Looks like the Fed's want to ratch it up a notch now

[Synergistic Explosions]

http://www.pokernews.com/news/2006/10/justice-officials-push-net-monitoring.htm


U.S. Justice Dept. Officials Continue Push for Increased Net-Monitoring
October 21, 2006
Haley Hintze
Print
Email to a friend
Post a comment
Online poker The rights of online poker players came under an additional, if indirect, threat on Wednesday when FBI Director Robert Mueller called on Internet service providers to record and store records of their customers' online activities to a greater degree than that currently mandated by law. The move, part of the greater battle between governmental control and the freedom and flow of information that the Internet represents, is likely to trigger fierce debate as privacy and law-enforcement concerns butt heads in a legal battle that's now expected to occur early in 2007.

The end-of-session flurry of activity precluded such a user-monitoring measure from being enacted in recent weeks, although the U.S. Justice Department did try to sneak
Guaranteed Tournaments at Bodog
it by in a manner similar to that used for the passage of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act [UIGEA]. According to a CNetNews.com article, 'Justice Department officials admit privately that data retention' [the term used for the proposed practice] 'legislation is controversial enough that there wasn't time to ease it through the U.S. Congress before politicians left to campaign for re-election.'

Data retention, as proposed by FBI Director Mueller, various states' attorneys general and legislators such as Colorado's U.S. representative Diane DeGette, takes one of two forms. The first is to require ISPs, 'social' network sites and search engines to log and store for a year or two the identifying IP [Internet Protocol] address of each user. The second proposed form is broader and even more offensive to civil-liberties purists, requiring companies to record and store the identities of e-mail correspondents, instant-messaging logs and users, and the addresses of web pages visited.

As expected, the Justice Department seized on the extreme examples of Internet misuse to justify the erosion of civil liberties, citing child pornography, terrorism and money laundering. Readers will remember that last item used as justification for the UIGEA's passage as well, despite the fact that documented cases of massive revenues from an online poker site being part of a laundered-money scheme, as of this date, number exactly zero.

What's ignored is the fact that technologies already exist to circumvent much of the control that data-retention legislation is designed to put in place, and it's a safe bet that the more egregious the violators, the more likely they are --- as a group --- to use these already existing tools. One example is that of anonymizing web browsers, such as Torpark, which re-route or otherwise obfuscate an Internet user's real identity; these browsers are certainly in use by criminal elements but are gaining a much wider mainstream audience, a direct response to some of the extreme freedom-restricting measures being enacted by the U.S. and a few other governments.

Few online poker players realize that the ISP-blocking provisions of the UIGEA are already of little value should an online player choose to circumvent then. Poker sites already exist that are based on Shockwave Flash technology, and when one combines the way these sites work with the data-encrypting capabilities of a Torpark-style web browser, the IP addresses of both the user and the online site are encrypted and never make it to the point at the user's home ISP where address blocking would occur.

It's true, though, that this type of technical workaround would take significant time to penetrate down to the average player, if it ever became a standard method at all. Many players lack the technical comprehension to understand how and why these things work, while another player population --- mostly casual players --- are unlikely to ever go to the bother.

Data-retention laws make common sense on the surface, as no one wants to see child pornographers or terrorists using the Internet for such purposes. However, it's the making of data storage mandatory, imposing such extreme time requirements --- up to two years --- and the forcing of yet another non-funded mandate onto the private sector that has freedom-of-information defenders up in arms.

It's a situation with no easy answer, and more countries than just the U.S. are wrestling with what is almost universally viewed by governments as the need for Internet control. No matter the form that the data-retention legislation takes, it's sure to spark a hot debate, and this time online poker players have a vested interest in determining where the line between supervision and censorship should be drawn.

[mikeh1975]

looks like the good 'ol days of internet are over.i can look back and tell my kids about the internet frontier and how we all had so much fun before forces beyond our control came and killed off all our fun and took our land.

[Sniper]

Guess you had a change of heart on the original subject... nice 2000th post! /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[tehDiceman]

the ISP thing would be harder to force than the bank portion. think about ISP's like MSN and AOL, they have so many users, so many TB's of data that flow through them that they would have to invest billions of dollars to store records for even just a few months. even then, who is going to go through them all?

[pokerraja]

wow. is this really really bad for us?

