Comment Re:and I suppose you blame abuse victims (Score 1) 395
I don't see why it matters so much to you. What does it matter who you blame for the shutdown? It was a good thing, not a bad thing.
There are no laws defending blonds or red-heads against discrimination by brunettes either.
Yes, there are. If you discriminate consistently against blonds, then you will be open to legal action. You are using a strict definition of "race", and the application of the laws doesn't work that way.
How about folks, whose name begins with "Mi*"? There is not a law anywhere in the world (!) explicitly protecting us — how do you sleep at night knowing of this ongoing travesty?
Has there ever been a documented case of someone discriminating against a Mi based on name? No? Then why do you think you deserve special laws?
Oh, well, if we start counting omissions, we can get really far.
I've seen some that explicitly list LGBT (as a non protected class). That's not an omission, but a license to discriminate. Is that any different?
[LBGT] are perfectly equal already — there are no laws singling them out in any way.
Nope, there are hundreds, if not thousands of laws that single them out, whether by name or omission. There are piles of laws on housing and other things that state you can't discriminate on race, gender, age, family status, religion, and/or other factors, but very few of them extend anti-discrimination laws to LBGT. This is singling them out as one of the non-protected classes is singling them out.
There is no connection between the old AT&T and the company called AT&T today.
SBC was spun off ATT, then grew larger, and bought it back. They are now, and have always been the same company, they just had a trial separation for a few years.
Except they are NOT getting away with it
Until you can name an FBI agent or administrator in prison, they *are* getting away with it.
Network Neutrality conflates two issues: Traffic management and anticompetitive behavior. Some packets SHOULD be treated differently than others, in order to make diverse services "play well together". (Example: Streaming vs. File Download.)
All net-neutrality rules officially presented allow for network QoS of all kinds. Prioritizing VoIP above FTP is allowed in all net-neutrality rules. What's not allowed is prioritizing *your* VoIP over your competitor's VoIP.
Also allowed under all net neutrality is blocking P2P, and various other QoS schemes, so long as they are not explicitly anti-competitive.
Yes, it should be the FTC doing the enforcement, but the FTC doesn't understand the issue. The FCC is tasked with understanding the problem. The Justice Department, working with both the FTC and FCC should do the enforcement. Maybe the FCC could write the rules, and hand them to the FTC. But having the FTC write the rules will end up with the bad rules everyone claims are what Net Neutrality is.
The FCC is using this as a power-grab on the Internet, in direct contravention of Congress' authorization.
The FCC is chartered to regulate communications. That's what the first "c" stands for in the name. The Internet is Communication. So it seems quite in-line with the goals and purpose of the organization.
The one day you'd sell your soul for something, souls are a glut.