Re: You can't save Internet Freedom by taking it away [was: Re: [videoblogging] Re: Lobbyists Trying to Destroy Internet Freedom?]

[Ron Watson]

This seems weasely. Why not admit that it is regulation for the Good Cause of Protecting the Internet from Evil? What is weasely is the idea that the internet is not regulated already. The communications cartel has all kinds of regulations that they are operating under. Can't have x% much marketshare, they have to allow traffic to flow over their lines freely, they have to comply with a myriad of laws already.  This is not about regulation or de-regulation. this is about re-regulation. These arguments always wind up coming down to regulation or de-regulation, and those 2 terms are fairly meaningless.  Things are regulated for good reason:  Banks are regulated to protect people's investment.  Food is regulated to ensure that we don't get poisoned and spread disease.  Pollution is regulated so that we don't all get cancer and die.  The media is regulated so we have solid information that we use to effectively govern ourselves.  Regulation is something that happens to things that are important to society that are prone to captive markets, cartels and monopolies. De-regulation or re-regulation, really, is something that happens to things that are important to society when cartels sponsor politicians and shower hundreds of millions of dollars on our elected officials and bombard them with propaganda at every turn. I am just so sick and tired of hearing that industry sponsored re-regulation is a good thing. Tell me one thing that has been improved through de-regulation.  That cable bill sure went down, eh?  Boy those airlines sure have things together, don't they? How about all that raised fuel efficiency by not placing regulations on the American auto companies?   Boy, energy markets in California sure went well, didn't they.  This whole conversation, especially your guys' semantical arguments over the Bill of Rights, which I enjoyed, remind me of trying to talk to someone from another political stripe about 'socialism'. The definitions are so poor and misunderstood from years of Conservative rhetoric, that people actually think that China and Russia were communist systems. Some even think they are socialist systems.  It is so maddening to have conversations where the definition of the main idea is up for grabs. I have been thinking about video blogging some of this, but I am really tight on time, and I am more than a bit afraid to say what I really feel on camera with my face visible. I know that is silly, but I worry about the repercussions of speaking those ideas openly on the other parts of my life.  I guess I should stop being such a wimp and just do it, lord knows I feel passionate enough about it.  Thanks for the cool conversation guys.  ron On May 19, 2006, at 4:43 PM, Charles HOPE wrote: David Meade wrote: On 5/19/06, Charles HOPE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Nevertheless, it looks like Charles K. wins this round. The Bill of Rights restricts government power; Net Neutrality restricts the power of the People (who own and control the wires). Says you. :-P Going back and forth on definitions is interesting debate, but I'm still not willing to say "Net Neutrality is about government regulation of the Internet" I'm still saying "No, its about Government protection of the Internet". This seems weasely. Why not admit that it is regulation for the Good Cause of Protecting the Internet from Evil? Another interesting debate on definition would be "The People" ... I guess I'm not willing consider huge corporate conglomerates as "The People" ... and therefore refuse to consider Net Neutrality as a regulation of The People. The standard distinction is drawn between public and private entities. You're using nonstandard terminology. What's wrong with the typical language? SPONSORED LINKS Fireant Individual Typepad Use Explains YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS  Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web.    To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. SPONSORED LINKS Fireant Individual Typepad Use Explains YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS  Visit your group "videoblogging" on the web.    To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.