I guess the message Obama got from the election was “gotta grab stuff faster before they stop me.”
For these fascists total control is the goal.
They have no right to attempt to control individuals’ interactions that use the network known as the internet.
I think we should reclassify Obama as useless and shiftless.
He once again plans to go around Congress.
As a utility, it becomes free to welfare recipients I bet. He is making the case that it is a necessity. It isn’t. You can go to a library if you really need one.
A way to regulate, to impose ever more controls. . .eventually resulting in government ownership in some way. . .
I don’t understand this issue very well, but Obama’s desire to exert greater control over ANYTHING should be suspect. Given his track record, any pretense of Internet regulation as a benefit to consumers must be given the greatest scrutiny. It will inevitably be a Trojan Horse for some shenanigans further down the road.
Obama, all of your dieas are sh!t, keep them to yourself.
Go away, don’t come back, you are not wanted.
Engineers and execs from Apple, eBay, Google, Hewlett-Packard and Yahoo are supporting this little nine-classroom utopia where tuition starts at $17,750 and where you won’t find a single computer or screen of any sort. Also, kids are discouraged from watching television or logging on at home.
Tech execs send kids to anti-computer school
Why are these highly-paid, cutting edge technology innovators cheating their children out of a basic human right?
Sounds like low-hanging fruit picked to boost his popularity.
Assuming, of course, it amounts to applying “common carrier” status, and not some ulterior scheme.
“In plain English, I’m asking [the FCC] to recognize that for most Americans, the internet has become an essential part of everyday communication and everyday life.”
So what if it has. So has television, automobiles, super markets and drug stores and many other things. By the dictator’s argument you could classify every industry a public utility.
then so is a printing press...
What the ISPs want to do would be like the power company deciding what you can use electricity for (outdoor lights? no, no, no because the power company has a contract with the city to provide all outdoor lighting) instead of just charging for the total amount of energy and contracting a maximum instantaneous power (equivalent to total bytes per month and maximum bandwidth).
If most locations had more than two potential broadband suppliers this wouldn't be a problem, especially if some started to explicitly state that they wouldn't pick and choose which websites get priority.
Maybe as a middle ground the government could just require ISPs to make explicit any prioritization they do in order to put market pressure on them to not do it.