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.
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.
Coming a little late with today being Super Tuesday, but InfoWorld has an article breifly reviewing the remaining (well not Ron Paul, but the comments on the article make up for it I guess) Presidential candidate’s views on major tech issues.
Not surprising to me the Democrats have actual policy statements on various topics. Both Clinton and Obama (PDF) are in favor of Net Neutrality and extending broadband services.
It appears the Republican candidates have more or less avoided dealing with the subject in any comprehensive way.
On Sunday, USA Today launched their new web site that incorporates many of the social networking features that have been all the buzz of the ‘netterati‘. According to the USA Today site, the new features include the ability of readers to:
• Scan other news sources directly on USATODAY.com;
• See how readers are reacting to stories;
• Recommend stories and comments to other readers;
• Comment directly on stories;
• Participate in discussion forums;
• Write reviews (of movies, music and more);
• Contribute photos;
• Better communicate with USA TODAY staff.
For those of us who have been participating in various aspects of user contributed content that makes Web 2.0 so exciting, these features don’t seem so revolutionary. But it’s the first time a major newspaper has opened itself up to so much reader input. Most other publication have only dabbled in these ideas and technologies.
None of the local papers (daily or weekly) have any of the openness and user participation that USA Today is offering. What’s important to note is that providing these kinds of features
are not really a cost issue. It’s not that difficult to develop social networking features if the will is there. It’s really more of a mind set where newspapers continue to believe the Internet is a distribution system instead of a communication system. This is what the telecommunications giants (AT&T, Cable sytems, etc.) continue to push for. What do you think? Will the Internet become just another outlet for corporations to distribute their content like radio and TV?
As we celebrate our nation’s birthday it’s good to see the system our Founding Fathers established 230 years ago is still working so well. Senator Ted “Bridge to Nowhere” Stevens has stepped up and explained how the Internet works in a speech that also attempts to explain why he voted not to support Net Neteutrality.
This Wired post transcribes part of the speech. The ignorance of how the Internet works is astounding. The butchering of the English language frightening. If you have the time, listen to the complet audio file of the speech (about 10 minutes). Senator Stevens’ locutions have been making the rounds on the Internet turnining the Senator in to a bit of a laughingstock. Perhaps he has helped the cause by illustrating the twisted logic used by the telcos hoping to gain complete control of the network and the ability to charge whatever they want.
Happy Birthday, America!