Press "Enter" to skip to content

This is just wrong in so freakin’ many ways.



So if you haven’t heard by now (and there’s been surprisingly little coverage), the FCC is about to v*te to regulate the Internet. ‘Cause, you know, the ‘Net is just precisely like the telephone system in the 1930s and now there are all these terrible, terrible unfair things going on like people not being allowed to express their opinions big traditional media companies triumphing over blogs and social media … well, like something. Whatever it is, the fedgov MUST save us from it!

Not only that, but tomorrow’s big v*te will be on a 300+-page secret plan that you and I (e.g. the alleged beneficiaries of regulation) aren’t even allowed to see.

Despite three of the five FCC v*ters (ah, the magic of democracy!) being Dems, the plan may yet choke. One of the Dems is reportedly just a teensy bit restless about the whole matter. And even if the Big Five v*te themselves the authority, court challenges could drag out for years. But as usual We the Peasants have no say in the situation, one way or the other. (Did I mention ah, democracy!)

Even one of the big forces supposedly looking out for “our” side has gone over to the other side.

And (ah, justice!) they’re already regretting it, despite not quite understanding why. MtK, who sent me the link in that last paragraph noted that the Electronic Frontier Foundation has become the NRA of ‘Net freedom.

You ask for federal regulation? You support federal regulation? Then you’re shocked, simply shocked! when you get federal regulation — and it turns out it benefits the feds more than you? Oh, you pooo widdle baby! Such a surprise! Who could possibly have predicted that?

Oh wait … anybody who’s been standing on the outside watching could have predicted that. Heck, we could have predicted it even before there was such a thing as the Internet to regulate. Because that’s just the way it works.

How is it that only those who so desperately cherish their “seats at the table” during fed dealmaking (and incidentally, we’re talking to you, Mr. Gottlieb, with your notorious seat-at-the-table on Manchin-Toomey, as well as the formerly principled folks at the EFF) are somehow the only ones who can’t see the inevitable result of playing footsie under that table with the fedgov?


SIDENOTE: How is it, also, that the big gov faction always comes up with the good memes? I mean “net neutrality” and “open internet” — what kind of villain could possibly be opposed to those? Being against neutrality and openness would be like hating kittens. Never mind that “neutrality” and “openness” are just verbal Halloween costumes disguising government control. And this has been going on for a long time, clear back to when the noble slogan “one man, one v*te” was used to shift all political power from rural areas to urban centers. How come freedom never gets the good memes?


  1. MamaLiberty
    MamaLiberty February 25, 2015 10:03 am

    Bad stuff, no doubt. But I think there are enough folks, both in and outside the matrix of this thing, that won’t settle for this as a done deal, by any means.

    There’s more than one way to skin a cat, pardon the nasty mental image, and I suspect there are enough independent, obnoxious and talented geeks and hackers around the world to create something else, maybe far better, or at least make the bureaucrats work like hell trying to keep up with work arounds and innovations.

  2. Laird
    Laird February 25, 2015 12:48 pm

    What I have trouble understanding is how the FCC thinks it can get away with hiding these new rules until after it votes on them. As a federal agency they are covered by the Administrative Procedures Act, which requires that all proposed new regulations be published in the Federal Register, in draft form, for public comment. Then the agency has to at least pretend to consider those comments before the rule becomes final. Obviously that wasn’t done here. (This, by the way, is precisely the basis upon which that federal judge in Texas issued a temporary injunction against implementation of Obama’s new immigration policy diktat. There was no ruling on its constitutionality, merely on the failure to follow the APA.) I can’t see how this new rule will survive a challenge solely on this basis.

    And of course, keep in mind that the federal courts have already struck down attempts by the FCC to regulate the internet three separate times. This latest attempt will undoubtedly suffer the same fate, but only after much time and money has been spent on litigation. What a waste.

    BTW, the bad guys always come up with the good names because they get to choose first. And that’s because they create the issue to begin with. We aren’t running around thinking up clever names in opposition to governmental abuses which haven’t even been threatened yet (why give them any more ideas?). Thus we’re always in reactive mode to their latest outrages. And that’s never going to change.

  3. Pat
    Pat February 25, 2015 1:53 pm

    “How come freedom never gets the good memes?”

    It does – libertarianism, anarchy, free market, capitalism, Bll of Rights, human rights, self-defense — but the opposition keeps re-defining them until they become misunderstood by the populace, and original meaning becomes lost.

  4. Karen
    Karen February 25, 2015 3:36 pm

    Sounds suspiciously like Deja vu all over again – you have to pass it to know what’s in it.

  5. jed
    jed February 25, 2015 3:47 pm

    Much as I think I should, I haven’t been following this whole thing. Other than to say that yes, bandwidth costs money, so people using it shouldn’t mind paying for it, and why does the gov. need to step in. So, in consideration of having nothing else to add, here’s some cool photo manipulations:

    (At least it’s not a bunny with a pancake on its head.)

