<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.3.3" -->
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Net Neutrality&#8217;s Second Coming</title>
	<link>http://www.savetheinternet.com/blog/2007/10/29/net-neutralitys-second-coming/</link>
	<description>Tracking the battle over Network Neutrality</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 16 Oct 2008 01:32:08 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: If Google Buys Sprint</title>
		<link>http://www.savetheinternet.com/blog/2007/10/29/net-neutralitys-second-coming/#comment-76591</link>
		<dc:creator>If Google Buys Sprint</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Nov 2007 15:32:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.savetheinternet.com/blog/2007/10/29/net-neutralitys-second-coming/#comment-76591</guid>
		<description>[...] no doubt, is why Google wants to expand their assets. To avoid losing them. Consider that, if net neutrality fails to materialize, Googs could be positioned to send untold billions of dollars AT&#38;T&#8217;s way [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] no doubt, is why Google wants to expand their assets. To avoid losing them. Consider that, if net neutrality fails to materialize, Googs could be positioned to send untold billions of dollars AT&amp;T&#8217;s way [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tstanley626@charter.net</title>
		<link>http://www.savetheinternet.com/blog/2007/10/29/net-neutralitys-second-coming/#comment-75514</link>
		<dc:creator>tstanley626@charter.net</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Nov 2007 11:09:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.savetheinternet.com/blog/2007/10/29/net-neutralitys-second-coming/#comment-75514</guid>
		<description>Dateline November 6, 2007 from China - Center for Democracy and Technology news brief - This is a great site for Save the Internet information. This could happen in America, if we let our guard down. We cannot allow government nabobs, hiding behind government regulations, to limit our access to information and Internet resources. Stand up and be counted.

"For a brief period last week, the Chinese government hijacked foreign search engines. Chinese Internet users trying to search on Google, Yahoo and Microsoft were redirected . . . . . to the Chinese search engine Baidu. Democratic governments understand the connection between human rights and Internet freedom. They have been quick to condemn the Internet crackdown in Burma and China and the lack of Internet freedom in much of the world".

"But at the same time, democratic countries are themselves increasingly turning to content blocking and online surveillance to address terrorism and other perceived dangers at home. In doing so, they are in danger of sacrificing their moral authority to ensure that the global Internet moves toward greater freedom".

"In Germany, there is an uproar about a proposal to give the government powers to spy virtually, using e-mails infected with spy ware". 

They are gatekeepers today, but tyrants tomorrow.  We have to be alert to the dangers ahead.  Stay alert.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dateline November 6, 2007 from China - Center for Democracy and Technology news brief - This is a great site for Save the Internet information. This could happen in America, if we let our guard down. We cannot allow government nabobs, hiding behind government regulations, to limit our access to information and Internet resources. Stand up and be counted.</p>
<p>&#8220;For a brief period last week, the Chinese government hijacked foreign search engines. Chinese Internet users trying to search on Google, Yahoo and Microsoft were redirected . . . . . to the Chinese search engine Baidu. Democratic governments understand the connection between human rights and Internet freedom. They have been quick to condemn the Internet crackdown in Burma and China and the lack of Internet freedom in much of the world&#8221;.</p>
<p>&#8220;But at the same time, democratic countries are themselves increasingly turning to content blocking and online surveillance to address terrorism and other perceived dangers at home. In doing so, they are in danger of sacrificing their moral authority to ensure that the global Internet moves toward greater freedom&#8221;.</p>
<p>&#8220;In Germany, there is an uproar about a proposal to give the government powers to spy virtually, using e-mails infected with spy ware&#8221;. </p>
<p>They are gatekeepers today, but tyrants tomorrow.  We have to be alert to the dangers ahead.  Stay alert.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ecsd</title>
		<link>http://www.savetheinternet.com/blog/2007/10/29/net-neutralitys-second-coming/#comment-75003</link>
		<dc:creator>ecsd</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Nov 2007 22:52:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.savetheinternet.com/blog/2007/10/29/net-neutralitys-second-coming/#comment-75003</guid>
		<description>"... Vindu Goel writes that efforts to restore Net Neutrality protections had been unsuccessful in the absence of evidence that Internet providers were meddling with the free flow of information. He adds that all this has changed since Comcast began blocking peer-to-peer sharing.
“There was no real evidence that Internet providers were discriminating against any content,” he concludes. “Now there is.”

This is just like Bush claiming that waterboarding isn't torture if it's "classified". Should we have Net Neutrality laws on the books? Why? Because we state in the law what we WANT. We say "it will NEVER BE LEGAL to balkanize the internet" - we don't have to wait for the first CRIME to know we need a LAW.

Free-market ideologues can stay married to the likes of AT&#38;T, Verizon and Comcast. For my part I say: we, the people, deserve better and we deserve it now. See http://communityfiber.org for a model for a Community owned-and-operated Fiber To The Home network - get a ONE GIGABIT connection at your home and business at standard utility rates, all vendors to users on the network compete on a level playing field, there CANNOT be a threat to network neutrality once we own our own network, and users will save up to $1000 per year EACH over telco/cableco costs.

