Posted on 08/13/2008 3:08:06 PM PDT by mainestategop
Behind the attempt to regulate the Internet is an attempt at destroying our God given constitutionally guaranteed rights of free speech and an attempt to suppress the spread of opinions, news, and ideas. For the Multi-national corporations and it's leftist CEOs there is a need for greed and to limit our choices they way they do with Television. The chance to monopolize the Internet and the video games industry is met with the support of none other than RINOS as well as the far left. Hillary Clinton, John Mccain and to some extent even Obama have expressed support for regulating our choices on the computer as well as the TV. The latest attempt is to lobby for regulations against software programing by requiring licensing for being able to legally program computer software and websites. Those who contruct blogs and websites and program software video games and applications can face prosecution from the state.
One of the fundamental virtues for a free market economy is for consumers to choose. When Companies compete, it results in greater innovation as well as better prices for consumers. With the internet, consumers of computer software games and applications have even greater choices as well as more compitition for the big companies. What makes this situation more interesting is that many software programers on the internet known as freelancers are giving away their software. Powerful and popular games such as Castle of the Winds, 3056 and others have become popular downloads. Although many of them are simple and based on technology from the 80's and 90's they are still popular and the best part of all they are for free.
In addition to writing software, there is changing current software on the market called moding. Popular games such as Grand Theft Auto, Warcraft ETC are recieving modifications to allow players to create new levels, new scenarios and campaings as well as add fun items to improve playability and provide comic relief known as easter eggs. Even old games such as Super Mario World and Legend of Zelada have mod programs that allow players to add and modify the games for replayability
With this in mind Software companies must compete by spending more of their profits to create additional jobs and promote research into more mind boggling games that consumers will pay more money for. They must offer lower prices for some of their games as well to encourage them to buy. But now Software giants are using their profits for a more wicked end, lobbying to put an end to the freelancers and to limit our choices and at the same time limit our freedom and liberty.
In 1998 during the height of the Clinton sex scandal Hillary Rodham Clinton in a news interview advocated regulations against "conservative voices attacking her." Presidential hopeful John McCain has also expressed opposition to net neutrality and has even appointed to his campaign staff a corporate manager from Microsoft. Although Barack Obama claims to support net neutrality, his opposition towards other liberties such as the 2nd amendment, as well as his fliping on DC's gun laws leaves several questions. Congressman Ron Paul is the only candidate to come out strongly in favor of protecting the internet from corporate and socialist interests.
We at MainestateGop support the free market economy and oppose this unjust regulation aginst our right to choose and our rights of creative expression and free speech. To this end we are on the side of the freelancers. If you play computer games we urge you to show support by downloading free games from several places we have found to be of interests
If you are a big fan of Lord of the rings like I am, you'll love this game. This game is about a group of dwarves setting up their own civilization in the mountains of a fantasy world. Your task is to help them set up their subteranean civilization while providing food and defending against enemy kingdoms and monseters. There is also an adventure mode in the game that let you assume the role of a dwarf, human, or elf adventurer and complete tasks in a virtual kingdom.
You can download the game from bay12 games
No JOKE! This is real! You play the role of a left wing revolutionary leader attempting to overthrow the US government and make the nation elite liberal. The game is pretty gory and has suggestive themes. Also it portrays liberals as freedom fighters when in fact if they had power they would destroy and undermine free speech and the working class.
You can download the game from bay12 games or You can download the game from home of the underdogs The later version is more workable.
3059 is a revolutionary RPG Video game created by a student of UMASS that allows the player to take the roll of a settler of the planet Esperanza in the year 3059. You can go on quests, explore the planet and it's multi-terrain features, construct buildings, spelunking, explore ancient ruins and many other things. This game is built on revolutionary programing that creates randomly generated landscapes in each sector the player happens upon.
You can download the game at home of the underdogs or from the main site, here
We also recommend searching the web for other sites such as games for gamers,
Whether or not if you are not a gamer you should still get involved by emailing your congressman and senator and demand that they uphold net neutrality and stop needless regulations against the internet.
For more information visit save the internet at http://www.savetheinternet.com/
Before going I just want to clarify a few things; We don't need the FCC and the fairness doctrine to promote net neutrality. It will do the exact opposite. Conservatives believe that net neutrality can be achieved by preventing corporations from monopolizing ISPs as well as through incentive and profit. When the left thinks of net neutrality, they want to put a choke hold on the world wide web and exclude content they don't agree with. This has nothing to do with fairness, this is about putting their dirty fingers on the scale of Democracy and liberty and silence conservative voices. The left hates when individuals think for themselves. Remember, it isn't news unless THEY say it is.
You mean to tell me I might have to give up one of freedoms of speech for moronic video games?!? Why don’t the gamers go get their own “internet?”
It is another thing entirely to piggy-back on an existing product without expecting the original product's developer to demand some sort of compensation.
I would love it if I could see the Olympics coverage with the annoying voices of the politically correct announcers replaced by witty and snarky commentary by someone such as Trey Parker and Matt Stone of South Park fame.
Unfortunately that's not gonna happen.
