Are you contending that the government has no jurisdiction over unlawful content currently? I'm trying to figure out how you reach the conclusion that neutrality rules are a gateway to censorship. Your example doesn't seem to be mutually exclusive with the status quo.

Borrowed from Gizmodo, so we know exactly what we're talking about:

Under the draft rules, subject to reasonable network management, a provider of broadband Internet access service may not:

1) prevent any of its users from sending or receiving the lawful content of the user's choice over the Internet;
2) prevent any of its users from running the lawful applications or using the lawful services of the user's choice;
3) prevent any of its users from connecting to and using on its network the user's choice of lawful devices that do not harm the network;
4) deprive any of its users of the user's entitlement to competition among network providers, application providers, service providers, and content providers.
5) A provider of broadband Internet access service must treat lawful content, applications, and services in a nondiscriminatory manner.
6) A provider of broadband Internet access service must disclose such information concerning network management and other practices as is reasonably required for users and content, application, and service providers to enjoy the protections specified in this rulemaking

Where are they controlling/enforcing what is being transmitted?

Man makes public documents available, for free, to the public. Obviously, this sort of thing cannot be allowed to continue.

A little like saying U2 for "Helter Skelter." Nice of the Beatles to cover Bono.

Try "The Cascades."

Getting relationship advice from /. is a little like getting dieting advice from Aintitcoolnews.

There are legitimate reasons to allow anonymity -- whistle blowing comes to mind. In some cases, the greater good is served by some leeway in the ability of people and organizations to confront accusers.

That said, I sincerely doubt that the skank status of anyone constitutes information necessary for the greater good.

I don't think Blomkamp was out to make the next "Star Wars" or "Matrix." He took the resources and talent he had, and he produced this film.

Frankly, "District 9" is the most fun I've had at a movie in a long time. I'm impressed that it has engendered such debate (who the hell is talking about the last Harry Potter film?), but for all the talk about deep themes and plot holes I've really got to wonder if people just watch stuff because it's entertaining any more.

It's an energy field created by all living things. It surrounds us and penetrates us. It binds the galaxy together.

I find it curious you never put French to any practical purpose in twenty years

Probably has something to do with the fact that I sucked/suck at it.

In my defense, I stated clearly that it was pronounced "something like" what I wrote. What you wrote is something like what I wrote.

Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose.

Impress your significant other: it's pronounced something like "ploo sah shanj, ploo say la mem showj."

4 years of high school French -- and finally, 20 years later, I get to put it to some use.

Just checked to make sure -- Firefox is still my default. No surreptitious shenanigans.

Is this an XP thing? TFA didn't say which OS he was running.

His/her post wasn't entitled to much of anything. It was titled "Question."

Douche.

Remind you of the present day United States where the public will cheer on air campaigns with minimal American loss of life but go apeshit we land ground forces and start suffering a larger number of casualties?

I think the present day United States public is just unaccustomed to fighting a war against someone who actually needed to be fought. Or was there a bunch of going apeshit over Afghanistan that I was unaware of?