controlling cyberspace

[heuristics]

Found this while surfing.....


Congress is pushing a law that would abandon the Internet's First Amendment -- a principle called Network Neutrality that prevents companies like AT&T, Verizon and Comcast from deciding which Web sites work best for you -- based on what site pays them the most. Your local library shouldn’t have to outbid Barnes & Noble for the right to have its Web site open quickly on your computer.

Net Neutrality allows everyone to compete on a level playing field and is the reason that the Internet is a force for economic innovation, civic participation and free speech. If the public doesn't speak up now, Congress will cave to a multi-million dollar lobbying campaign by telephone and cable companies that want to decide what you do, where you go, and what you watch online.

This isn’t just speculation -- we've already seen what happens elsewhere when the Internet's gatekeepers get too much control. Last year, Telus -- Canada's version of AT&T -- blocked their Internet customers from visiting a Web site sympathetic to workers with whom the company was having a labor dispute. And Madison River, a North Carolina ISP, blocked its customers from using any competing Internet phone service.

[earthbound]

Yep I read about that on "Rachel's News" newsletter Heuristics , it reallly sucks..... And we all know how quick we are to follow the lead of so many things happening in the U.S. it will be a travesty if it gets through..

EDITORIAL: KEEPING A DEMOCRATIC WEB

"Net neutrality" is a concept that is still unfamiliar to most
Americans, but it keeps the Internet democratic. Cable and telephone
companies that provide Internet service are talking about creating a
two-tiered Internet, in which Web sites that pay them large fees would
get priority over everything else. Opponents of these plans are
supporting Net-neutrality legislation, which would require all Web
sites to be treated equally. Net neutrality recently suffered a
setback in the House, but there is growing hope that the Senate will
take up the cause.

One of the Internet's great strengths is that a single blogger or a
small political group can inexpensively create a Web page that is just
as accessible to the world as Microsoft's home page. But this
democratic Internet would be in danger if the companies that deliver
Internet service changed the rules so that Web sites that pay them
money would be easily accessible, while little-guy sites would be
harder to access, and slower to navigate. Providers could also block
access to sites they do not like.

That would be a financial windfall for Internet service providers, but
a disaster for users, who could find their Web browsing influenced by
whichever sites paid their service provider the most money. There is a
growing movement of Internet users who are pushing for legislation to
make this kind of discrimination impossible. It has attracted
supporters ranging from MoveOn.org to the Gun Owners of America.
Grass-roots political groups like these are rightly concerned that
their online speech could be curtailed if Internet service providers
were allowed to pick and choose among Web sites.

The House Energy and Commerce Committee defeated a good Net-neutrality
amendment last week. But the amendment got more votes than many people
expected, suggesting that support for Net neutrality is beginning to
take hold in Congress. In the Senate, Olympia Snowe, a Maine
Republican, and Byron Dorgan, a North Dakota Democrat, are drafting a
strong Net-neutrality bill that would prohibit broadband providers
from creating a two-tiered Internet. Senators who care about the
Internet and Internet users should get behind it.

================================================== =======

New York Times (pg. A14)
February 20, 2006

[ho-hum]

Heuristics,


During the last presidential campaign it was decided by Bush that no foreign internet users could access US govt election sites [or RNC & DNC sites.] This was done to 'protect America' from outside interference.

I think the fact that 5000 ex-pat Americans in Sydney joined the Democrat Party and got news time in the USA. Similar stories were seen in the USA from ex-pat Americans in London, Europe & Japan.

I saw on the news this was announced and took place immediately. This measure was considered a success and 'protected America's democracy'. So Internet political restrictions are happening.

As an aside, google a copy of the US Constitution and do search [F3] on the words 'democratic' or 'democracy'. They are not to be found.

Rice, Powell, Cheney, Rumsfeld & Ashcroft all famous names of powerful american political figures yet none of them were ever elected to office.

cheers

floot