People tend to get what they wish for, good and hard.
TechFreedom held a fireside chat on Feb. 27th with two FCC commissioners, Ajit Pai and Mike O’Rielly, and the two of them concurred that the new regulations are far-reaching, largely unchecked and pose a threat to consumer bills and to innovation in the industry.
Ajit Pai openly questioned what the problem was, saying, “There’s never been a systemic analysis of what the problem with the Internet is. In this order, you see scattered niche examples [Comcast and BitTorrent, Apple and FaceTime, others] all of which were resolved, mind you, through private sector initiatives.” He continued, saying that the FCC’s net neutrality regulatory regime is a solution that won’t work in search of a problem that doesn’t exist.” Essentially, this is, contrary to the assertion of activists and others, a vaguely justified power grab by a government agency.
Mike O’Rielly added, in a bit of humor that “there is a problem, and it’s the document we adopted [Feb. 26].” Neither of them were reticent in explaining exactly how and why the document was the problem. For one, the document was, as Commissioner Pai pointed out, written to solve a problem that wasn’t readily apparent. O’Rielly said the document is “guilt by imagination, trying to guess what will go wrong in the future”; instead of tackling a readily apparent and current issue, the FCC proposal is instead stumbling forward, trying to find future, hypothetical transgressions to retroactively justify its own regulations.
This conspiratorial and wide-ranging thinking on the part of FCC is not a bug, but rather a feature. O’Rielly openly said that “it’s intended to catch everybody”. Pai noted that the FCC was going to centralize powers over what infrastructure was deployed and where through the use of statutes and other laws; O’Rielly mentioned specifically that the FCC was going to “use Section 201 [of the Communications Act] to do it’s dirty work.”
Pai continued, saying that the FCC was largely focused on the ends of Internet regulation rather than the means, and that “a lot of these promises of regulatory restraint are pretty ephemeral.” O’Rielly mentioned that mobile data policies were likely to be subsumed by the new regulations into policies on the wider Internet as a whole. This one-size-fits-all approach ignores the differences in how mobile data is used versus the way the Internet is used by a normal computer or other devices. Many features of mobile service, the two said, could be construed as a company favoring one app or one site over another in terms of data, which would violate the FCC’s standards. […]
The net may be “neutral” but the FCC is most certainly not.
Big Brother is tired of being watched. “This isn’t what I signed up for,” he harrumphs.
Welcome to the canal, chums!
they said chumping, not chumming
“The Net” should be on one big server named “Hillary”.
Experts tell Gawker: Hillary’s shoddy private e-mail security is a potential national security disaster
National Security is a small price to pay to ensure that Hillary is there to answer the phone a 3AM to take care of National Security.
Read that Gawker thing on Hillary’s “security” setup.
Being in IT security, even as someone who’s not a sysadmin, I about swallowed my teeth when I read about the setup.
The only reason she would have done it that way would be that she privileges her own ass more than National Security.
She was definitely hacked. Nobody is going to pass up that kind of treasure trove, no way no how.
Effing sociopath.
Fox Exclusive: Clinton Internal Cable Forbids Use Personal Accounts
Fox News has exclusively obtained an internal 2011 State Department cable that shows Secretary of State Clinton’s office told employees not to use personal email
Well this HRC/ImaWomen/Server config surely explains how the whole Ruskie Reset button debacle went down. Putin fed her the incorrect spelling through her secure woman…… socket.
Ew.
keystone cops news
State agencies mobilize after crude oil train derails near Galena
A smart Republican who wanted to be President of the United States would spend much of the next two years demanding the Vladimir Putin release Hillary Clinton’s emails to the public.
Hell, a smart Democrat who wasn’t afraid of the Clintons would do much the same.
Furthermore, smart Republicans in Congress would go to the floor of the House or Senate every time something bad happens to a railcar carrying oil and denouce the Democrats for blocking the construction of the Keystone pipeline.
Of course, since there aren’t any smart Republicans, that’ll never happen.
Sociopath, or entitled queen bitch Dicentra?
