Successful Blog

Net Neutrality 6-20-2006

by

Net Neutrality Links

I’ve added these links to the Net Neutrality Page today.

I don’t usually comment on this page, but then what’s said here is usually thoughts passed on that are either rants or one sided solutions to a complicated situation. Today, however, Scot Karp has changed that pattern for me. His piece,
Eminent Domain: A Modest Solution to Net Neutrality? jarred me out of my “watch the debate,” position into finally seeing Scot’s radical suggestion as one that would hurt, but would work.

So how do we fix this? Are we stuck in telco hell? Silicon Valley can ignite a political arms race and spend more on lobbyists, but why play an old man’s game? Instead, these webbies should get creative, change the rules. Bam-Bam, not Barney Rubble is the future. Take the telcos and cable companies out at the knees.

Here’s an idea: Start screaming like a madman and using four letter words–like K-E-L-O. And fancier words like “eminent domain.” I know, I know. This sounds wrong. These are privately owned wires hanging on poles. But so what? The government-mandated owners have been neglecting them for years–we are left with slums in need of redevelopment. Horse-drawn trolleys ruled cities, too, but had to be destroyed to make way for progress. How do we rip the telco’s trolley tracks out and enable something modern and real competition?

SPEED BUMPS ON THE INFORMATION HIGHWAY [via deal architect]

Check out this graphic:

How the Internet works. Chronicle graphic by John Blanchard

Ethical fog by Stirling Newberry

Chicago Dyke at corrente joins the long list of people commenting on the question of “should blogs take ads from telecos on net neutrality”. Bopnews.com has turned down these ads in the past, but there is no reason to believe that we will turn them down in the future.

Having used blogads at various times, generally with success, I think the paradigm that Skippy has gotten into – that ads are push that people are overly influenced by – simply isn’t backed by my experience. [Blogads] are essentially very gaudy links. Should we turn down Google ads because we can’t control the content? Several sites – like Brad Delong’s – have been very anti-Bush and his executive, and then had google ads that touted Bush gear.

Trying to draw lines that don’t exist – we should not sequester the blogsphere – doesn’t make any sense to me at all. “If you can’t take their money, drink their liquor, smoke their cigars, fuck their women and still vote against them in the morning, you shouldn’t be in this business.” No one has been farther out front against the telecos in the blogspace than Matt Stoller. Prudery when it comes to money is not reasonable, and this is prudery. . .

–ME “Liz” Strauss

Related
NET NEUTRALITY PAGE

Net Neutrality 6-18-2006

by

Net Neutrality Links

I’ve added these links to the Net Neutrality Page today.

“Save the Net” Contest Winner…

…will be announced on Tuesday, June 20th

Telcos’ Business Model Broken?

Folks, put the pieces together. It ought not be hard. The skill of the Telcos to manipulate Congress? Their business model is broken? A hindrance to their expansion efforts was removed and they then tried an end run but got caught? Now they’re spending millions on the effort to put in place what they believe will set their profit run back on track!

You and I are out here attempting to define it. We have help. It has become more and more clear. It is about competition! The US Telcos don’t have the competition which opens the door for their monopolization attempts.

Placing my money where my mouth is

I’ve been eagerly expecting the next BlogAd to float my way since BlogAds only feeds money into my PayPal account after a certain dollar amount of ads have been sold, and my next ad is the tipping point for a payout. And that ad came in tonight!

–ME “Liz” Strauss

Related
NET NEUTRALITY PAGE

Net Neutrality 6-16-2006

by

Net Neutrality Links

I’ve added these links to the Net Neutrality Page today.

Net neutrality today — playing the “safety” card

Net Neutrality is Bad for National Preparedness, says Center for Advanced Studies

NEW YORK, June 12 /U.S. Newswire/ — In a research brief published by the World Policy Institute’s Global Information Society Project, K.A.Taipale, executive director of the Center for Advanced Studies, Science & Technology Policy, asks whether imposing strict net neutrality regulation on telecommunications providers could put public safety and economic recovery at risk in times of national emergency.

How quickly can an innovation policy question be morphed into a security issue? Answer: Almost instantly.

But Paul, It’s Too Elegant and Simple A Solution [Paul Kapustka’s Post]

Paul Kapustka writes: One idea I kicked around a bit at this past weekend’s Vloggercon (in no small agreement with fellow blogger Matt Sherman, who is about 179 degrees away from me on most net neutrality matters) was the idea of Google (or Microsoft, anyone with buckets of folding money and a desire to get into online apps) buying or building an online application that would show anyone who wants to use it exactly what’s happening to their packets as they course to and fro. . . .

