Page All: Viewing All Pages
Page 1
I don't hide the fact that I'm a libertarian and one of the tenets of that is to uphold personal freedoms and have a limited federal government. The Federal Government wants to intrude on one of the most basic rights that we are given when we are created, the ability to speak freely and openly; I mean, on the internet. The government wants power to oversee areas of the internet and wants to be able to control certain aspects.
Let's look at their comments.
That was then and this is now? What changed? You don't think that the internet has become a medium to allow political views to be disseminated to large audiences of like minded people would be the cause? No... Couldn't be. My question to you, why is it when something works does the Federal Government want to regulate it?
What's the purpose of the Federal Government regulating the internet? This is what the document says are problems.
People won't buy stuff on the internet? Please, what are the Feds looking at? The next three are FUD (fear, uncertainty, doubt) trying to evoke a emotional knee-jerk reaction. All the points are unfounded and even if they were, government needs to stay out and let the internet manage itself as it has done for a long time.
What are the goals of this new policy?
Slippery slope? No, it is a avalanche and we're in the face of it. If you let the Federal Government do this, it will be the end of the internet as you and I know it. What happens when the Feds find something they don't approve of on the internet? You think that child porn is the only thing? No political views would ever be suppressed? Hmm...
Read it for yourself: http://www.ntia.doc.gov/presentations/2010/MediaInstitute_02242010.html
I don't hide the fact that I'm a libertarian and one of the tenets of that is to uphold personal freedoms and have a limited federal government. The Federal Government wants to intrude on one of the most basic rights that we are given when we are created, the ability to speak freely and openly; I mean, on the internet. The government wants power to oversee areas of the internet and wants to be able to control certain aspects.
Let's look at their comments.
Quote
In the physical world, I associate the dynamics of a natural ecosystem with two important concepts: first, the presence of some set of biological laws such as natural selection, that second, leads to a balance or equilibrium state so that even when there is a disturbance these natural operations and laws bring the ecosystem back to a equilibrium state (maybe different than before, but an equilibrium).
Applying this concept to the online ecosystem could lead us to accept the idea that the Internet is self-regulating and there is some natural order that will always emerge no matter how the system may be disturbed. From this concept some argue that policymakers should just leave the Internet alone.
In fact, "leaving the Internet alone" has been the nation’s Internet policy since the Internet was first commercialized in the mid-1990s. The primary government imperative then was just to get out of the way to encourage its growth. And the policy set forth in the Telecommunications Act of 1996 was: "to preserve the vibrant and competitive free market that presently exists for the Internet and other interactive computer services, unfettered by Federal or State regulation."
This was the right policy for the United States in the early stages of the Internet, and the right message to send to the rest of the world. But that was then and this is now.
That was then and this is now? What changed? You don't think that the internet has become a medium to allow political views to be disseminated to large audiences of like minded people would be the cause? No... Couldn't be. My question to you, why is it when something works does the Federal Government want to regulate it?
What's the purpose of the Federal Government regulating the internet? This is what the document says are problems.
Quote
- If users do not trust that their credit card numbers and private information are safe on the Internet, they won’t use it.
- If content providers do not trust that their content will be protected, they will threaten to stop putting it online.
- If large enterprises don’t have confidence that their network will not be breached over the Internet, they will disconnect their network and limit access to business partners and customers.
- If foreign governments do not trust the Internet governance systems, they will threaten to balkanize the Domain Name System which will jeopardize the worldwide reach of the Internet.
People won't buy stuff on the internet? Please, what are the Feds looking at? The next three are FUD (fear, uncertainty, doubt) trying to evoke a emotional knee-jerk reaction. All the points are unfounded and even if they were, government needs to stay out and let the internet manage itself as it has done for a long time.
What are the goals of this new policy?
Quote
- Privacy policy. Here’s the question: How can we enable the development of innovative new services and applications that will make intensive use of personal information but at same time protect users against harm and unwanted intrusion into their privacy? We are launching a series of listening sessions this spring with industry, advocates and academics in the field, and will follow up with a notice of inquiry and public outreach events.
- Child protection and Freedom of Expression: As more children go online, how do we ensure proper targeting of law enforcement resources against serious crime while remembering that most important line of defense against harmful content is the well- informed and engaged parent or teacher? Later this year, the Online Safety Technology Working Group, created by Congress and convened by NTIA, will issue a report on the state of the art in child protection strategies online.
- Cybersecurity: How do we meet the security challenge posed by the global Internet which will require increased law enforcement and private sector technology innovation yet respect citizen privacy and protect civil liberties. We’re participating in a Commerce Department cybersecurity initiative that will address these issues, particularly as they relate to improving the preparedness of industry for cyber attacks.
- Copyright protection: How do we protect against illegal piracy of copyrighted works and intellectual property on the Internet while preserving the rights of users to access lawful content? NTIA and our sister agency at the Department of Commerce, the US Patent and Trademark Office, are beginning a comprehensive consultation process that will help the Administration develop a forward-looking set of policies to address online copyright infringement in a balanced, Internet-savvy manner.
- Internet Governance: In our role administering the Federal government’s relationship with the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), how do we ensure that ICANN serves the public interest and conducts its activities with the openness and transparency that the global Internet community demands? Last fall, NTIA and ICANN set forth a framework for technical coordination of the naming and numbering system and I am looking forward to soon participating in the first of the administrative reviews to ensure that these commitments are carried out in full.
Slippery slope? No, it is a avalanche and we're in the face of it. If you let the Federal Government do this, it will be the end of the internet as you and I know it. What happens when the Feds find something they don't approve of on the internet? You think that child porn is the only thing? No political views would ever be suppressed? Hmm...
Read it for yourself: http://www.ntia.doc.gov/presentations/2010/MediaInstitute_02242010.html