The war that we all need to be fighting, ytmnd. (updated)
Created on: August 22nd, 2006
www.savetheinternet.com ; http://www.savetheinternet.com/=senatemap for ease of who's on what side ; http://www.senate.gov/index.htm to send some emails to those who hate the internet. http://www.cjr.org/tools/owners/timewarner.asp for how much a big bus
Sponsorships:
| user | amount | user | amount |
|---|---|---|---|
| linkskywalker | $9.41 | ||
| Sponsor this site! | Total: $9.41 | Active: $0.00 | |
Vote metrics:
| rating | total votes | favorites | comments |
|---|---|---|---|
| (4.43) | 1,608 | 114 | 908 |
View metrics:
| today | yesterday | this week | this month | all time |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 43,351 |
Inbound links:
| views | url |
|---|---|
| 5 | http://collectedanimals.org/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=4978 |
| 5 | http://www.stumbleupon.com/su/ |
| 4 | http://www.google.com.hk |
| 2 | http://typo-oni-kun.livejournal.com/ |
| 2 | https://www.google.com/ |
You forgot to mention the fact that Max owns YTMND.com, and would have to pay for "top-tier" service if this bullsh*t actually goes through. As it stands now, he already has to pay ungodly amounts of money to host the site, which is really only paid for by the ads on here. Imagine if he had to pay twice that much to get decent bandwidth to host this massive site on. The death of network neutrality will mean the death of YTMND.
I mailed both my senators, and my local representative, about a month ago. The letter to the representative was deemed undeliverable (wrong address is posted on his site, apperantly), one letter to the senator seems to have been ignored, and the other senator sent me a form letter basically saying, "f*ck you" in political-ese.
Does this apply to Canadians as well? I assume it does at some level, and even if it doesn't it would still have profound impact on any web site I can think of. Thusly, I made sure to contact as many U.S. Senators as possible, mainly the ones undecided or against Net Nuetrality... Who knew that a moron ranting about the series of tubes could be a beacon for the destruction of basic liberties...
We must not save just one internet... but all of the internets. Bushisms put to good use... Anyways, whether you think it's liberal or not it's the right thing to do. Neither conservative nor liberal are always wrong or always right, whoever this cause is proposed by, this is one of their party's just causes.
Yes Ive already done this because someone else also pointed this out a few months ago I dont remember who, however this was a slightly better presentation and it was very persausive in its arguement. Yes lets indeed be the REAL savoirs of the internet. There is quite a few of us we can make an impact if we all did this.
So let me get this right. These companies will determine which content has higher priority and will in turn receive more bandwidth. So logically they will allocate more bandwidth to sites that draw more attention. Ultimately, I will be able to see more porn at faster speeds. I fail to see the problem.
I'm sure you're all familiar with Ted Steven's "Series of Tubes" Speech. Now realize that he was making that speech as an explaination of his OPPOSITION to net neutrality! Thankfully, I recently moved to alaska so I'll be voting that retard out of office even if I have to vote for hitler to take his place.
most that i questioned or needed to say has been answered or said. also i salute you for doing someting instead of knodding your head and carrying on with your day as most would.... but ytmnd as you can see with the ignoranceof fiving for the bgm or use of fads for comments, is not the best place for something of this caliber. but ty i wasnt aware of this until now
"'even if I have to vote for hitler to take his place.' what." perhaps you're not familiar with how elections work. you vote for one person and they get the office. If stevens runs again, I have to vote for someone else to take his place if I don't want stevens. and yes, if your pr0n site is not paying craploads of money to the ISPs for bandwidth, you'll be lucky to get 56k speeds, if the site even loads at all.
"NaroidCRX: But is that necessarily wrong? I'm not disagreeing with you, but
if you hate Best Buy and walk into the store and plaster "Best Buy Sucks"
signs all of the walls, shouldn't they be allowed to take them down?"
If you walked into the street with a sign that said "Bush Sucks," would you expect to be arrested? that's what effectively will happen if net neutrality is abandoned. It'll end up that every blog that says bad things about any given ISP is gonna get their bandwidth killed.
So you're saying you would want someone in office who killed 6 million jews over someone who used the word "tubes" to describe the internet. The “what” wasn't a misunderstanding of your message, it was a "Wow you're f*cking retarded" reponse. You must've been one of those "Anyone but Bush" Kerry voters.