Let's quit worrying what the SCUMBAGS want to do and instead BUILD OUR OWN NETWORK AROUND THEM. And put them out of business, as they deserve. Service, my a**. A DSL user in the Central Valley (e.g. Manteca) will wait UP TO ONE AND THREE-QUARTER HOURS ON MUZAK HOLD to report a problem with their line. We could be getting ONE GIGABIT on fiber but Verizon is selling DSL speeds on Fiber! AT&#38;T wants to do fiber to the NODE and then use COPPER to get to you, capping you at 55 megabits (VDSL.)

Tell them:  We're going to BUILD OUR OWN FIBER NETWORK and then you fellas can TAKE A LONG WALK ON A SHORT PIER.

They can balkanize their remaining eight customers at will, then.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;&#8230; Vindu Goel writes that efforts to restore Net Neutrality protections had been unsuccessful in the absence of evidence that Internet providers were meddling with the free flow of information. He adds that all this has changed since Comcast began blocking peer-to-peer sharing.<br />
“There was no real evidence that Internet providers were discriminating against any content,” he concludes. “Now there is.”</p>
<p>This is just like Bush claiming that waterboarding isn&#8217;t torture if it&#8217;s &#8220;classified&#8221;. Should we have Net Neutrality laws on the books? Why? Because we state in the law what we WANT. We say &#8220;it will NEVER BE LEGAL to balkanize the internet&#8221; - we don&#8217;t have to wait for the first CRIME to know we need a LAW.</p>
<p>Free-market ideologues can stay married to the likes of AT&amp;T, Verizon and Comcast. For my part I say: we, the people, deserve better and we deserve it now. See <a href="http://communityfiber.org" rel="nofollow">http://communityfiber.org</a> for a model for a Community owned-and-operated Fiber To The Home network - get a ONE GIGABIT connection at your home and business at standard utility rates, all vendors to users on the network compete on a level playing field, there CANNOT be a threat to network neutrality once we own our own network, and users will save up to $1000 per year EACH over telco/cableco costs.</p>
<p>Let&#8217;s quit worrying what the SCUMBAGS want to do and instead BUILD OUR OWN NETWORK AROUND THEM. And put them out of business, as they deserve. Service, my a**. A DSL user in the Central Valley (e.g. Manteca) will wait UP TO ONE AND THREE-QUARTER HOURS ON MUZAK HOLD to report a problem with their line. We could be getting ONE GIGABIT on fiber but Verizon is selling DSL speeds on Fiber! AT&amp;T wants to do fiber to the NODE and then use COPPER to get to you, capping you at 55 megabits (VDSL.)</p>
<p>Tell them:  We&#8217;re going to BUILD OUR OWN FIBER NETWORK and then you fellas can TAKE A LONG WALK ON A SHORT PIER.</p>
<p>They can balkanize their remaining eight customers at will, then.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tstanley626@charter.net</title>
		<link>http://www.savetheinternet.com/blog/2007/10/29/net-neutralitys-second-coming/#comment-74748</link>
		<dc:creator>tstanley626@charter.net</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Nov 2007 11:14:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.savetheinternet.com/blog/2007/10/29/net-neutralitys-second-coming/#comment-74748</guid>
		<description>The Rosemead Star News says.  http://rosemeadstarnews.blogspot.com/
There is a movement to use child protection to stifle free speech. Even though child protection advocates have a good argument in proposing controls on internet content, free speech advocates have a better argument. Namely, when the government starts controlling internet content and the blogosphere our free speech rights are in danger.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Rosemead Star News says.  <a href="http://rosemeadstarnews.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow">http://rosemeadstarnews.blogspot.com/</a><br />
There is a movement to use child protection to stifle free speech. Even though child protection advocates have a good argument in proposing controls on internet content, free speech advocates have a better argument. Namely, when the government starts controlling internet content and the blogosphere our free speech rights are in danger.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: democraticus &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Net Neutralitys Second Coming</title>
		<link>http://www.savetheinternet.com/blog/2007/10/29/net-neutralitys-second-coming/#comment-74724</link>
		<dc:creator>democraticus &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Net Neutralitys Second Coming</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Nov 2007 07:37:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.savetheinternet.com/blog/2007/10/29/net-neutralitys-second-coming/#comment-74724</guid>
		<description>[...] Read full story at Save the Internet [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] Read full story at Save the Internet [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tstanley626@charter.net</title>
		<link>http://www.savetheinternet.com/blog/2007/10/29/net-neutralitys-second-coming/#comment-74564</link>
		<dc:creator>tstanley626@charter.net</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Oct 2007 10:43:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.savetheinternet.com/blog/2007/10/29/net-neutralitys-second-coming/#comment-74564</guid>
		<description>Washington's Finest

I do not think that Washington gets it. Bloggers will not allow Washington's finest goof balls to block access to the Internet. Save the Internet is an important topic, but Washington's finest have not figured this out. Bloggers and Internet based citizen journalists are on the march to protect our freedom of speech in this new dynamic medium called the blogosphere.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Washington&#8217;s Finest</p>
<p>I do not think that Washington gets it. Bloggers will not allow Washington&#8217;s finest goof balls to block access to the Internet. Save the Internet is an important topic, but Washington&#8217;s finest have not figured this out. Bloggers and Internet based citizen journalists are on the march to protect our freedom of speech in this new dynamic medium called the blogosphere.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
