Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Senators Bash ISP and Push Extensive Net Neutrality 427

eldavojohn writes "Remember when Verizon sued the FCC over net neutrality rules? Well, Senators Maria Cantwell (D-WA) and Al Franken (D-MN) see it a bit differently and have authored a new working bill titled 'Internet Freedom, Broadband Promotion, and Consumer Protection Act of 2011 (PDF).' The bill lays out some stark clarity on what is meant by Net Neutrality by outright banning ISPs from doing many things including '(6) charge[ing] a content, application, or service provider for access to the broadband Internet access service providers' end users based on differing levels of quality of service or prioritized delivery of Internet protocol packets; (7) prioritiz[ing] among or between content, applications, and services, or among or between different types of content, applications, and services unless the end user requests to have such prioritization... (9) refus[ing] to interconnect on just and reasonable terms and conditions.' And that doesn't count for packets sent over just the internet connections but also wireless, radio, cell phone or pigeon carrier. Franken has constantly reiterated that this is the free speech issue of our time and Cantwell said, 'If we let telecom oligarchs control access to the Internet, consumers will lose. The actions that the FCC and Congress take now will set the ground rules for competition on the broadband Internet, impacting innovation, investment, and jobs for years to come. My bill returns the broadband cop back to the beat, and creates the same set of obligations regardless of how consumers get their broadband.'"

Comment Re:Paying straight people less, lawsuit? (Score 1) 1036

I'm glad you brought the legal ramifications of this to Google's attention! Here they were just blithely going around instituting policies without any sort of labor attorneys providing counsel, so it's a good thing you showed up to set them straight (no pun intended.)

Seriously, though, as a straight guy, I would never complain about this. I'm not even sure you could win a discrimination lawsuit, since your net income is the same. But the tax is unfair, and I don't want to be the guy with "loves to take advantage of his privileged status" on his resume.

Comment Re:Can only guess... (Score 5, Insightful) 375

Since Google's entire business model revolves around advertising (and thus, customer targeting), while Microsoft, Apple (and Linux, in a fashion)'s business model revolves around selling OSes, I think it would be pretty easy for MS or Apple to simply say, "We will never collect any data about our OS users' application usage, browsing habits, or other personal information."

Google simply can't afford to say that. So no, not exactly the same thing at all.

Comment Re:1 million (Score 1) 457

I will bet $100 that the iPad and all of its following generations will not push 50 million units within the next 5 years, starting from the point of first sale. They simply don't have the versatility required to break out that big.

1) Take the date 3 months after the iPad is fully available in Europe and Asia.
2) Count the sales from that date 1 year forward.

It won't be anywhere close to the number of netbooks sold during that period.

Using the iPad's first quarter as some kind of predictive benchmark is foolish.

Comment Re:Double Nuggets with Idiocracy (Score 1) 756

The worst one for me is that they've moved the DVD section (almost all family-oriented) of our grocery store into the breakfast ceral aisle. So now every parent taking their kid to get cereal has to say "No" to all of those DVDs.

Terribly frustrating.

But I would never want government to say a grocery store can't do this. I can always choose another grocery store if it gets ridiculous.

Comment Re:Welcome to Obamanation (Score 1) 756

First, "regulating everything" does not equal "massive government control." In fact, government's first and foremost job is to "regulate everything."

Secondly, that Obama has a philosophy of massive government control is news to me, I haven't seen anything to really indicate that that's the case, care to expand on that?

Comment Re:Buying ARM for a leg? (Score 1) 695

First off, they do NOT have that right, because that would be an illegal restraint of trade.

You don't seem to understand that the basic concept of a "free" market involves things like "no extortion." So if Apple had the monopoly on smartphones, and went to Best Buy and said, "Either you stop selling Windows PCs or you can't sell any smartphones," that is an illegal restraint of trade, and that we as Americans WANT exactly that to be illegal. We don't want anyone to be able to get to the top, monopolize it, and then stifle innovation or competition through restraint of trade. They ALWAYS need to be competing for our business and our capital.

We want fair competition on all products, THAT is how a free market grows and prospers.

Slashdot Top Deals

You can tell the ideals of a nation by its advertisements. -- Norman Douglas