4 ms·

Get ready for FCC-public-airwaves-style censorship of your now-goverment-provided "public" internet.

dangus 6y ago
The ballot language: “Should the City of Chicago act to ensure that all the City’s community areas have access to broadband Internet?” It’s just a non-binding ballot measure to gauge public opinion. The way you’ve responded to this in context to the ballot measure jumps, no, leaps to an alarmist conclusion. there are lots of obvious “government doesn’t own the ISP” ways to ensure community access to broadband Internet. These could include regulation placed upon ISPs that cap or tie rates to household income, regulate rates for service areas with no competing providers, tie rates to speed and latency to prevent price gouging for outdated technology, or add availability requirements (e.g. ISPs not being allowed to only build fiber out to affluent neighborhoods). They could even be as simple as regulations surrounding making billing more transparent or setting up a website to help people find and compare ISPs in their area. Just some ideas. Regardless, the ballot measure doesn’t even go that far to discuss those options. It literally just asks if broadband should be accessible to everyone. Again, it’s simply a voter opinion poll.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
_r2h 6y ago
Is the FCC censoring all these networks? https://muninetworks.org/communitymap https://muninetworks.org/communitymap
finnthehuman 6y ago
They'd have a hard time applying Pacifica to the Internet. Personally I don't think the reasoning Pacifica holds up to the changing landscape for over the air radio and TV anymore, but that's not here or there.
ultrarunner 6y ago
I'm less worried about overt government censorship (although it has been repeatedly shown during times of protest in other countries and may be attempted here covertly). I'm more worried about total government surveillance. It's strange to me that many of the same people who are concerned with room 641a are people asking to cut out the private entity, not the government. It's entirely possible that I simply don't know some aspect that would make other government entities less susceptible to this kind of strong-arming, but the DMV here sells change-of-address data, so I remain skeptical.
- dantheman 6y ago
  Yeah, people seem to forget that the post office has collected metadata long before the NSA even existed and provided to the government agencies. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mail_cover https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mail_cover

The ballot language: “Should the City of Chicago act to ensure that all the City’s community areas have access to broadband Internet?” It’s just a non-binding ballot measure to gauge public opinion. The way you’ve responded to this in context to the ballot measure jumps, no, leaps to an alarmist conclusion. there are lots of obvious “government doesn’t own the ISP” ways to ensure community access to broadband Internet. These could include regulation placed upon ISPs that cap or tie rates to household income, regulate rates for service areas with no competing providers, tie rates to speed and latency to prevent price gouging for outdated technology, or add availability requirements (e.g. ISPs not being allowed to only build fiber out to affluent neighborhoods). They could even be as simple as regulations surrounding making billing more transparent or setting up a website to help people find and compare ISPs in their area. Just some ideas. Regardless, the ballot measure doesn’t even go that far to discuss those options. It literally just asks if broadband should be accessible to everyone. Again, it’s simply a voter opinion poll.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

_r2h 6y ago

Is the FCC censoring all these networks? https://muninetworks.org/communitymap https://muninetworks.org/communitymap

finnthehuman 6y ago

They'd have a hard time applying Pacifica to the Internet. Personally I don't think the reasoning Pacifica holds up to the changing landscape for over the air radio and TV anymore, but that's not here or there.

ultrarunner 6y ago

I'm less worried about overt government censorship (although it has been repeatedly shown during times of protest in other countries and may be attempted here covertly). I'm more worried about total government surveillance. It's strange to me that many of the same people who are concerned with room 641a are people asking to cut out the private entity, not the government. It's entirely possible that I simply don't know some aspect that would make other government entities less susceptible to this kind of strong-arming, but the DMV here sells change-of-address data, so I remain skeptical.

dantheman 6y ago
Yeah, people seem to forget that the post office has collected metadata long before the NSA even existed and provided to the government agencies. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mail_cover https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mail_cover