‘Please Pray’: Popular Christian Singer Stuns Fans With Open Letter Revealing Personal Struggle
Praise You In The Storm
Ernst, I’m gonna go there: “What difference, at this point, does it make?”
>Just a few hours ago it was reported that Harrison Ford crashed his plane in a golf course, fortunately with only moderate injuries. But if he got it down in one piece it was because he could manipulate the controls and read the gauges. In some basic way, Ford could fly the plane. But what can Hillary or Barack actually run?
For they have been as busy as bees replacing the real gauges with painted ones and hurling the United States around with wild abandon, not even caring it seems where north is, or even where down goes. One trembles at the thought.<
link
>IN SOCIETIES under the post-totalitarian system, all political life in the traditional sense has been eliminated. People have no opportunity to express themselves politically in public, let alone to organize politically. The gap that results is filled by ideological ritual. In such a situation, people’s interest in political matters naturally dwindles and independent political thought, insofar as it exists at all, is seen by the majority as unrealistic, farfetched, a kind of self-indulgent game, hopelessly distant from their everyday concerns; something admirable, perhaps, but quite pointless, because it is on the one hand entirely utopian and on the other hand extraordinarily dangerous, in view of the unusual vigor with which any move in that direction is persecuted by the regime.
Yet even in such societies, individuals and groups of people exist who do not abandon politics as a vocation and who, in one way or another, strive to think independently, to express themselves and in some cases even to organize politically, because that is a part of their attempt to live within the truth.
The fact that these people exist and work is in itself immensely important and worthwhile. Even in the worst of times, they maintain the continuity of political thought. If some genuine political impulse emerges from this or that “pre-political” confrontation and is properly articulated early enough, thus increasing its chances of relative success, then this is frequently due to these isolated generals without an army who, because they have maintained the continuity of political thought in the face of enormous difficulties, can at the right moment enrich the new impulse with the fruits of their own political thinking. Once again, there is ample evidence for this process in Czechoslovakia. Almost all those who were political prisoners in the early 1970s, who had apparently been made to suffer in vain because of their quixotic efforts to work politically among an utterly apathetic and demoralized society, belong today-inevitably-among the most active Chartists. In Charter 77, the moral legacy of their earlier sacrifices is valued, and they have enriched this movement with their experience and that element of political thinking.
And yet it seems to me that the thought and activity of those friends who have never given up direct political work and who are always ready to assume direct political responsibility very often suffer from one chronic fault: an insufficient understanding of the historical uniqueness of the post-totalitarian system as a social and political reality. They have little understanding of the specific nature of power that is typical for this system and therefore they overestimate the importance of direct political work in the traditional sense. Moreover, they fail to appreciate the political significance of those “pre-political” events and processes that provide the living humus from which genuine political change usually springs. As political actors—or, rather, as people with political ambitions—they frequently try to pick up where natural political life left off. They maintain models of behavior that may have been appropriate in more normal political circumstances and thus, without really being aware of it, they bring an outmoded way of thinking, old habits, conceptions, categories, and notions to bear on circumstances that are quite new and radically different, without first giving adequate thought to the meaning and substance of such things in the new circumstances, to what politics as such means now, to what sort of thing can have political impact and potential, and in what way- Because such people have been excluded from the structures of power and are no longer able to influence those structures directly (and because they remain faithful to traditional notions of politics established in more or less democratic societies or in classical dictatorships) they frequently, in a sense, lose touch with reality. Why make compromises with reality, they say, when none of our proposals will ever be accepted anyway? Thus they find themselves in a world of genuinely utopian thinking.<
link
Harrison Ford crashed his plane in a golf course
Unfortunately president Present was not present.
King Putts was in the rough
bogartin’ a doobielooking for his ball.As if.
Although I do have “Check Valerie’s Purse, Mister President” in our office pool.
There was a golfer, lost his balls and Barry was his name O!
And if it can’t quite catch everybody, well, there are other means available. Shoulda backed ClownDisaster’s Iran play there, Bob. But noooooo, you had to go and declare you aren’t afraid of anybody.
Well in the lead for threadwinner.