Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 19 submissions in the queue.
Politics
posted by Fnord666 on Wednesday January 17 2018, @03:12PM   Printer-friendly
from the tip-your-hand dept.

Senate Democrats have put together 50 votes for a measure meant to block the Federal Communications Commission's December decision to end net neutrality rules put in place by the Obama administration.

Democrats are just one GOP vote shy of the 51-vote threshold for a Senate resolution of disapproval, which would strike down the FCC's December rules change.

"With full caucus support," Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) said, "it's clear that Democrats are committed to fighting to keep the internet from becoming the Wild West where ISPs are free to offer premium service to only the wealthiest customers while average consumers are left with far inferior options."

The Democrats' effort won the support of its first Republican backer, Sen. Susan Collins (Maine), last Tuesday.

The Hill


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This discussion has been archived.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: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 17 2018, @07:17PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 17 2018, @07:17PM (#623730)

    This supposed "net neutrality" is about how companies like Verizon and Comcast have to treat the traffic from companies like Netflix and Hulu.

    That matters, barely. It's nothing compared to how large end-user-oriented monopolies treat individual users, which is the neutrality that matters. Twitter, YouTube, Google search, Google news, and Facebook have all been caught suppressing viewpoints that are not politically correct in California. Amazon and Netflix have even gotten into that misbehavior, purposely promoting viewpoints that mainstream America finds abhorrent.

    When the companies abusing users complain about other companies abusing them, it should be no surprise that this complaint falls on deaf ears at best.

    Bonus: with the CAN-SPAM act encouraging spam and the patriotism of the PATRIOT act being questionable, we tend to assume that names are the opposite of what they sound like. So we already have suspicion that "net neutrality" is non-neutral, and then we see it supported by companies that fight end-user net neutrality.

    Maybe if those companies wanted neutral treatment from ISPs, they could have provided neutral treatment to end users. There could be some sympathy then.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   -1  
       Troll=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Troll' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   -1