[joeker]

[ QUOTE ]
http://www.pokernews.com/news/2006/10/justice-officials-push-net-monitoring.htm


U.S. Justice Dept. Officials Continue Push for Increased Net-Monitoring
October 21, 2006
Haley Hintze
Print
Email to a friend
Post a comment
Online poker The rights of online poker players came under an additional, if indirect, threat on Wednesday when FBI Director Robert Mueller called on Internet service providers to record and store records of their customers' online activities to a greater degree than that currently mandated by law. The move, part of the greater battle between governmental control and the freedom and flow of information that the Internet represents, is likely to trigger fierce debate as privacy and law-enforcement concerns butt heads in a legal battle that's now expected to occur early in 2007.

The end-of-session flurry of activity precluded such a user-monitoring measure from being enacted in recent weeks, although the U.S. Justice Department did try to sneak
Guaranteed Tournaments at Bodog
it by in a manner similar to that used for the passage of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act [UIGEA]. According to a CNetNews.com article, 'Justice Department officials admit privately that data retention' [the term used for the proposed practice] 'legislation is controversial enough that there wasn't time to ease it through the U.S. Congress before politicians left to campaign for re-election.'

Data retention, as proposed by FBI Director Mueller, various states' attorneys general and legislators such as Colorado's U.S. representative Diane DeGette, takes one of two forms. The first is to require ISPs, 'social' network sites and search engines to log and store for a year or two the identifying IP [Internet Protocol] address of each user. The second proposed form is broader and even more offensive to civil-liberties purists, requiring companies to record and store the identities of e-mail correspondents, instant-messaging logs and users, and the addresses of web pages visited.

As expected, the Justice Department seized on the extreme examples of Internet misuse to justify the erosion of civil liberties, citing child pornography, terrorism and money laundering. Readers will remember that last item used as justification for the UIGEA's passage as well, despite the fact that documented cases of massive revenues from an online poker site being part of a laundered-money scheme, as of this date, number exactly zero.

What's ignored is the fact that technologies already exist to circumvent much of the control that data-retention legislation is designed to put in place, and it's a safe bet that the more egregious the violators, the more likely they are --- as a group --- to use these already existing tools. One example is that of anonymizing web browsers, such as Torpark, which re-route or otherwise obfuscate an Internet user's real identity; these browsers are certainly in use by criminal elements but are gaining a much wider mainstream audience, a direct response to some of the extreme freedom-restricting measures being enacted by the U.S. and a few other governments.

Few online poker players realize that the ISP-blocking provisions of the UIGEA are already of little value should an online player choose to circumvent then. Poker sites already exist that are based on Shockwave Flash technology, and when one combines the way these sites work with the data-encrypting capabilities of a Torpark-style web browser, the IP addresses of both the user and the online site are encrypted and never make it to the point at the user's home ISP where address blocking would occur.
It's true, though, that this type of technical workaround would take significant time to penetrate down to the average player, if it ever became a standard method at all. Many players lack the technical comprehension to understand how and why these things work, while another player population --- mostly casual players --- are unlikely to ever go to the bother.


[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree with this, if ISPs start blocking access to websites, there will be plenty of services that pop up allowing people to EASILY circumvent the measures.

[wpr101]

[ QUOTE ]
wow. is this really really bad for us?

[/ QUOTE ]

[gonebroke]

They want to protect us from the sexual predators and terrorists on the internet. Maybe they should clean out the White House and Congress first. Plenty of sexual predators there.

[Brice]

Is the government just stupid or something? Do they not realize that they can only push people so far? Yea, the government got by with the UIGEA. They should consider themselves lucky. But if they keep pushing and pushing, it will bring more and more media attention. That would be the worse thing they could do.

[doormat]

There was a time when people in this country valued freedom more than safety. Unfortunately that is no longer the case. The government will tell us that data retention is for our own protection, and the sheep will say "thank you". Very sad.

[faustusmedea]

[ QUOTE ]

I disagree with this, if ISPs start blocking access to websites, there will be plenty of services that pop up allowing people to EASILY circumvent the measures.

[/ QUOTE ]

That isn't the point. Because of a few disenfranchised cave dwellers, our government is seizing the opportunity to legislate all sorts of constraints on our freedoms in the name of protecting us. From the suspension of habeas corpus to monitoring our actions via datamining, our government is essentially creating an environment where we give up our freedom to protect us from those who would harm us.

