I had missed this. Looks like I need to contact my elected officials and remind them that they work for me.
Thanks for your thoughts on the Great Grand Child. Children are a joy and not everyone gets to meat their Great Grand Children. It was just a shock at first.
This is much to do about nothing. The story is completely misleading when it suggests that there will be an attempt to “turn the internet over to the telephone and cable companies”. The hysteria seems to be over the rejection of an amendment wherein ISP’s would not be allowed to charge end web users for certain information. If this amendment were embraced, the Telco’s would not be allowed to charge for video services routed over the web. This would effectively kill thousands of future jobs (of which one is mine) that rely on Telco use of the World Wide Web. Please understand that this bill has nothing to with someone charging you to use google or see what’s new at Moveon, but rather it allows the Telco’s the ability to charge for video services such as “video on demand” or services that could compared to “basic cable”. This is very much akin to what happened with Napster. Its simple: if you want to surf the web, have at it. If you want to subscribe to AT&T’s Video Over Internet Protocol, have at it. So before you contact your elected official, I suggest you first read and understand the language contained within the bill.
I seem to remember the House backing down from just this sort of bill late last summer. but I can't recall enough detail to link to something. Disturbing to think they would even consider trying to rein in the greatest engine for the production of truth since the invention of cross examination, but I just can't see that sort of legislation as ever being successful. I guess we'll see.
3 Comments:
I had missed this. Looks like I need to contact my elected officials and remind them that they work for me.
Thanks for your thoughts on the Great Grand Child. Children are a joy and not everyone gets to meat their Great Grand Children. It was just a shock at first.
God Bless America, God Save The Republic.
By David Schantz, at 8:36 PM
This is much to do about nothing. The story is completely misleading when it suggests that there will be an attempt to “turn the internet over to the telephone and cable companies”. The hysteria seems to be over the rejection of an amendment wherein ISP’s would not be allowed to charge end web users for certain information. If this amendment were embraced, the Telco’s would not be allowed to charge for video services routed over the web. This would effectively kill thousands of future jobs (of which one is mine) that rely on Telco use of the World Wide Web. Please understand that this bill has nothing to with someone charging you to use google or see what’s new at Moveon, but rather it allows the Telco’s the ability to charge for video services such as “video on demand” or services that could compared to “basic cable”. This is very much akin to what happened with Napster. Its simple: if you want to surf the web, have at it. If you want to subscribe to AT&T’s Video Over Internet Protocol, have at it. So before you contact your elected official, I suggest you first read and understand the language contained within the bill.
By Anonymous, at 5:59 AM
I seem to remember the House backing down from just this sort of bill late last summer. but I can't recall enough detail to link to something. Disturbing to think they would even consider trying to rein in the greatest engine for the production of truth since the invention of cross examination, but I just can't see that sort of legislation as ever being successful. I guess we'll see.
By Roger Fraley, at 3:05 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home