In spite of their recent blog post defending their new non-net neutrality policy, the FCC really is changing course. But don’t believe me. Here, read this post from Stanford’s Center for Internet and Society and decide for yourself.
The question is: What Can We Do About It?
It seems to me that only a change in the law will change the course of the river. That means appealing to a rather dysfunctional Congress.
Update: If you’d like to comment on the new FCC proposed policy, the comment period is open.
I Loves Me Some Netflix. But Come ON!
When Netflix signed a deal with Comcast to pay them extra for faster, more consistent content delivery it was understandable from a business point of view. But it was clear that it violated the principle of network neutrality and that consumers were going to pay for it one way or another.
Sure enough, Netflix just announced it is going to raise rates for new customers, and while existing customers won’t see their rates change for now, as Netflix strikes the same bargains with other service providers it’s bound to happen that all our rates will go up.
FCC: Throwing in the Towel
And guess what, now that the Appeals Court ruled the FCC doesn’t have the authority to enforce Network Neutrality, the FCC has simply decided aw what the heck. Let’s just say we can have multi-tiered service after all.
I think the writing is on the wall. Cable providers are going to continue lose subscribers because of their high cost and bundled packages. People are going to use Netflix, Amazon Prime (which just signed a deal with HBO to stream older content), and Hulu through a Roku or Apple TV device, paying small fees to multiple services in lieu of high fees to a single source.
At least that’s where I’m headed. But then I fear the cable companies will start jacking up Internet service rates. So, we people at the bottom of the food chain will get bit in the ass one way or another.
If you haven’t heard of the Oculus Rift, it’s a newly developed 3D virtual reality device that sits on your face like a large pair of goggles. It’s said to be immersive and quite amazing even at this early stage. It garnered a great deal of attention a few months ago, and then, when Facebook bought it for 2 billion dollars, even more press.
Without personally having the Oculus experience it’s hard to know what the excitement is all about. But clearly something is going on. Then I read this article about an elderly woman diagnosed with cancer, and having a wonderful experience just walking through a demo of a Tuscany village.
The story points the way to future possible uses of such technology beyond gaming. And then I got to imagining a care home where instead of a room full of elderly folks staring at Jeopardy on TV, all the old folks are sitting around with Oculus goggles being tended to by robots made in Japan. They are swaying, and oohing and aahing at the worlds they are experiencing. The robots put ice tea in their hands but it’s not used to wash down a fistful of medications.
Gosh, am I imagining my own future? Could be worse, I guess.
I wanted to share a small victory. A relative had proclaimed herself an anti-GMO person to my consternation. She started sending me links, all of which I refuted. Then she told me she’d watched these 2 movies: Genetic Roulette and Genetic Chili, which, so help me, I watched on a Sunday afternoon.
After I watched Genetic Roulette, I sent her to this page which refutes point by point the assertions from the first film (actually from the self-published book that the film was based on).
Then, I watched the second one, Genetic Chili and saw it was directed by the same guy. So, I looked him up on Wikipedia. From his entry:
A variety of American organic food companies see Smith “as a champion for their interests”, and Smith’s supporters describe him as “arguably the world’s foremost expert on the topic of genetically modified foods”. In contrast, Michael Specter, writing in The New Yorker, reported that Smith was presented as a “scientist” on The Dr. Oz Show despite his lack of any scientific experience or relevant qualifications. Bruce Chassy, a molecular biologist and food scientist, wrote to the show arguing that Smith’s “only professional experience prior to taking up his crusade against biotechnology is as a ballroom-dance teacher, yogic flying instructor, and political candidate for the Maharishi cult’s natural-law party.”.
I also noted that much of the assertions in the second movie were based on the findings of debunked studies by French microbiologist Gilles-Eric Séralini
After that, she wrote these magic words: “You are starting to persuade me. The de-bunking of Genetic Roulette is pretty thorough.”
Yes! OK, it’s not definitive. It’s just a start. But hey, any movement toward the light I will take. The rest, now that she has the skeptical spark, is up to her.