The argument is "if you are not doing anything wrong, you should not be afraid". These are the steps leading to a world where freedom is cheap and meaningless. Obviously, if they record your actions, you will seek to find methods to circumvent. Then they will target you specifically because why on earth are you trying to hide?

Its amazing how it only takes 40 or 50 years before people forget how government can be derailed by zealous misanthropes; remember a whole industry was attacked on the basis of communist affiliation in the 50s.

[suzzer99]

As far as I know this would be the first case of the US government forcing ISPs to block their users from certain sites. That fact alone makes me a lot less nervous about this than I would be

[Bilgefisher]

"A man willing to sacrifice freedom for security, deserves neither freedom nor security" - Ben Franklin

Just say no to protectionism!

[joeker]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I disagree with this, if ISPs start blocking access to websites, there will be plenty of services that pop up allowing people to EASILY circumvent the measures.

[/ QUOTE ]

That isn't the point. Because of a few disenfranchised cave dwellers, our government is seizing the opportunity to legislate all sorts of constraints on our freedoms in the name of protecting us. From the suspension of habeas corpus to monitoring our actions via datamining, our government is essentially creating an environment where we give up our freedom to protect us from those who would harm us.

The argument is "if you are not doing anything wrong, you should not be afraid". These are the steps leading to a world where freedom is cheap and meaningless. Obviously, if they record your actions, you will seek to find methods to circumvent. Then they will target you specifically because why on earth are you trying to hide?

Its amazing how it only takes 40 or 50 years before people forget how government can be derailed by zealous misanthropes; remember a whole industry was attacked on the basis of communist affiliation in the 50s.

[/ QUOTE ]

I dont think it will go that far....but it would defintely stop now if the 23 million poker players in this country got off thier collectivre fat asses and made a statement this Nov.

But is that going to happen?

[Jack Bando]

Well, no law has been passed regarding this, sicne the FBI guy says he wished they did pass one. So they're just asking the ISP's right now, and some ISP's will say no. If the House/SEnate/both switch sides next month, this will be a very different discussion.

[jmillerdls]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I disagree with this, if ISPs start blocking access to websites, there will be plenty of services that pop up allowing people to EASILY circumvent the measures.

[/ QUOTE ]

That isn't the point. Because of a few disenfranchised cave dwellers, our government is seizing the opportunity to legislate all sorts of constraints on our freedoms in the name of protecting us. From the suspension of habeas corpus to monitoring our actions via datamining, our government is essentially creating an environment where we give up our freedom to protect us from those who would harm us.

The argument is "if you are not doing anything wrong, you should not be afraid". These are the steps leading to a world where freedom is cheap and meaningless. Obviously, if they record your actions, you will seek to find methods to circumvent. Then they will target you specifically because why on earth are you trying to hide?

Its amazing how it only takes 40 or 50 years before people forget how government can be derailed by zealous misanthropes; remember a whole industry was attacked on the basis of communist affiliation in the 50s.

[/ QUOTE ]

I dont think it will go that far....but it would defintely stop now if the 23 million poker players in this country got off thier collectivre fat asses and made a statement this Nov.

But is that going to happen?

[/ QUOTE ]

after writing this, you felt it was so great dnd unique that it needed its own thread?

[joeker]

[ QUOTE ]

after writing this, you felt it was so great dnd unique that it needed its own thread?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it's an important point....everyone comes on here and bitches about the law and this and that, but are most of these people gonna do something about it?

We could collectively stop this with our votes....power still does ultimately reside with the people but the people, in this case 20+ million pokers players dont seem to want to use it.

[solucky]

No freedom and only the IMAGINE from safe. Noone is safe in this world.

[jmillerdls]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

after writing this, you felt it was so great dnd unique that it needed its own thread?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it's an important point....everyone comes on here and bitches about the law and this and that, but are most of these people gonna do something about it?

We could collectively stop this with our votes....power still does ultimately reside with the people but the people, in this case 20+ million pokers players dont seem to want to use it.

[/ QUOTE ]

well, i'm just glad we have you here to think of these things

[joeker]

[ QUOTE ]

well, i'm just glad we have you here to think of these things

[/ QUOTE ]

Well you can be a smartass about it all you want. Fact is I dont see the backlash occuring, all I see is bitching and whining.

I barely see any call to arms here, all people are concerned about is what site they're gonna play at and how they're gonna get their money to and from it.

