SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Democrats' Net Neutrality Bill Survives First Vote:
A bill backed by House Democrats to reinstate Obama-era net neutrality protections passed its first hurdle Tuesday.
Democrats pushed the Save the Internet Act through the House Energy and Commerce subcommittee in an 18-11 vote that fell along party lines. The legislation codifies rules that were repealed in December 2017 by the Republican-led FCC. As part of this repeal, the FCC abdicated its authority to protect consumers online to the Federal Trade Commission.
The bill introduced by Democrats is an attempt to end a nearly two-decade-old fight over how best to prevent broadband companies from abusing their power as gatekeepers to the internet. Specifically, it prevents broadband providers from blocking, slowing down or charging for faster access to the internet. But it also restores the FCC's authority as the "cop on the beat" when it comes to policing potential broadband abuses.
Republicans have criticized the legislation as giving the FCC too much authority to regulate ISPs.
What are the odds that it will pass?
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday March 27 2019, @04:41PM (6 children)
That's just another man in the middle... And it sounds like it's trivial for the ISP to block, should the order ever come down.
So far still, the ISP is the weakest link. The connection is too frail, subject to the whims of any two bit dictator that comes along. Legislation can't protect us from that. There has to be a technical solution for this very social problem.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Wednesday March 27 2019, @05:30PM (5 children)
I'm talking only about privacy.
If you're doing something that would get you blocked by a court order, then that is a whole different business.
A two bit dictator who thinks he's a 2^32 bit dictator could also trumple on your right to electrical power, sewer service, clean water, etc. Far worse things than the internet.
The lower I set my standards the more accomplishments I have.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday March 27 2019, @05:45PM (4 children)
A two bit dictator who thinks he's a 2^32 bit dictator could also trumple on your right to electrical power, sewer service, clean water, etc. Far worse things than the internet.
Well yeah, they can bomb your house and shoot the dog too. The idea is that we need a robust connection, resistant to interference. Solar and water (if it rains a lot) are easier to find.
And we're not just talking about court orders. You get crap like they're doing in New Zealand. That's the ISPs doing the censorship. That is unacceptable, exactly the kind of damage we're supposed to be able to route around. You can't do that when you're tethered to BigCorp Telecom. And if they don't want you to have privacy, you won't have privacy. All those VPNs VPSs are too easy to block.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Wednesday March 27 2019, @06:58PM (3 children)
> You get crap like they're doing in New Zealand.
That's why I'm talking about hopping through a VPS.
At least the ISP doesn't know I'm looking at a forbidden manifesto.
But the site that ultimately served it would know. And might have a log.
The lower I set my standards the more accomplishments I have.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday March 27 2019, @07:05PM (2 children)
At least the ISP doesn't know...
Only for lack of interest. First, they have deep packet inspection. Second, they can block "unauthorized" encrypted packets that they can't read. The ISP is a government agent. The ISP is a monkey trap.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Wednesday March 27 2019, @08:26PM (1 child)
Deep Packet Inspection doesn't help with encrypted packets. And that is my purpose with bouncing traffic through a VPS. I have also done this with my phone before on insecure WiFI places. And on a Netbook back when that was a thing -- remember those? All the ISP sees is SSN or VPN or other encrypted traffic.
As for blocking *unauthorized* encrypted packets, how to they determine what is unauthorized?
Especially an SSH. Why would an SSH connection to a cloud host be unauthorized?
Other than out of pure spite in wanting to trumple on people's rights.
The lower I set my standards the more accomplishments I have.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday March 27 2019, @09:02PM
Other than out of pure spite in wanting to trumple on people's rights.
That would be one reason. Also if the government wants to restrict the use of encryption, the ISP will block those encrypted packets that don't go straight to your bank or other authorized institution (who will gladly cough up anything the authorities want to know). The ISP has absolute control over your connection. We are at their mercy until we find a way around them. Doesn't mean you shouldn't use encryption, use it while you can, just know that it can be easily cut off.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..