US Senate votes to restore net neutrality 8 replies

Please wait...

FileTrekker Über Admin

I'm spending a year dead for tax reasons.

264,105 XP

15th December 2002

18 Uploads

22,346 Posts

1,633 Threads

#1 2 months ago

So the US Senate has just voted to restore the Net Nutrality regs, thanks to 3 republican voters who gave the democrats enough to push it through.

Sadly though I doubt it will get any further, from the looks of things? Apparently it has to go to the House of Representatives? And apparently the chances are given the greater Republican control there, they'll likely quash it, and in any event, it will then go to Trump who will quash it anyway.]

Hopefully something comes of this because honestly it is going to be really harmful for the open internet and has been already. 


Danny King | Community Manager | GameFront.com



Jeff Über Admin

I am a mean boss ⬆️⬆️⬇️⬇️⬅️➡️⬅️➡️🅱🅰

184,626 XP

6th April 2000

0 Uploads

14,591 Posts

1,534 Threads

#2 2 months ago

Steps in making a law: 


  • A bill can be introduced in either chamber of Congress by a Senator or Representative who sponsors it.
  • Once a bill is introduced, it is assigned to a committee whose members will research, discuss, and make changes to the bill.
  • The bill is then put before that chamber to be voted on.
  • If the bill passes one body of Congress, it is then presented to the other body to go through a similar process of research, discussion, changes, and voting.
  • Once both bodies vote to accept a bill, they must work out any differences between the two versions. Then both chambers vote on the same exact bill and, if it passes, they present it to the President.
  • The President then considers the bill. The President can approve the bill and sign it into law or not approve (veto) a bill.
  • If the President chooses to veto a bill, in most cases Congress can vote to override that veto and the bill becomes a law. However, if the President pocket vetoes a bill after Congress has adjourned, the veto cannot be overridden.

Source


It's an uphill battle for this bill, but at least it's moving forward. Hopefully, with the next election cycle, we see the "blue wave" continue and remove the majority that their red counterparts currently hold in every branch of government. However, it still needs to get past our current President who isn't exactly for the people as much as he is for himself and big business.

It's a huge issue in the US and will continue to be so long as it exists. Hopefully, once we get a new President that isn't bought and paid for by the ISPs, we can dissolve this law.  


Product Manager | GameFront.com




Redlin5

That Team Rocket Guy

1,362 XP

1st November 2017

0 Uploads

102 Posts

8 Threads

#3 2 months ago



Even if the process is going to be opposed by the special interests, that's no reason to roll over and accept a complete corpocracy over the Internet in the way things are distributed, levels of service/product, etc.  Far too many small industries are built on the back of an affordable, accessible internet.

 


Unrepentant Hoser



Adrian Ţrumpeş Forum Mod

I LOVE TRUMP

261,065 XP

9th September 2007

4 Uploads

21,711 Posts

1,753 Threads

#4 2 months ago

My one, great hope is that if this bill passes Ajit Pai gets duct-taped to a wall and has pies thrown at him.  


"I'd shush her zephyr." ~ Zephyr.



Lindale Forum Mod

Mister Angry Rules Guy

240,291 XP

31st January 2010

0 Uploads

23,365 Posts

2 Threads

#5 2 months ago

All I can say is good luck with this, while America has a President who only cares about the top 1%.


filesnation_by_lindale_ff-da1kplo.png



Serio VIP Member

The Dane

149,603 XP

10th November 2006

3 Uploads

12,492 Posts

35 Threads

#6 2 months ago

For anyone who might be confused about what net neutrality actually means, this infographic from the European Commission shows it;




I have to say, I don't have much faith in congress not to fuck up. As it stands, the majority of Republicans would far sooner see the Internet become a privatised, corporate entity than allow it to blossom and foster creativity and business. And frankly, you have to wonder if it's just for the money. 




Jeff Über Admin

I am a mean boss ⬆️⬆️⬇️⬇️⬅️➡️⬅️➡️🅱🅰

184,626 XP

6th April 2000

0 Uploads

14,591 Posts

1,534 Threads

#7 2 months ago
Posted by Lindale

All I can say is good luck with this, while America has a President who only cares about the top 1%.

He doesn't care _about_ the 1%, he only cares about being a 1% and trying to make it so any laws created benefit him. The rest are just benefitting from his corruption. He hates Jeff Bezos because he owns the Washington Post which routinely points out the BS in what trump says and does. trump is using his position to try and force the USPS to charge Amazon more for shipping because of it. 


Product Manager | GameFront.com




Jeff Über Admin

I am a mean boss ⬆️⬆️⬇️⬇️⬅️➡️⬅️➡️🅱🅰

184,626 XP

6th April 2000

0 Uploads

14,591 Posts

1,534 Threads

#8 2 months ago
Posted by Serio

For anyone who might be confused about what net neutrality actually means, this infographic from the European Commission shows it;




I have to say, I don't have much faith in congress not to fuck up. As it stands, the majority of Republicans would far sooner see the Internet become a privatised, corporate entity than allow it to blossom and foster creativity and business. And frankly, you have to wonder if it's just for the money. 

This is only a broadsword example of what it means. The ISPs could selectively throttle specific websites based on how much extra they can make for charging to use them. Want to use Facebook? Tough, unless you upgrade to the next tier Internet package. They could also use this method to only allow access to political candidates they prefer in office, ensuring that these rules are never changed. 


It's making the ISPs more powerful than governments because it then puts them in control of what people are informed of. 


Product Manager | GameFront.com




Serio VIP Member

The Dane

149,603 XP

10th November 2006

3 Uploads

12,492 Posts

35 Threads

#9 2 months ago
Posted by Jeff
Posted by Serio

For anyone who might be confused about what net neutrality actually means, this infographic from the European Commission shows it;




I have to say, I don't have much faith in congress not to fuck up. As it stands, the majority of Republicans would far sooner see the Internet become a privatised, corporate entity than allow it to blossom and foster creativity and business. And frankly, you have to wonder if it's just for the money. 

This is only a broadsword example of what it means. The ISPs could selectively throttle specific websites based on how much extra they can make for charging to use them. Want to use Facebook? Tough, unless you upgrade to the next tier Internet package. They could also use this method to only allow access to political candidates they prefer in office, ensuring that these rules are never changed. 


It's making the ISPs more powerful than governments because it then puts them in control of what people are informed of. 

Indeed. No doubt they'd try to restrict access to content they deem "un-American", such as pornography or liberal subjects such as free media or art. You want access to Wikipedia instead of Conservapedia? Pay extra for that. You want access to WashingtonPost, Reddit, Twitter instead of Fox News and Facebook? Costs extra.