If there's not a huge upheavel in Nov. cuz of this then you know what? Every player deserves what is happening.

[jmillerdls]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

well, i'm just glad we have you here to think of these things

[/ QUOTE ]

Well you can be a smartass about it all you want. Fact is I dont see the backlash occuring, all I see is bitching and whining.

I barely see any call to arms here, all people are concerned about is what site they're gonna play at and how they're gonna get their money to and from it.

If there's not a huge upheavel in Nov. cuz of this then you know what? Every player deserves what is happening.

[/ QUOTE ]

well, you are clearly the only one who has thought of this, and said it...so you deserve a huge amount of respect and possibly cash donations. If only we could have been listening to you all this time, we would all have been saved. Everyone needs to immediately get on your bandwagon, because you are taking us places.

[ajml]

While it would be terrible in the short-term this could be beneficial in the long run. Im sure there are many people who don't care at all that they can't play online poker. However, once they hear the government is determining what people can and cannot do on the internet they might actually take our side.

[joeker]

[ QUOTE ]

well, you are clearly the only one who has thought of this, and said it...so you deserve a huge amount of respect and possibly cash donations. If only we could have been listening to you all this time, we would all have been saved. Everyone needs to immediately get on your bandwagon, because you are taking us places.

[/ QUOTE ]

Where did I exactly say I thought of this on my own or where did I take credit for it?

How is this working out for you? Being clever on teh interwebs....must make you feel so good when you feverishly type in these clever responses.

GO you

[jmillerdls]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

well, you are clearly the only one who has thought of this, and said it...so you deserve a huge amount of respect and possibly cash donations. If only we could have been listening to you all this time, we would all have been saved. Everyone needs to immediately get on your bandwagon, because you are taking us places.

[/ QUOTE ]

Where did I exactly say I thought of this on my own or where did I take credit for it?

How is this working out for you? Being clever on teh interwebs....must make you feel so good when you feverishly type in these clever responses.

GO you

[/ QUOTE ]

You started a whole new thread repeating exactly what you said in this thread...that is ridiculous. I think the one here with the ego problem is the one who needs his attention from a new post, with a topic that has been mentioned a million times. You said it once in this thread...that was more than enough. Get off your horse, buddy.

[joeker]

[ QUOTE ]

You started a whole new thread repeating exactly what you said in this thread...that is ridiculous. I think the one here with the ego problem is the one who needs his attention from a new post, with a topic that has been mentioned a million times. You said it once in this thread...that was more than enough. Get off your horse, buddy.

[/ QUOTE ]

And how is that taking credit for that idea or claiming it's new? It's called hammering the issue because the issue is more important than all the other drivel being postedright now. It has nothing to do with ego or attention whoring. Just like when someone is running for office, do they a mke a few commercials then stop because it's been said already? No...the hammer it until election day.

I'm simply hammering the fact that all these players need to get involved politically to turn the tide.

I'm sorry if that offends the local post nazis such as youtself. Deal with it.

[BJK]

[ QUOTE ]
They want to protect us from the sexual predators and terrorists on the internet. Maybe they should clean out the White House and Congress first. Plenty of sexual predators and terrorists there.

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP

[BJK]

[ QUOTE ]
There was a time when people in this country valued freedom more than safety. Unfortunately that is no longer the case. The government will tell us that data retention is for our own protection, and the sheep will say "thank you". Very sad.

[/ QUOTE ]

Throughout history, the erosions of personal freedoms oftentimes have been not only welcomed with open arms, but with cries of jubilation. It's sad.

[Guthrie]

[ QUOTE ]
They want to protect us from the sexual predators and terrorists on the internet. Maybe they should clean out the White House and Congress first. Plenty of sexual predators and terrorists there.

[/ QUOTE ]
FYP

[BJK]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
They want to protect us from the sexual predators and terrorists on the internet. Maybe they should clean out the White House and Congress first. Plenty of sexual predators and terrorists there.

[/ QUOTE ]
FYP

[/ QUOTE ]

Looks like I beat you to the punch by six minutes, but the fact that we were thinking alike only makes it more funny:)

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
wow. is this really really bad for us?

