Topic: Obama says FCC should reclassify internet as a utility (Read 8097 times)

Kimosabe, get a clue of how the world really works.

The internet (i.e. the free market which is why you have it today) is the only free press remaining in the USA.

You are an young idealistic liberal idiot with a functioning vocabulary and extremely discombobulated illogic (you put the cart before the horse w.r.t. internet and free media) because your political religion does not allow you to understand the logic of the asymmetric power of political capture and why collectives always fail in a heap of vested interests corruption. The ONLY way to avoid that is do not form collectives and enable the free market to prosper.

Hey what happened to your threat to put me on ignore?  

     Anarchism, the no-government system of socialism, has a double origin. It is an outgrowth of the two great movements of thought in the economic and the political fields which characterize the nineteenth century, and especially its second part. In common with all socialists, the anarchists hold that the private ownership of land, capital, and machinery has had its time; that it is condemned to disappear; and that all requisites for production must, and will, become the common property of society, and be managed in common by the producers of wealth. And in common with the most advanced representatives of political radicalism, they maintain that the ideal of the political organization of society is a condition of things where the functions of government are reduced to a minimum, and the individual recovers his full liberty of initiative and action for satisfying, by means of free groups and federations--freely constituted--all the infinitely varied needs of the human being.

     As regards socialism, most of the anarchists arrive at its ultimate conclusion, that is, at a complete negation of the wage-system and at communism. And with reference to political organization, by giving a further development to the above-mentioned part of the radical program, they arrive at the conclusion that the ultimate aim of society is the reduction of the functions of government to nil--that is, to a society without government, to anarchy. The anarchists maintain, moreover, that such being the ideal of social and political organization, they must not remit it to future centuries. but that only those changes in our social organization which are in accordance with the above double ideal, and constitute an approach to it, will have a chance of life and be beneficial for the commonwealth.

. . .

Haha, idiot. He didn't respond to you. Hey, are you a programmer by chance? I don't think you mention it enough in your posts. Rather than let your "superior" logic skills do the talking for you, you have to keep pointing out to people you're a programmer to give your arguments artificial gravity. If you were really so damn smart, you wouldn't have to tell people how smart you are. You're really just rather sad.

Kimosabe, get a clue of how the world really works.

The internet (i.e. the free market which is why you have it today) is the only free press remaining in the USA.

You are an young idealistic liberal idiot with a functioning vocabulary and extremely discombobulated illogic (you put the cart before the horse w.r.t. internet and free media) because your political religion does not allow you to understand the logic of the asymmetric power of political capture and why collectives always fail in a heap of vested interests corruption. The ONLY way to avoid that is do not form collectives and enable the free market to prosper.

Hey what happened to your threat to put me on ignore?  

I do NOT trust my ISP or that the capitalist system we have in America will do anything except sell me out. What your saying about the free market sounds good, but communism also sounds good on paper. I have never in my life seen so called "competition" among media providers lead to anything but higher prices and shitty service.  That magic of the market stuff is BS unless you have a true free market. In which case you would need to have net-neutrality.

The point you are missing is that in a free market, you don’t need to trust your ISP as competition will provide you with options.

What you don’t believe or fail to understand is that regulatory capture of your government is precisely what stifles competition. This is what the quote from Eric S. Raymond about “asymmetric power” means.

So yes the monopolistic telcos are on their knees praying that you will trust the government more than the free market, because the more power you give to the government to regulate, the stronger their monopolies will become.

This has been proven over and over to always be the outcome in all of recorded human history. The mathematical reason was explained by Mancur Olson’s book, The Logic of Collective Action.

I don’t expect you to be able to wrap your mind around this, because the reason socialists are socialists is because they don’t have the IQ to reason rationally at this high level.

And evolution is at work (over and over throughout recorded human history since Mesopotamia) to cull the population of the low IQ fools (via the war, eugenics, genocide, rationing, and totalitarian megadeath that results from peaking socialism when it runs out of other people's resources to steal, ahem redistribute) so the human race can get smarter and advance knowledge. So sorry for you, you haven’t been able to grasp how to survive.

---

Eric S Raymond worked hard to move to the term “open source” instead of Richard Stallman’s “free software”, because the latter is communism which is an abject failure.

The key difference between that Stallman and the FSF advocate the oxymoronic use of coercion (force) to maintain freedom (specifically the FSF GPL standard license forces some actions and limits other actions), thus it exhibits the loss of liberty that is the hallmark of Communism.

You can listen to Eric S. Raymond on this topic at the following video of a Java Users Group presentation where “viral contamination” means coercion in the GPL license:

http://jobtipsforgeeks.com/2012/05/17/lessons-from-a-jug-talk-with-eric-esr-raymond/


Jump to the 9:15 min point in the video.

user[name]18444, we no longer live in a resource scarcity paradigm (its only the peaking socialism, misallocation of resources with $227 trillion global debt that gives the illusion of resource scarcity) rather now in a knowledge paradigm. Wealth of knowledge is not uniformly distributed.