"Ziv: Go into a Best Buy with signs that say "Best Buy Sucks" and paste them
all over the walls." I didn't say that. Flaming an ISP on their own forums is one thing. Flaming them on your own personal website is another. If net neutrality is abandoned, the ISP would be able to censor anyone on any site. It would be like peacefully protesting against Best Buy in a town square and getting arrested because Best Buy doesn't approve.
I don't think it's a non-issue at all, I think it's something everyone should be concerned about. If Congress gives in to the lobby and doesn't protect net neutrality the big ISPs will undoubtedly ruin the internet with this two tiered garbage and possibly begin the charge people extra fees to access the "normal" internet they had before net neutrality was killed. That to me is an issue. Especially when someone as ignorant of the internet as Ted Stevens is trying to fix something that isn't broken.
"Ziv: But is it? I don't really know. I have no good answer for you. In one
sense, it's like censoring an exterior protest, but at the same time it
*is* their network."In the absence of net neutrality, the ISPs become like the mafia. Don't like that rival store? pay the ISP and the site will just disappear. Also: in what way is an external website "their" network?
"NaroidCRX: But is that necessarily wrong? I'm not disagreeing with you, but
if you hate Best Buy and walk into the store and plaster "Best Buy Sucks"
signs all of the walls, shouldn't they be allowed to take them down?" That analogy makes no sense. Would you want the internet to be synonomous with a corporation? Saying "best buy sucks" on the net is like saying it sucks on the street. If best buy had authority to take the message down, that'd imply that the message was on their property ie the internet.
right now the internet is free for anyone to speak their mind about anything. It is unbiased. It is not a corporate entity, but rather a series of tubes. once corporate and political entities claim ownership, they can take away the power the people once held, and we'll be once again forced to sit back and watch what we're told to watch.
Not one of these fudgepackers in Congress has a clue about what they are voting on here beyond what the lobbyists have told them after stuffing a fat wad of hundred dollar bills into their pockets. Which is why Net Neutrality will probably die because the side supporting net neutrality has nothing to offer beyond information. Cash > Information unless there is a larger public outcry over this.
RalphTheMagician: I would normally agree with you. I think that businesses should be able to do what they want with their investments. However, the internet has become such a huge thing that the control those ISPs would weild would be tremendous. Say a polititian pays off the ISPs to make it so his opponent's website doesn't work? On one hand, you can't trust the companies, and on the other hand, you can't trust the government to do that job either. I see net neutrality as the only feasible solution.
I see what you're saying. But at the same time, I'm allowed to say whatever I want about best buy so long as it isn't on thier site or anything they have direct power over. To say they or any other company has the right to take down what you say about them anywhere on the net is to say it's alright for a corporate entity to invade your space and censor you. It's not them taking down signs on their walls, it's them barging in your house and telling you to drop the subject. not saying this will happen if this
"in theory, current anti-trust legeslation should prevent
anything from spiraling out of control. It has so far." that's the argument that many of the senators who are against net neutrality are citing, saying that they want to wait to see if it's going to be a problem. However, savetheinternet.com wants it put into law now so we don't have to worry about it being a problem in the first place.
comicmaster: "Just logged on again because I couldn't sleep...what the hell is all this
talk about Hitler??? What happened???"
I made an off-the-wall comment about voting for Hitler rather than Ted Stevens (I live in Alaska, so I get to decide if ted gets another 6 years) For this I apologize. It was offensive and off-topic.
The main problem we have with Net Neutrality is that f*cktards like Ted Stevens (and yes, many other politicians) don't have a f*cking clue how the internet works. They, honest to God, think they're actually improving the internet by removing Net Neutrality. Someone needs to fill them in on the real deal, or YTMND as we know it will cease to exist.
I propose that YTMND and eBaum's join forces in this fight. Eric may be able to pay the companies to keep his site alive NOW, but when all the other sites that he steals content from dissapear eBaum's world will also cease to exist. Eric is just as dirty and underhanded as the politicians. He's just what we need in this fight.
As Lewis Black put it, "The Democrats, the party of no ideas. The Republicans, the party of bad ideas." What we really need is a leader, not a politician... Not many people running for presidency are more leader than politician... Politics is a symbiotic relationship with leadership, unfortunately, politics can sometimes suck a leader dry... lol, analogy...
"You've got it backwards. The more money the 'evil corperations' pay
internet providers, the more prominant their influence will become in the
services. It doesn't mean the poor will no longer be allowed to read the
news. OH NOES!"