[/ QUOTE ]

no

1)Congress has exactly one chance to pass this, in a lame duck session before the Democrats take over at least the House (and as much as the Dems tend to cave most of the time, this is a crucial part of their platform with no new elections to worry about and they have the more libertarian Republican support on top of that; this will never pass the House in December)

2)if it theoretically did pass, UIGEA doesn't even make gambling illegal for players to gamble, so wtf does internet monitoring have to do with anything? I guess it's even easier to tell that PS is doing something extra super duper illegal now? *However*, if you're in Washington, yeah this could be a concern.

[Megenoita]

I guess the idea is that they could block players from known gambling sites.

[jmillerdls]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

You started a whole new thread repeating exactly what you said in this thread...that is ridiculous. I think the one here with the ego problem is the one who needs his attention from a new post, with a topic that has been mentioned a million times. You said it once in this thread...that was more than enough. Get off your horse, buddy.

[/ QUOTE ]

And how is that taking credit for that idea or claiming it's new? It's called hammering the issue because the issue is more important than all the other drivel being postedright now. It has nothing to do with ego or attention whoring. Just like when someone is running for office, do they a mke a few commercials then stop because it's been said already? No...the hammer it until election day.

I'm simply hammering the fact that all these players need to get involved politically to turn the tide.

I'm sorry if that offends the local post nazis such as youtself. Deal with it.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a forum, not a TV ad. We can do a search to find out what we should be doing. Your "new thread" does nothing but clutter up the forum with information already posted a million times, a million different places...hell, even word for word in another thread. We don't need you to "hammer the issue home" on a forum...it's nothing like TV and the correlation is 0. Get a clue dude, nothing you have said is important, get over yourself.

[gonebroke]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
They want to protect us from the sexual predators and terrorists on the internet. Maybe they should clean out the White House and Congress first. Plenty of sexual predators and terrorists there.

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP

[/ QUOTE ]

Nothing to fix.

[joeker]

[ QUOTE ]

This is a forum, not a TV ad. We can do a search to find out what we should be doing. Your "new thread" does nothing but clutter up the forum with information already posted a million times, a million different places...hell, even word for word in another thread. We don't need you to "hammer the issue home" on a forum...it's nothing like TV and the correlation is 0. Get a clue dude, nothing you have said is important, get over yourself.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is important....and tough [censored], cuz I'm not gonna stop posting about it.

As a matter of fact, I think I'll make a few more threads about it /images/graemlins/shocked.gif

[jmillerdls]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

This is a forum, not a TV ad. We can do a search to find out what we should be doing. Your "new thread" does nothing but clutter up the forum with information already posted a million times, a million different places...hell, even word for word in another thread. We don't need you to "hammer the issue home" on a forum...it's nothing like TV and the correlation is 0. Get a clue dude, nothing you have said is important, get over yourself.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is important....and tough [censored], cuz I'm not gonna stop posting about it.

As a matter of fact, I think I'll make a few more threads about it /images/graemlins/shocked.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

congrats, you are a troll...you can see how well recieved you are by all of the great responses you got to your first thread...well done.

[pokerraja]

thanks adanthar

[joeker]

[ QUOTE ]

congrats, you are a troll...you can see how well recieved you are by all of the great responses you got to your first thread...well done.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's Mr. Troll to you

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
I guess the idea is that they could block players from known gambling sites.

[/ QUOTE ]

what does that have to do with monitoring where internet surfers go? they could do that today.

[Archon_Wing]

Well, at least this might piss off a bit more than the online poker playing population.

[jrbick]

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but this seems to be much more in line with the likes of "wire tapping" than it does with anything else. That said, I don't think we need to go nuts over this with Internet Poker in mind. UIGEA was purely political garbage, nothing more. So, to look at this and think "oh no here they come, they're gonna get us (poker players)" is a bit much. I highly doubt the Feds are going to put forth any effort to watchdog stuff like that.

In terms of UIGEA think about it like this: the GOP passed it, not the Federal Government. For that reason I seriously doubt there will be any further "fall out" from the Federal government regarding internet gaming.

Just my $.02

That said, I don't think that this is necessarily a bad thing as long as it is used for it's intent: protecting us from the bad guys.

[Synergistic Explosions]

[ QUOTE ]
That said, I don't think that this is necessarily a bad thing as long as it is used for it's intent: protecting us from the bad guys.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the bad guys are the ones you think will protect us.

[Copernicus]

"the GOP passed it, not the Federal Government"

Huh?