I trust my government a million times more than I trust my ISP. That is the bottom line for me.  

As well,

...Nobody can take those freedoms away from us anymore; we have the internet. We have the way to migrate our software development out of the reach of any particular jurisdiction that goes idiotic. We have the code; they can’t take the code away from us...

. . .

When we call software “free,” we mean that it respects the users' essential freedoms: the freedom to run it, to study and change it, and to redistribute copies with or without changes. This is a matter of freedom, not price, so think of “free speech,” not “free beer.”

These freedoms are vitally important. They are essential, not just for the individual users' sake, but for society as a whole because they promote social solidarity—that is, sharing and cooperation. They become even more important as our culture and life activities are increasingly digitized. In a world of digital sounds, images, and words, free software becomes increasingly essential for freedom in general.

Tens of millions of people around the world now use free software; the public schools of some regions of India and Spain now teach all students to use the free GNU/Linux operating system. Most of these users, however, have never heard of the ethical reasons for which we developed this system and built the free software community, because nowadays this system and community are more often spoken of as “open source”, attributing them to a different philosophy in which these freedoms are hardly mentioned.

. . .

Actually it's just that I am not afraid of people. I think they are mostly the same and I get along with everyone. I believe this helps me see people for who they are instead of who I thought they should be.
It may be comforting to see the world as black and white, good and evil, communists and 1776 patriots. Reality is never so simple, and you do yourself a disservice when you fail to take each person or event as a separate issue.

Eric S. Raymond's (the progenitor of the term "open source" in the infamous essay "The Cathedral and the Bazaar") past writings about "net neutrality":

---

No I am stating the facts. He wants to be culled and is actively fighting for that. This is evolution at work so he can get his wish.

Evolution makes no excuses for intent with ignorance.

The fellow, as with any, desires a liberty he cannot know by his own limitation. You, having thus scoffed him, demonstrate equivalent failings.

As I posited upthread, you want to be culled.

. . .

I think I'll take my chances with Obama.
He is the smartest president of my lifetime and i trust him on this. 

...

What happens when all nations are blanketed from stem to stern with surveillance?

Public utilities, acting on government orders, will be able to allot electricity in amounts and at times it wishes to. This is leading to an overarching plan for energy distribution to the entire population.

Claiming shortages and limited options, governments will essentially be redistributing wealth, in the form of energy, under a collectivist model.

National health insurance plans (such as Obamacare) offer another clue. Such plans have no logistical chance of operating unless every citizen is assigned a medical ID package, which is a de facto identity card. In the medical arena, this means cradle-to-grave tracking.

Surveillance inevitably leads to: placing every individual under systems of control. It isn’t just “we’re watching you” or “we’re stamping out dissent.” It’s “we’re directing your participation in life.”

As a security analyst in the private sector once told me, “When you can see what every employee is doing, when you have it all at your fingertips, you naturally move on to thinking about how you can control those patterns and flows of movement and activity. It’s irresistible. You look at your employees as pieces on a board. The only question is, what game do you want to play with them?”

Every such apparatus is ruled, from the top, by Central Planners. When it’s an entire nation, upper-echelon technocrats revel in the idea of blueprinting, mapping, charting, and regulating the flows of all goods and services and people, “for the common good.”

Water, food, medicine, land use, transportation—they all become items of a networked system that chooses who gets what and when, and who can travel where, and under what conditions.

This is the wet dream of technocrats. They believe they are saving the world, while playing a fascinating game of multidimensional chess.

As new technologies are discovered and come on line, the planners decide how they will be utilized and for whose benefit.

In order to implement such a far-reaching objective, with minimal resistance from the global population, manufactured crises are unleashed which persuade the masses that the planet is under threat and needs “the wise ones” to rescue it and us.

We watch (and fight in) wars and more wars, each one exacerbated and even invented. We are presented with phony epidemics that are falsely promoted as scourges.

The only response, we are led to believe, is more humane control over the population.

On top of that, we are fed an unending stream of propaganda aimed at convincing us that “the great good for the greatest number” is the only humane and acceptable principle of existence. All prior systems of belief are outmoded. We know better now. We must be good and kind and generous to everyone at all times.

Under this quasi-religious banner, which has great emotional appeal, appears The Plan. Our leaders allocate and withhold on the basis of their greater knowledge. We comply. We willingly comply, because we are enlisted in a universal army of altruistic concern.

This is a classic bait and switch. We are taught to believe that service for the greater good is an unchallengeable goal and credo. And then, later, we find out it has been hijacked to institute more power over us, in every way.

The coordinated and networked surveillance of Earth and its people is fed into algorithms that spit out solutions. This much food will go here; that much water will go there; here there will be medical care; there medical care will be severely rationed. These people will be permitted to travel. Those people will be confined to their cities and towns.

Every essential of life—managed with on-off switches, and the consequences will play out.

An incredibly complex system of interlocking decisions will be hailed as messianic.

Surveillance; planning; control.

...