Net Neutrality for Sports — Forced unbundling by any other name [Read more…]

Net Neutrality 6-15-2006

by

Anti-Net Neutrality Spin Examples

CNN ran this fluff-peice by Mike McCurry as an independently written opinion item. Mike, the ex-Clinton Press Secretary, has suddenly become quite an internet expert who says the ‘creaky’ internet needs to be rebuilt. Creaky? I have never heard any of the original architects of the internet say there is a problem right now. In fact Vint Cerf, creator of TCP, (the gateway of all internet data transfer)testified as much in Washington recently. ‘Creaky’ is assuredly a strategically chosen buzzwords to plant an image there is a problem with the internet.

I wish I could end this entry but the spin-nausea doesn’t stop.

The Week I Wish that Wasn’t — Down and Out in Washington, DC

What is clear is that Americans won’t really be able to participate (be it via voice, video, text, IM, or any heretofore unknown mode of IP-enabled communications) in the revolution. At least, not on a level playing field with the lucky subjects of those countries that get it. I had been tracking the state of Internet communications policy around the world through efforts with the Global IP Alliance and the VON Coalition. Most specifically, we posted a Global Policy Matrix and a user-supported Global Policy Wiki at www.globalipalliance.net>. But, as the battle for the future of the Internet heated up in America this year, we amassed most of our troop on the US front. To the extent possible, I commit to reviving our efforts to compile and update our sense of global policy developments.

For the moment, suffice it to say that there is an emerging divide between those countries that get it and those that don’t, and, I hate to say it, but in just two short years, America has switched sides.

Net Neutrality: Shouldn’t We Be Wanting Less Regulation?

Most proponents of NN worry that evil telecoms will be evil capitalist pigs. My response? Of course they will, that’s why their CEO’s get the big bucks! Repeat after me… Increase Shareholder Value. That means your 401k, your pension, mutual fund all increase with telecom stock. But in America you can’t get more money without providing more value. That means they must constantly be looking and searching for new ways to make a buck. If they don’t, their competitors will.

That means finding new products and services they think you will buy. It’s called capitalism, and it’s a very good thing.

The real difference between me and your average NN Proponent … I trust the free market. They don’t.

–ME “Liz” Strauss

Related
NET NEUTRALITY PAGE

Net Neutrality 6-14-2006

by

Net Neutrality Links

I’ve added these links to the Net Neutrality Page today.

ONLY ONE LINK TODAY SO THAT YOU WILL LISTEN TO IT.

DOWNLOAD A NEW TUNE BY INDEPENDENT ARTISTS
WHILE YOU STILL CAN!!! [via Mark Wade ]

Three singer/songwriters met at a Los Angeles recovery center for those suffering from internet-related anger issues. How could Congress vote to destroy one of the only good things left in America? This made no sense! How could so few people be enraged? What were people doing to keep network neutrality the law of the land?

They realized that they had found kindred spirits in one another and needed to work through their newfound political rage. Their counselor suggested that they could channel their frustration through song, interpretative dance, screaming or simply calling Congress over and over. When they discovered that Michelle was afraid of morons, they decided to just do the singing part. And thus The BroadBand was born.

–ME “Liz” Strauss

Related
NET NEUTRALITY PAGE

Net Neutrality 6-13-2006

by

Net Neutrality Links

I’ve added these links to the Net Neutrality Page today.

Out Of Control!

The discussion, debate, battle, whatever, over Net Neutrality is completely out of control! And those who favor anti-Net Neutrality (yeah, figure that out) still haven’t answered the question – Where’s the $200 BILLION??? Or – why aren’t 86 million households which should have been rewired by 2006 with a fiber optic wire, capable of 45 Mbps, in both directions, wired that way now??? Which leads to – what did the Telco’s do with that money??? And follows with – why won’t anyone open up about it?

Net neutrality

Nothwithstanding all of the above, net neutrality legislation is not the answer – it is more like ‘casting out a devil with the devil’. There is no fundamental understanding of the internet as a space, marketplace, world or a frontier (for more on this see Doc Searls’ article on Saving the Net). The debate should not be about the internet as a sum of pipelines and wires and content and packets delivered across an infrastructure. It should be in terms of protecting the space in which the individual has been empowered and the emergent benefits of interactions among those individuals that are having an increasingly sociall impact.

Net neutrality debate to carry on

Alan Davidson, Washington counsel for Google, said that the House vote should be taken as “a wake-up call” by the public and businesses about how the internet could be regulated in the future. “As more consumers and small businesses learn about this, I think we’ll see more concern,” he said.

Jeannine Kenney, senior policy analyst for Yonkers, N.Y.-based Consumers Union, said that the “grass-roots campaign is only gaining steam” and that the telecommunications and cable companies still have a fight on their hands.

“I think that in the Senate there is a better understanding of the idea of net neutrality,” although many members are still on the fence on the issue, she said.

–ME “Liz” Strauss

Related
NET NEUTRALITY PAGE