[Zele]

[ QUOTE ]
That said, I don't think that this is necessarily a bad thing as long as it is used for it's intent: protecting us from the bad guys.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's the trouble - these sorts of things are never used only for their stated intent. RICO was supposed to be just for mobsters; now it's applied to CBOT traders. Mining flight manifests was meant to catch terrorists, but that's how they got David Carruthers.

[jrbick]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That said, I don't think that this is necessarily a bad thing as long as it is used for it's intent: protecting us from the bad guys.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the bad guys are the ones you think will protect us.

[/ QUOTE ]


I won't disagree with you. These are troubling times w/o a doubt. I wasn't trying to say that's what they WILL do, but that's what they SAY they're trying to do. Just trying to show that this isn't aimed at UIGEA as this thread seemed to go in that direction.

[jrbick]

[ QUOTE ]
"the GOP passed it, not the Federal Government"

Huh?

[/ QUOTE ]


I wasn't speaking in a technical manor. Just trying to show that the Federal Government as a whole doesn't really care about internet gaming.

[jrbick]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That said, I don't think that this is necessarily a bad thing as long as it is used for it's intent: protecting us from the bad guys.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's the trouble - these sorts of things are never used only for their stated intent. RICO was supposed to be just for mobsters; now it's applied to CBOT traders. Mining flight manifests was meant to catch terrorists, but that's how they got David Carruthers.

[/ QUOTE ]


Yeah, I admit I don't really have faith that it will be used for its intent. Obviously whenever statements like that are made you can count on picking some wool from your eyes at some point.

[FCBLComish]

Always remember:

War is Peace
Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Strength

Big Brother is Watching YOU......

[Synergistic Explosions]

[ QUOTE ]
Always remember:

War is Opportunity
Freedom is a Priviledge
Ignorance is Preferable

Big Brother owns YOU......

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP to represent present day Republican beliefs.

[Shake_N_Bake]

Actually this bill has already passed the House and Sen. Ted Stevens from AK is making it a priority for the lame duck session.

And for those of you who think that the ISP's won't go for it, they are the ones behind it. The want to set tiers of service with each being more expensive obviously. Only the large corporations will be able to afford unlimited internet. The average person will be stuck choosing from a menu much like you do now for your cable bill.

"Land of the Free" - not anymore. /images/graemlins/mad.gif

[Synergistic Explosions]

[ QUOTE ]
Actually this bill has already passed the House and Sen. Ted Stevens from AK is making it a priority for the lame duck session.

And for those of you who think that the ISP's won't go for it, they are the ones behind it. The want to set tiers of service with each being more expensive obviously. Only the large corporations will be able to afford unlimited internet. The average person will be stuck choosing from a menu much like you do now for your cable bill.

"Land of the Free" - not anymore. /images/graemlins/mad.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, you are correct. It's very very sad. It will shut out small internet companies from growth. One example that was brought up was Google. If these new laws were in place years ago, Google would never have had a chance to be what they are today. That goes for hundreds of companies.

Basically, this is just another way to keep all the money in the hands of a few companies, who are the same companies donating all that money to your Republican heroes election campaigns.

This is just one of many examples of why our political system has broken down completely. It won't fix itself either, no matter how many times you vote.

[IndyFish]

[ QUOTE ]
Actually this bill has already passed the House and Sen. Ted Stevens from AK is making it a priority for the lame duck session.

[/ QUOTE ]

So are you saying that companies that have the "higher tier" access will have bigger internet tubes?

[PokerintheI]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Actually this bill has already passed the House and Sen. Ted Stevens from AK is making it a priority for the lame duck session.

[/ QUOTE ]

So are you saying that companies that have the "higher tier" access will have bigger internet tubes?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but my understanding is it isn't "ISPs" that are behind this. It's the companies that actually own the phone and cable lines. Granted, some of them are ISP's, but the ISP's that lease or rent line access would be just as screwed as the rest of us.

Do an google on "Net Neutrality" and you will find all the information you want.

[Drac]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Actually this bill has already passed the House and Sen. Ted Stevens from AK is making it a priority for the lame duck session.

[/ QUOTE ]

So are you saying that companies that have the "higher tier" access will have bigger internet tubes?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, they get the dump trucks.

[Nincompoop]

http://img164.imageshack.us/img164/3255/1984nm2.gif

[meleader2]

you know, i haven't looked much into this, but if this is true and it actually happens i might be inclined to start some tyler durdenish b.s. just because i have close to nothing else to lose. freedom gone? wtf.