your cellphone and text. What they should do if they are so worry about internet slowing down FIRST thing they should do is go to all these company and they them to delete all accts that people don't use. Every site I go to,like youtube;acct hasn't been login in for years is still there. And why do all these company need to have hundreds of website that all point to their own site. MAYBE YOUR SITE SUCK THATS WHY NO ONE VISIT;quit wasting bandwidth pointing to your useless site. Just go to Whois and see how many company have more than one site. Fuck if we want to see a fucking franchise we can see it in the real world! Well I forgot what I was writing about but the point is government ruin everything!

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
23 Dec 2010 6:27PM

With fools like you who can't type in coherent english in the voting pool I'm sure we're all doomed.

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
24 Jan 2011 3:30PM

You better look up your own spelling before you criticize others, LOL. Typical left-wing ploy....when you can't disprove the facts try to discredit by other means.

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
26 Dec 2010 5:02PM

Giving service providers the option of putting prices on the types of content users view may restrict the medium’s greatest advantage: its free-flowing river of ideas and reservoir of information at a cheap cost. By allowing providers to price which content you access, the FCC might eventually be able to put a price on what you post, too, which could lead to censorship.

A young Philadelphia entrepreneur working in the new-media of 1722—the printing press—wrote: “Without freedom of thought, there can be no such thing as wisdom; and no such thing as public liberty, without freedom of speech.” Benjamin Franklin was right then, and he is right today.

Americans deserve to keep the Internet as it was intended. The less the federal government intrudes on the Internet today, the more individual liberty flows freely down the road of tomorrow.
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010/12/22/dont-tread-internet/#disqus_thread

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
26 Dec 2010 10:59PM

Why the hell is the word p******** censored but FUCK is not? Doesn't make any damn fucking sense, does it Mr. p********? OBAMA SUCKS.

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
28 Dec 2010 10:21PM

Welcome to Internet 2.0... Enjoy shopping here...

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
29 Dec 2010 6:49AM

Wait. WWe can say nigger and faggot but not p********?
I lol'd.

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
29 Dec 2010 11:07PM

@ op, they are going to track you down as well for viewing and posting on this site. Looks like we all go down together. See you all in prison fuckers :)

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
MadCamel
View posts View profile
31 Dec 2010 4:25PM

Nothing illegal about this site. If you post illegal content on here we will report you to the authorities, as the law requires us to do. Personally I can't figure out why pedos come here to get busted all the time, I guess they are just stupid and think moralless means lawless.

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
31 Dec 2010 9:26PM

I just wonder why more ppl don't bitch about girls fucking dogs, etc. I mean, that's also illegal in many jurisdictions.

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
31 Dec 2010 9:28PM

^ Scare tactic...?

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
03 Jan 2011 10:44PM

Thanks to you and more than 300,000 other Americans who have signed our petition opposing the "Internet Blacklist Bill" we've been able to put the brakes on this terrible legislation.

The bill -- formally called the Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act (COICA) -- would give government officials the power to force Internet service providers to block your access to certain sites. It's shockingly similar to what goes on in places like China and Iran -- and it's the kind of thing that's just not supposed to happen here.

We delivered your petition to the Senate's most powerful players, and one bold Senator -- Oregon's Ron Wyden -- made it clear that he's on our side: He put what's known as a "hold" on the bill, blocking it from passage this session.

As the New Year begins and the new Congress is sworn in, will you sign on to our message of thanks to Ron Wyden, and ask him to keep fighting through next session?

The big business lobby wants to censor the Internet, and is putting lots of pressure on Wyden to back down: the bill will almost certainly be taken up anew when the Senate reconvenes, and we need him and other Senators to stand strong.

Please click here to let Senator Wyden know that you appreciate his stand in support of Internet freedom, and that we'll have his back as he presses forward.

Thanks for keeping up the fight.

-- The Demand Progress team

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
04 Jan 2011 3:25PM

China and Iran are really not doing that. The UK, Canada, Australia are. Dunno about the US so I guess with this legislation they're falling into line? China is one of the most free and fastest connections out there currently
make old legal!

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
06 Jan 2011 5:21AM

The FCC is Obama's plan to get the leftist welfare freaks to riot before the next election. The FCC is going to regulate everything on the Web. Porn will be illegal. This will cause mass rioting.

Think I'm kidding? Watch.

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
06 Jan 2011 1:06PM

If you guys think porn will be Illegal your all idiots...its a multi billion dollar business in the US alone without porn think of how shitty our economy would be... That being said yea they may regulate porn by making free sites illegal but they pay sites would stay and most likely become even more expensive than it already is.

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
06 Jan 2011 8:17PM

To the previous poster. Your right and also wrong to think it will remain around, at least legally. Everytime the government caters to people or organizations with polititions in their back pocket, it is in the governments' intrest to cater to the pay off's they got from them, and look forward to the profits that they will make in the law enforcement that will follow. People will continue to do what they like to do, and take the risks that go allong with it. Just like prohibition back in the 20s. Don't worry what can be done to you, because it will, weather you like it or not. Like Jim Morrison said, "Your all fuckin slaves"

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
07 Jan 2011 11:10AM

the dems have no power to pass any new laws...so nothing to worry about...it's the republicans who the last time they were in power covered up naked statutes cause they saw them as pornographic. they are the ones who will try to stop all porn on the net

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
08 Jan 2011 4:02PM

The only way to stop americans taking over the world is to kill the fuckers, just a thought!