  6. Jim B.
    Jim B. February 25, 2015 8:02 pm

    Unfortunately it’s not just the Fedgov that’s restricting us. Google is requiring a change of the Porno sites to either go private or seek other hosting services, most of which are not as easy as Google Blogger. Which will have a chilling effect as most people prefer to surf Porn anonymously so nobody knows they do. The deadline as I understand it is March 23, 2015.

  7. Jim B.
    Jim B. February 25, 2015 11:37 pm

    Before anyone misunderstand my previous entry. While it is a private company and they can do what they want, it does smack of censorship and is a very slippery slope. Where will it end? Will it end?

    Who to say they’ll stop at Porn? Maybe one day, perhaps sooner than anyone thinks, someone like Claire won’t be able to post or blog anything against the government at all.

    That’s the chilling effect.

  8. R.L. Wurdack
    R.L. Wurdack February 26, 2015 6:39 am

    We’ll all have to revert to FIDONET and TTYs.

    I believe we need a system that has no dependency on government. i.e. No infrastructure binding it to control. If Joe and Jill prepper could come up on the ‘newnet’ without ISPs or cable DSLs or phone lines, etc. they would have nothing to be controlled.

  9. Paul Bonneau
    Paul Bonneau February 26, 2015 7:40 am

    It’s easy to see the end result here. The big companies (comcast) will become entrenched and their smaller competition excluded from the market. Then the Internet will become essentially another government bureaucracy, with all that entails.

    The problem is that the US-based ISPs can be absorbed by government. However with encryption, they cannot see what we do or read (provided we bother to use things like Tor Browser and Tor). So while I see innovation tapering off and speed becoming limited, I don’t see things getting worse (on this front anyway) for things like privacy via this FCC action. I could be wrong…

    However there is satellite access. A given satellite may be owned by Dutch or Swiss or Russian-based companies, and we have access to satellite, bypassing US ISPs and their regulations. So there is another way around this mess.

    Whenever I discuss “net neutrality” in various forums I always point out that it is fascism. I think it might cause at least casual (non-connected) advocates to sit back and think a bit. The problem is that the percentage of people who believe in government is always up there on the order of 90%. People are going to make the same mistakes over and over again. I don’t know what to do about that. I suppose there is nothing to do until a societal reset comes along, and we are scrambling to have any Internet at all.

  10. Josh from Oklahoma
    Josh from Oklahoma February 26, 2015 9:04 am

    The “Party of Freedom,” the democratic party, the ones who speak out for “choice” and “acceptance,” the ones who for some reason hope to achieve liberty through government control have gotten their little asses in a bind. When you let the government support you, educate you, make your decisions for you, what do you expect them to do? Do people think that the government will follow the honor system if they just give them the authority to trample all over us. I see our fore-fathers rolling the hell over in their graves. But, as long as there is a free biscuit in it for us, who cares right?

  11. Kyle
    Kyle February 26, 2015 9:13 am

    Claire, now that FedGov is trying to “regulate” the ‘Net, do you think the same will happen to Bitcoin?

    I ask because in August ’13, the Bitcoin Foundation held a “private conference” with federal “regulators” like FinCEN, IRS, & the Federal Reserve so that “the industry and the regulators work together to create a safe and sane regulatory environment for Bitcoin businesses in the United States.” (SOURCE:

  12. Paul Bonneau
    Paul Bonneau February 26, 2015 1:00 pm

    The more bitcoin is adopted by the mainstream, the more the regulators will get hold of it. Just the way things always go.

    To avoid that mess, find a currency that is used in the black market and not in the mainstream. Or use gold or silver. Or use barter.

    I’m no currency expert, so the above is worth what you paid for it, heh.

  13. Claire
    Claire February 26, 2015 1:37 pm

    Kyle, I can’t say I know much about Bitcoin — only that the fedgov will either eventually control it or destroy it, as the fedgov does with all once-promising systems. I’m sad, but not even a tiny bit surprised, to hear that Bitcoin (like egold before it) will submit under the threat.

  14. parabarbarian
    parabarbarian February 26, 2015 3:08 pm

    I’ve been trying to warn technical people that net neutrality means more control of the Internet, not less. I am surprised at the number who don’t care or actually think turning the Internet over to the FCC is good thing.

    Maybe it is time to start working on gulch net again.

  15. TN James
    TN James February 26, 2015 4:50 pm

    This FFC vote on the ‘net is just another sign that our government is getting near collapse of the dollar. Drones flying in our skies, the government spying on us and all the rest of what they are doing we all know so well. Sign of the times.

  16. Krp
    Krp February 27, 2015 11:20 am

    Claire……is it time yet?

Leave a Reply