Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Sunday December 09 2018, @07:07PM   Printer-friendly
from the just-pass-a-law dept.

Senators urge FCC to preserve neutrality protections for text messages

The FCC is considering classifying texts as an information service in order to give carriers more tools to fight automated messages and spam texts. However, the Senators don't see the need. The Telecom Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) already requires senders to get permission from a receiver before sending an automated text. Additionally, there is concern that carriers might block legitimate bulk messages. Verizon did so in 2007 when it stopped women's rights advocacy group Naral Pro-Choice America from sending a mass text to its members because the content was considered controversial.

Here is the original letter (pdf).


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday December 10 2018, @10:17PM (8 children)

    by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Monday December 10 2018, @10:17PM (#772596) Journal

    I hereby inform you that, in Australia, voting is compulsory

    --
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Tuesday December 11 2018, @12:28AM (7 children)

    by fustakrakich (6150) on Tuesday December 11 2018, @12:28AM (#772664) Journal

    Nothing wrong with that. Do they tell you who you can vote for? Or can you nominate candidates through petitioning, like in the U.S.?

    --
    La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
    • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday December 11 2018, @03:29AM (5 children)

      by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday December 11 2018, @03:29AM (#772739) Journal

      Or can you nominate candidates through petitioning, like in the U.S.?

      The way I know (and I may be wrong, but I don't think I am), no.
      A candidate has to nominate her/himself to receive votes.

      (It's a bit weird that you can propose someone who has no intention to run, much less to do the job if elected)

      --
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
      • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Tuesday December 11 2018, @05:15AM (4 children)

        by fustakrakich (6150) on Tuesday December 11 2018, @05:15AM (#772755) Journal

        It's a bit weird that you can propose someone who has no intention to run

        It's really better that way. We shouldn't vote for people that want the job. We should conscript the ones that don't, make it like jury duty, then they go *back to the farm* after they serve their time.

        --
        La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
        • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday December 11 2018, @06:44AM (3 children)

          by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday December 11 2018, @06:44AM (#772778) Journal

          That's forced labor in disguise under the name of "conscription".
          Paid forced labor, but forced anyway.

          --
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
          • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Tuesday December 11 2018, @07:09AM (2 children)

            by fustakrakich (6150) on Tuesday December 11 2018, @07:09AM (#772782) Journal

            :-) We could make it a condition of parole. Otherwise let's just call it "community service". If we are going to have "forced labor", could it be in a better place? We need qualified people. At the very least we need to hang a real Sword of Damocles over their heads.

            --
            La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
            • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday December 11 2018, @07:21AM (1 child)

              by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday December 11 2018, @07:21AM (#772785) Journal

              :-) We could make it a condition of parole.

              Politicians life: one term in office, one term in jail.
                ---
                TMB - 2018

              Gotta love it.

              --
              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
              • (Score: 2, Interesting) by fustakrakich on Tuesday December 11 2018, @04:19PM

                by fustakrakich (6150) on Tuesday December 11 2018, @04:19PM (#772914) Journal

                Start with jail. It's the perfect environment. Everybody's a lawyer, and they have a good law library. Once a guy can talk his way past the parole board, you can assume he knows the *art of the deal* and is well qualified to serve the rest of his time in congress. Then people can vote to put him back in jail if he fucks up.

                Come to think of it, I kinda like that idea.

                --
                La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
    • (Score: 2) by Fluffeh on Tuesday December 11 2018, @04:48AM

      by Fluffeh (954) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday December 11 2018, @04:48AM (#772752) Journal

      To nominate yourself for the vote, candidates for either house must formally nominate with the Electoral Commission. The nomination for a party-endorsed candidate must be signed by the Registered Officer of a party registered under the Electoral Act. Fifty signatures of eligible voters are required for an independent candidate.

      A deposit of $1000 is required for a candidate for the House of Representatives, and $2000 for a candidate for the Senate. This deposit is refunded if the candidate gains at least 4% of first preference vote.

      Once candidates are on the ballot paper, the following rules apply:

      Australia uses various forms of preferential voting for almost all elections. Under this system, voters number the candidates on the ballot paper in the order of their preference. The preferential system was introduced in 1918, in response to the rise of the Country Party, a party representing small farmers. The Country Party split the anti-Labor vote in conservative country areas, allowing Labor candidates to win on a minority vote. The conservative government of Billy Hughes introduced preferential voting as a means of allowing competition between the two conservative parties without putting seats at risk.[citation needed] It was first used at the Corangamite by-election on 14 December 1918.[39][40] The system was first used for election for the Queensland Parliament in 1892. It was introduced in the Tasmanian House of Assembly in 1906 as a result of the work of Thomas Hare and Andrew Inglis Clark.

      Preferential voting has gradually extended to both upper and lower houses, in the federal, state and territory legislatures, and is also used in municipal elections, and most other kinds of elections as well, such as internal political party elections, trade union elections, church elections, elections to company boards and elections in voluntary bodies such as football clubs. Negotiations for disposition of preference recommendations to voters are taken very seriously by candidates because transferred preferences carry the same weight as primary votes. Political parties usually produce how-to-vote cards to assist and guide voters in the ranking of candidates.