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
09 Jan 2011 2:48AM

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-501465_162-20027837-501465.html

STANFORD, Calif. - p******** Obama is planning to hand the U.S. Commerce Department authority over a forthcoming cybersecurity effort to create an Internet ID for Americans, a White House official said here today.

It's "the absolute perfect spot in the U.S. government" to centralize efforts toward creating an "identity ecosystem" for the Internet, White House Cybersecurity Coordinator Howard Schmidt said.

That news, first reported by CNET, effectively pushes the department to the forefront of the issue, beating out other potential candidates including the National Security Agency and the Department of Homeland Security. The move also is likely to please privacy and civil liberties groups that have raised concerns in the past over the dual roles of police and intelligence agencies.

The announcement came at an event today at the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research, where U.S. Commerce Secretary Gary Locke and Schmidt spoke.

The Obama administration is currently drafting what it's calling the National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace, which Locke said will be released by the p******** in the next few months. (An early version was publicly released last summer.)

"We are not talking about a national ID card," Locke said at the Stanford event. "We are not talking about a government-controlled system. What we are talking about is enhancing online security and privacy and reducing and perhaps even eliminating the need to memorize a dozen passwords, through creation and use of more trusted digital identities."

The Commerce Department will be setting up a national program office to work on this project, Locke said.

Details about the "trusted identity" project are unusually scarce. Last year's announcement referenced a possible forthcoming smart card or digital certificate that would prove that online users are who they say they are. These digital IDs would be offered to consumers by online vendors for financial transactions.

Schmidt stressed today that anonymity and pseudonymity will remain possible on the Internet. "I don't have to get a credential if I don't want to," he said. There's no chance that "a centralized database will emerge," and "we need the private sector to lead the implementation of this," he said.

Inter-agency rivalries to claim authority over cybersecurity have exited ever since many responsibilities were centralized in the Department of Homeland Security as part of its creation nine years ago. Three years ago, proposals were were circulating in Washington to transfer authority to the secretive NSA, which is part of the U.S. Defense Department.

In March 2009, Rod Beckstrom, director of Homeland Security's National Cybersecurity Center, resigned through a letter that gave a rare public glimpse into the competition for budgetary dollars and cybersecurity authority. Beckstrom said at the time that the NSA "effectively controls DHS cyber efforts through detailees, technology insertions," and has proposed moving some functions to the agency's Fort Meade, Md., headquarters.

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
09 Jan 2011 2:49AM

Motherless sensors the word 'p********', lol

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
09 Jan 2011 2:49AM

p-r-esident

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
09 Jan 2011 11:25PM

...i thought this was a PORN site??

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
10 Jan 2011 9:58AM

No you dumn ass!

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
16 Jan 2011 3:53PM

It always makes me laugh when p******** Reagan was going to blow up the world (and wound up defeating Russian communism) and Bush (who I agree is a moron) was "Hitler" for wanting warrantless wiretaps according to democrats... yet the left-wingers and socialists think its ok Tipper Gore and her left wing committee for wanting to take over and control the media and recording industry in the '80's. If it were Bush trying to do something that's MUCH WORSE, take over control of the internet, they'd be howling and screaming, but since its Obama trying to pull a "Gore" now with the internet, we hear nothing from the left wing nut cases simply because they are idealogues that agree with him politcally. How come these ignorant loud mouth idealogues aren't out protesting the infringment of the 1st Amendment now?? Oh yeah, 'cuz their ignorant idealogues.

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
18 Jan 2011 3:47AM

Bloody hell. Did we get enough of this shit with Bush and Republicans after the whole Patriot Act thing? And now people are calling Obama a tyrant with all these conspiracy theories?

Jesus H Christ people. Stop with your conspiracy theories and stop being so fucking extremist. Obama isn't a foreign Muslim Communist Nazi Chinese spawn of Satan. Just like how Bush wasn't a Nazi Fanatical Tyrannical Anti-Christ.

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
20 Jan 2011 3:15AM

You need to read a newspaper, because you obviously have no idea what Obama is trying to do to the internet with the FCC, nor what he's trying to do with environmental restrictions through the EPA. Ignorance is not bliss, sir.

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
18 Jan 2011 5:17AM

Conspiracy? Read the fucking story on the leftist rag CBS news, above, you idiot.

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
18 Jan 2011 5:18AM

Do you want an Internet ID while your stupid ass surfs Motherless?

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-501465_162-20027837-501465.html

I didn't think so. You fucking commies better wake up.

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
21 Jan 2011 5:01AM

Verizon challenges FCC's net neutrality rules

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110120/ap_on_hi_te/us_tec_verizon_fcc

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
24 Jan 2011 2:18AM

PROTIP: (Real) net neutrality is not regulation of the Internet, it is regulation of the ISPs.
Make sure everyone knows this.

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.
1
Anonymous
24 Jan 2011 3:25PM

right...and how many times have you bought the Brooklyn Bridge? Gullable ignoramus.

reply permalink parent Share
Quote Strike
Anonymous
Anonymous
note, attachments may take a moment to show up.