Adding some mod to Grand Theft Auto that requires a user to violate the purchase agreement in order to activate the mod is something that might be great in theory, but doesn't work in a free market system backed up by legal contracts enforced by a justice system.
Net neutrality is massive gov’t control of the internet. It is the epitome of lowest common denominator.
Net neutrality is the equivalent of outlawing overnight, 2 day, and 3 day shipping because it’s somehow “unfair” to standard shipping (and then claiming that if all shipping is “neutral” then everyone’s mail will be overnight!) Of course, premium shipping is an upgraded service requiring more resources that people are either willing to pay extra for or aren’t. Outlawing different shipping options will force everyone to be stuck with 1-week shipping.
Net “neutrality”, like so many other leftist terms, is blatantly misleading. It’s really “net MEDIOCRITY”, since that’s what it does: outlaw people’s ability to choose what service they’d like, and force everyone into the same sub-par standard. Proponents hope that those who really want/need better service will pay for everyone’s improvements, and they’ll get a free ride. The reality will be the equivalent of the Post Office (but with FedEx and UPS outlawed).
The flip side of that is what our current set of telecom ISPs are doing. Imagine getting a non-exclusive contract with UPS for package deliveries. How would you react to your UPS deliveryman stealing packages you've received from FedEx or the post office and keeping them for a few days to slow down non-UPS service. When they do finally pass them through you might only get half the package. Occasionally they'll just set the packages on fire on your front yard just to show you who's boss.
I pay my ISP to transmit bits, not to kill some of them to convince me to use the ISP's paid service. Can you trust your ISP to deliver a streaming NetFlix rental over the net if they want to sell you the same service for twice the price?
Well it's just that some people misunderstood and thought that government should be involved just so some college geek dweeb can write computer games.
OTOH, if Internet service companies get bought out enough it could narrow down our choices liken with television. Just how easy is it to set up our own ISP if we wanted to anyway? Cant be that hard can it? I'm not quite an expert.
No it's not that. This is VERY VERY serious. One can only imagine how far the Democrats would go with this. Imagine requiring permission from the federal government and/or having to pay expensive licensing fees to publish a website, an important software application or operate a server? Imagine your kid having to need a government license to publish his exam using WORD? In fact imagine requiring the same to post on a blog or forum like FR? We are talking about the end of the Internet if they get far enough. It'll be cheaper for someone like Jimrob and the adminmods to operate a television station than a server.
They are already doing something similar in Europe and Canada. They are making it illegal for activists who write politically incorrect material on the web to have access to the Internet or operate a computer merely because they hurt someones feelings. They did it to this one kook job who wrote something offensive in Canada.
And you know it that Nancy Pelosi would love to spade the Viking kitties!
ISPs are simply telecommunications companies that provide Internet access like Comcast, Qwest ETC. It can be difficult to set them up thanks in part to regulations set up by the FCC and the Democrats. A monopoly by these companies can hamper the use of personal websites by adding higher costs and expenses to operate.
The creators of Quake (id software) published the technical specifications for their game and encouraged people to produce new levels or mods for it. Since playing those levels or mods required buying the original game, the existence of hundreds of high-quality levels and mods (by now, thousands I'm sure) someone who spent $40 for Quake wouldn't just get to play 30 levels from id, but hundreds of other levels as well. A real bargain.
Adding some mod to Grand Theft Auto that requires a user to violate the purchase agreement in order to activate the mod is something that might be great in theory, but doesn't work in a free market system backed up by legal contracts enforced by a justice system.
If I purchase a piece of software, and have not agreed to any license prior to the seller's acceptance of my payment, I am not bound by any purchase agreement.
Even if companies are required to handle without discrimination packets whose source and destination were both outside their equipment, I shouldn't think that would be an obstacle to value-added services. If AcmeNet has a super-fast link between Chicago and California, and my ISP company has an agreement with them, it could take packets I'm sending to California IP addresses and put a wrapper around them sending them to the AcmeNet's Chicago server. AcmeNet would then see those packets, transfer them to California, remove the wrapper, and send them on their way. Since ISPs have to be able to specially handle packets whose source or destination IP addresses are within their equipment, the ISP would have the authority to treat specially packets arriving from its own subscribers. AcmeNet would have the authority to treat specially the wrapped packets from the ISP, since their destination IP address would be that of its server. This approach would not be completely without complications, but I would think it should be workable.
I gotta admit I loved the Liberal Crime Squad game! I wished they came out with something about conservatives.
Speaking to the actual question of net neutrality: While I agree in principle with the idea that you ought to actually pay for the bits you have delivered and send, in practice this isn't really a market solution for numerous reasons, not least of which is that I cannot deny delivery at my end; therefore advertisers and spammers are free to deliver content at my expense. More importantly, though, is the fact that the largest suppliers of broadband are monopolies and there is not, in many areas including mine, the ability to seek a cheaper, or more reliable, or ... whatever .. alternative ISP. Even in some large urban markets there are no more than two high bandwidth providers. I wish I had as many choices for my ISP as I do for my VOIP. Until I do, I don't see how any sensible person can support "net neutrality." There's nothing neutral about allowing the single-source of a commodity to charge whatever price -- or provide whatever service level -- they in their protected and infinite wisdom decide is acceptable.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.