Monday, 7 August 2006

Fighting For Net Neutrality

Thanks to one of the best bloggers in the world, Scott, I am now turned on to the cause of We Are The Web who are fighting US policy makers and big business and their efforts to make the web more expensive to use.

So go to We Are The Web and learn all about the fight for net neutrality and join in if you can!

Off to Nottingham today as I've got an audition and meeting up with some mates, staying with Marie at her parents and their PC is broke so unless I can fix it, bloggage will be very light. Back on Thursday, by which time I hope the situation in Lebanon is improved, if not, they'll be hell to pay...


  1. Net "neutrality" is not a beneficial thing. It is, when you think about it, a form of control, in that strict "neutrality" deprives us of a very one-sided concept of freedom of expression.

    We cannot be "neutral" on the imperative that Freedom be give a wide berth, and Her expression be given free rein, in order to prevent the tyranny of government.

    It simply will not do to neutralise the Web--it must remain a living creature in order to protect Freedom.

    Eighteen Canadians have died in Afghanistan in the last 2 weeks and nobody cares.

  2. Have fun with Marie this week! And good luck on that audition.

  3. Three murders last week mate..stay safe.

  4. Goodness, watching those wackos promoting net neutrality was enough to make me take a fire axe to my router, smash it into a hundred pieces, then takes those splintered fragments of plastic and insert each one into my own swollen anus. Yes, the Internet is for weirdos like you and me. Get used to it. Meanwhile, the company for which The Missus works for has just trademarked Web 2.0.


  5. makes it sound like they are fighting the bad old U.S. feds who want to stick their hand in the internet. They claim they are fighting for our freedom. They also make veiled threats that future cool internet applications will not happen with this "regulation". When in fact, the neutrality regulations are supposed to maintain the "unregulated" nature of the internet.

    Will the "handsoff" supporters also fight the regulators who gave us the payments system, which allows telcos to sue you, and take your things (and you go to jail if you resist), if you don't pay? Will they fight the regulations that give them rights of way and easements to run their radiating wires past your home? How about the laws that provide a policing and legal infrastructure to discourage people cutting their wires, and burning down their switching offices? Will they fight those "heavy hand of the feds" regulations too?

    Will the handsoff people allow me to have tiered pricing for access to me? I want to charge them $5 for each piece of spam I receive. Since they want to do content filtering, will they charge spammers and reimburse me for reading about their products?

    The push is on right now, since the Chinese government has completed testing of the packet filtering systems, which prevent dissenting political views from getting packets through. The systems are configurable, so new bad words can be added as they are discovered, and IP addresses recorded. Someone decided that they work so well, let's bring it in here, so we can degrade service for content that didn't pay the premium. They already paid for the bandwidth, but that is no longer enough. Then you *will* see the feds get involved, because if you can track content for billing and service level purposes, you can do the same for "patriot act III".


Please do not be under the misapprehension that this blog has a laissez-faire comments policy where commenters can get away with whatever they want to say on account of their ‘freedom of speech’.

Blurred Clarity has a stringent comments policy. So anything off-topic, diversionary, trollish, abusive, misogynist, racist, homophobic or xenophobic will be deleted.

Cheers duckies.