Could this be the end of ATS?

U.S. "Net neutrality" rules to take effect in November

link
I'm not smart enough to figure all of this out, but something in the article stated that. .

Criticized by opponents as a legally shaky government intrusion into regulating the Internet, the new rules forbid broadband providers from blocking legal content but leave flexibility for providers to manage their networks.

So if a provider didn't WANT to allow access for ATS, they could legally block it?

Also. . .

For the past 10 years, the possibility of regulations to mandate the neutrality of the Internet -- in terms of restrictions on content, sites, platforms and types of equipment that may be attached -- has been the subject of fierce debate.

The fight pits content providers who seek protection against the blocking or degrading of their services against Internet service providers that want to "control the pipeline."

Is what I'm reading correct? Could "controling the pipeline" be next?

I appreciate any and all insight.

Thanks,
beez

Name 5 things that have gotten better over the past 10 years? (as far as freedoms and rights)
Comcast has become the Godzilla of internet providers in America, if I could I would go with another provider but they've bought everyone out and are my only choice, and at $70/mo just for internet! Back in 2000 I was paying about $20/mo for high speed internet, by 2013 it'll be $90/mo. (with thumb scanning mandated), 2015 it'll be $110, etc. etc. just like electricity rates.

reply to post by JibbyJedi
But could they actually control content?

Could they block sites that they didn't like?

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by JibbyJedi

 

But could they actually control content?

Could they block sites that they didn't like?

That's inevitable. Enjoy the freedoms we have now online, after they implement their blockages, then implement thumb scanners to get online, anything we say on sites like this one can and will be used against us. God forbid any of us get arrested for a felony and the prosecution can bring our online activities into the courtroom, and with thumb scans to prove it was us saying anti-gov't statements.

reply to post by beezzer


It would require the provider to assess that a particular site was sourcing illegal content, as in copyrighted material.

As in file sharing sites and not not necessarily those of the likes of Chat sites such as ATS.

Life without ATS....Oh NOOOOO !

No offense . . . but if the whole internet went 'poof' or became a very large haven for playing pac man, maybe a few of us would actually GET THE HELL UP OFF OUR FAT ASSES AND DO SOMETHING ABOUT ALL THE CRAP THAT'S WRONG WITH THE WORLD INSTEAD OF SITTING AROUND PISSING AND MOANING ABOUT EVERYTHING UNDER THE SUN . . . me included!!!

Thirty years ago, people actually when out in the street and rallied and made their voices heard and were civly disobedient and tried to make changes.

Now, between American Idol, internet porn and the odd site like this, nobody gets off their butts and does anything anymore.

I guess what I'm saying is that it wouldn't be the end of ATS or any other sites of this nature because they know that as long as we're all frying the midnight oil creepin' out ATS and facebook and boobies-R-us, we're not out planning some sort of revolt against the people who's pockets we line!

reply to post by beezzer


Yes they could block any site they wanted look at china you cant look up anything dealing with Tiananmen Square or anything relating to human rights so quite frankly they can do whatever they like to the internet legally now YAY US government just one more step to an isolated population they already control the media now they can control the internet

Originally posted by GoalPoster
No offense . . . but if the whole internet went 'poof' or became a very large haven for playing pac man, maybe a few of us would actually GET THE HELL UP OFF OUR FAT ASSES AND DO SOMETHING ABOUT ALL THE CRAP THAT'S WRONG WITH THE WORLD INSTEAD OF SITTING AROUND PISSING AND MOANING ABOUT EVERYTHING UNDER THE SUN . . . me included!!!

Thirty years ago, people actually when out in the street and rallied and made their voices heard and were civly disobedient and tried to make changes.

Now, between American Idol, internet porn and the odd site like this, nobody gets off their butts and does anything anymore.

I guess what I'm saying is that it wouldn't be the end of ATS or any other sites of this nature because they know that as long as we're all frying the midnight oil creepin' out ATS and facebook and boobies-R-us, we're not out planning some sort of revolt against the people who's pockets we line!

Good point.

Originally posted by beezzer
So if a provider didn't WANT to allow access for ATS, they could legally block it?

Actually, "net neutrality" prevents that.

Obfuscation by political conservatives hell-bend on opposing anything that originates "not from their camp" has twisted the debate about "net neutrality" into some kind of government intrusion into Internet operation. Quite simply, they're lying for political gain.

Originally posted by nh_ee
reply to post by beezzer

 

It would require the provider to assess that a particular site was sourcing illegal content, as in copyrighted material.

As in file sharing sites and not not necessarily those of the likes of Chat sites such as ATS.

Life without ATS....Oh NOOOOO !

The "law" just seems vague to me. I take it as there being ALOT of room for interprettion.

Originally posted by Immune
reply to post by beezzer

 

Yes they could block any site they wanted look at china you cant look up anything dealing with Tiananmen Square or anything relating to human rights so quite frankly they can do whatever they like to the internet legally now YAY US government just one more step to an isolated population they already control the media now they can control the internet

Another good point.
Let me ask you this, are they already manipulating content?

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

Originally posted by beezzer
So if a provider didn't WANT to allow access for ATS, they could legally block it?

Actually, "net neutrality" prevents that.

Obfuscation by political conservatives hell-bend on opposing anything that originates "not from their camp" has twisted the debate about "net neutrality" into some kind of government intrusion into Internet operation. Quite simply, they're lying for political gain.

Thanks, sir. Appreciate you chiming in. I just felt it warrented an open discussion on the topic.

reply to post by beezzer


actually i don't think they are but i can guarantee they are monitoring traffic at certain sites and somewhere all our names are on a list for even being here after all our government has nothing better to do than infringe on its citizens

reply to post by Immune

If that were the case, I'd probably be in trouble.

I hold -sip- clearances in the Army, they tend to get rather "ouchy" over such things.

reply to post by JibbyJedi


But also as the cost goes up hopefully so does your earnings . Yes the cost of all these amenities are expensive, but that's why they are accessories not necessities. We have Time Warner Cable's all in one and pay about $170/month that includes 2 dvr hd boxes, internet and phone.

reply to post by beezzer


well good luck then beezer lol i bet they watch your post like a hawk eyeing a mouse

Originally posted by Immune
reply to post by beezzer

 

well good luck then beezer lol i bet they watch your post like a hawk eyeing a mouse

I seriously doubt it. Well, back to work supporting the wants and needs of my government that I love and admire so much.

Let's face it. The internet is a distraction for all of us. I am pretty sure TPTB knows this. They stand to lose much more if they began limiting the internet. For all we know, we may actually be helping TPTB without even knowing it by simply talking about it online. The more thoughts they have going their way the more powerful they become.

Noone likes fighting a Ghost I agree, and TPTB should be brought to the light where everyone will see them. But There is two sides two every coin. Every action has a consequence. The more freedom are limited the more angry the human being becomes before long it's only a matter of time where he/she explodes.


Sigh, why can't everyone just get along? All I really want in this world is peace, love and harmony without anyone telling me what to do. *Dreams of Utopia*

reply to post by beezzer


Depending on your definition of "manipulating" - they already are - and Net Neutrality would stop that.
Cox cable had been throttling the bandwidth of file sharing sites for several years - to the point where you couldn't even log in - LimeWire was a perfect example.

Here is a definition of Net Neutrality from WIKI.

Net_Neutrality_Link