Yea, that's EXACTLY why they want this law to go down. So their competators get the same equal connection they do...Get out of my f*cking country.
IF you think guys like this: http://ttico.ytmnd.com/ (pro?) or http://sentedstevens.ytmnd.com/, http://personalinternet.ytmnd.com/ (con), should be in any sort of position to influence the development of the Internet (in the U.S. at least) please visit the following informative website - http://internetsuck.ytmnd.com/. =)
Individual solicitation of congressman is likely not to do much. There has to be a swelling response, unfortuantely the Media is directed by those who do not want this to happen so word is not that easy to get out. There are several levels of action that need to be taken, each dependent on the severity of the problem relative to time passed.
Make people on video game sites and other popular sites aware, if you can gather enough who care, do real life campaings where you announce what is happening directly to people. Preferably obtaining an Ice Cream truck and a bull horn. If such efforts fail and things become dire... well that would be a real revolution with blood spilt (if people actually cared about their rights that is.) Let's hope it doesn't get there.
Just a little side note to the Americans writing letters to your congresspeople. Please don't forget to include a plea for those they place on the internet regulatory committees to know WHAT THE F*CK THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT! At least put a computer scientist or something in the room to tell the Senators when they are totally clueless.
I called Senator Kennedy and left the message from Savetheinternet.com. Come on YTMND. If we band together we can make a dent. We're a laaaarge group of like-minded people who have the amazing talent of coming together for a common cause. Eric Bauman is a crook. So we're doing out best to stop him. Someone lit a cat on fire, So we started an anti-animal abuse phenomenon on the internet. When someone stole our logo? We had him closing shop in 2 f*cking days. So I say COME TOGETHER YTMND SOLDIERS! Go! Go!
I called about 9 congressmen's offices, I think I actually spoke to one and told him I'm happy with his decision (he was out of state and pro net neutrality). I think the fact that we even have to fight our congress to do the RIGHT thing and not go out of their way to f*ck us shows that this country is in serious need of an overhaul (execute corrupt officials for treason plz)
Also: F*ck representative democracy. That's how we got into this situation in the first place; we need to put direct democracy in place, similar to what they had in Athens. Imagine what would happen? Someone would 'nay the net neutrality bill, and at the end of his short term would be thrown into exile... now THAT is a government by, for, and to meet the needs of the people
Let's get serious here: the abandoning of net nuetrality would not limit your first Amendment rights: that's just extreme spin. It would just allow ISPs to charge you for internet access in the manner that they charge for cable TV. An "all-inclusive" package would be available. Don't get me wrong, I don't like the idea, but be honest.
While a real issue, I die of laughter when I read that people "sent letters to their senators" or "left a message on their voicemail". If you're so angry and afraid, go to Washington and protest for all the gods sake. Burn down the White House. Do SOMETHING. All you're doing now is sit on your *ss and hope something will happen, patting yourself on the back saying: "I did my part." Well, clearly, you're not.
It's not just gonna "blow over". That mentality is the reason America is rotting from the inside right there. People don't give a sh*t, they just figure the same government bodies that f*ck them over are somehow going to take care of the problems THEY themselves are creating, and everything will be fine and blow over. So we shouldn't worry about it or think about it or do any work, we'll just leave it up to them. If you havn't noticed, they've been taking away our rights little by little for years now, and
DEAR INTERNET USERS: The net narvality act is actually a big deal because we're looking at things like preferential routing by the owners of backbones. So, if Pacific Bell decided to screw, say, Google, then users whose traffic went through a PacBell router on its way to the nearest Google server might experience higher latency than usual when accessing Google pages. OMG ALERT THE INTERNET!
None of you realize this, but Net Neautrality just allows the government get its sticky fingers into regulating the Internet. Net Neutrality is the most short sighted political issue I have seen in a long time. Please read about why Net Neutrality is BAD for freedom here:
http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articles/0706/0706neutrality.htm
PLEASE start thinking for yourselves and stop joining these bandwagons just because they claim to support "freedom".
Someday, the Internet will become an example of a problem known as "The Tragedy of the Commons." Everyone will have an incentive to use the infrastructure, no will have an incentive to build it. There are two solutions to this problem: privatize the commons (which is essentially waht Congress is doing) or ration access to the commons (this is generally what government does in such situations.) The simple fact is that rationing would be FAR worse.
Bold
Italic
Underline
Code
User Link
Site Link