Emigrate While You Still Can

Please remember this website is supported by your donations...


"Save the Internet" News, Censorship and Solutions


"Save the Internet" News, Censorship and Solutions

What you need to know about the FCC's new net neutrality proposal

Dusting off old regulations won't protect free, open Internet

The Internet is and will continue to be an indispensable part of the lives of Floridians and all Americans. As we grow more dependent on it for everyday tasks, ensuring fair and open Internet access will continue to be a priority.

In the early days of the Internet, Congress and regulators intentionally left the Internet free from burdensome regulation. This bipartisan decision to keep government’s hands off the Internet has been responsible for leaps in innovation and investment – making America a global leader in broadband development. Revolutionary ways to connect with other people around the world online; billion dollar smart phone applications; near-instantaneous Internet speeds; the list of truly life-altering innovations goes on and on.

No one disagrees that the Internet should be free and open. The president’s plan just does not accomplish that goal.

We have all benefitted from a system that incentivizes broadband providers to be the fastest and most reliable consumer access to the Internet.

Over the last six years, however, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has tried to assert more control over this valuable American resource. The courts have already overturned two sets of FCC rules, but this so-called “independent agency” is poised to vote this week on its most aggressive rules yet.

At the urging of President Obama, FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler submitted a proposal that included more drastic changes and regulations than ever before. This government takeover of the Internet follows the President’s position that reclassification of broadband services to Title II common carrier status – which were originally designed and implemented to protect against 1930s monopolies– is the only option.

Dusting off regulations from the Roosevelt-era will not protect a free and open Internet. They will not benefit consumers. They will not spur innovation. They will not encourage a young entrepreneur to develop a new innovative app, or a company to develop new “smart” appliances.

Consumers – yes, you, reader – will be most hurt by this proposal. A whole host of new regulations and years of uncertainty will come. Even worse, this plan opens the door to billions of dollars in new fees on your Internet service, while putting nearly $45 Billion of new investments at risk over the next five years.

Do you like streaming live sports or network TV on your computer or mobile device? The agreements that allow you to do that quickly and reliably will now be subject to new, untested regulations. This unknown regulatory landscape is likely to reduce future investments in services that many consumers rely upon.

Small businesses across the country are also put in jeopardy from these rules. http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2015/02/26/net-neutrality-debate-dusting-off-old-regulations-wont-protect-free-open/

Location: 12160mods
Members: 166
Latest Activity: Mar 27


"LEAKED! Here's The White House's Draft Cybersecurity Executive Order"

Earlier this week, we wrote about how the White House was working on an executive order to act as a "stand in" for cybersecurity legislation that has so far failed to pass Congress (CISPA passed in the House, but a different effort, the Cybersecurity Act, failed in the Senate, and it would have been difficult to get the two houses aligned anyway). Last weekend Jason Miller from Federal News Radio wrote about a draft he saw... but failed to share the actual draft. We got our hands on a draft (and confirmed what it was with multiple sources) and wanted to share it, as these kinds of things deserve public scrutiny and discussion. It's embedded below. As expected, it does have elements of the Lieberman/Collins bill (to the extent that the White House actually can do things without legislation). It's also incredibly vague. The specific requirements for government agencies are left wide open to interpretation. For example, the State Dept. should engage other governments about protecting infrastructure. Well, duh. As expected, most stuff focuses on Homeland Security and its responsibilities to investigate a variety of different cybersecurity issues -- but, again, it's left pretty vague.

There is, as expected, plans concerning information sharing -- but again, they're left pretty empty on specifics. It talks about an "information exchange framework." Unfortunately, it does not appear to highlight privacy or civil liberties concerns in discussing the information sharing stuff. That seems like a pretty big problem. Homeland Security is tasked with coming up with a way to share information, pulling on some existing efforts, but nowhere do they call out how to make sure these information exchange programs don't lead to massive privacy violations, despite the President's earlier promises that any cybersecurity efforts would take into account privacy and civil liberties.

Mike Masnick







Discussion Forum

GOOGLE Complies With Government Requests for User Data 88% of the Time

Started by Central Scrutinizer. Last reply by Central Scrutinizer Jan 24, 2013. 2 Replies

Google starts watching what you do off the Internet too

Started by Central Scrutinizer. Last reply by DTOM Dec 21, 2012. 1 Reply


Started by Central Scrutinizer. Last reply by Lawrence Edward Calcutt Nov 9, 2012. 1 Reply

Comment Wall


You need to be a member of "Save the Internet" News, Censorship and Solutions to add comments!

Comment by Anonymiss Express on November 14, 2011 at 12:06pm

U.S. could claim millions of Canadian domain names in piracy battle

By Michael Geist Internet Law Columnist

The U.S. Congress is currently embroiled in a heated debated over the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), proposed legislation that supporters argue is needed to combat online infringement, but critics fear would create the “great firewall of the United States.”

SOPA’s potential impact on the Internet and development of online services is enormous as it cuts across the lifeblood of the Internet and e-commerce in the effort to target websites that are characterized as being “dedicated to the theft of U.S. property.” This represents a new standard that many experts believe could capture hundreds of legitimate websites and services.

For those caught by the definition, the law envisions requiring Internet providers to block access to the sites, search engines to remove links from search results, payment intermediaries such as credit-card companies and PayPal to cut off financial support, and Internet advertising companies to cease placing advertisements.

While these measures have unsurprisingly raised concern among Internet companies and civil society groups, the jurisdictional implications demand far more attention. The U.S. approach is breathtakingly broad, effectively treating millions of websites and IP addresses as “domestic” for U.S. law purposes.


Comment by truth on November 14, 2011 at 10:42am

Handy anonimity tools

You might as well start by looking in the data of your machine. Did you fill in your real name and address anywhere? Remove it. And don’t keep any of your passwords on your machine. A piece of paper will do.

KeePassX is very useful if you make more identities, keeping the database on a USB stick that you take out of your machine when you walk away from it, and keep that stick in a location only known to you.

Comment by truth on November 12, 2011 at 8:53am

Twitter Ordered to Disclose Data in WikiLeaks Investigation

News Link  •  Police State

Twitter Ordered to Disclose Data in WikiLeaks Investigation

11-11-2011  •  slatest.slate.com 

114986305Twitter stores information, including IP addresses, on individual accounts. A federal judge ruled Thursday that the company can be forced to turn over that information to the government.

Photo by Oli Scarff/Getty Images.

Twitter will have to disclose information, including location-revealing IP addresses, on three account holders currently under investigation for their possible involvement with WikiLeaks, a federal judge ruled this week.

The New York Times reports that the Justice Department requested the information earlier this year, but did so without a warrant, a decision that helped turn the case into "a flash point for online privacy and speech." Twitter contacted the three account holders earlier this year to inform them of the demand for their information. None have been charged with a crime.

Read Full Story

Comment by Anonymiss Express on November 8, 2011 at 5:02pm
I thank you too: http://anonymiss-express.blogspot.com/
Comment by Nana Silvergrim on November 8, 2011 at 3:06pm

@calgarycmmc.com TYVM!

I am using it here: http://folly-roger.blogspot.com/

Comment by calgarycmmc.com on November 8, 2011 at 2:03pm

I use this for an anonymous search...and I give away the code for free...use it or not...although it defaults to my topic of choice...you can click on the All web button for security search

Anonymous Search


webmasters can copy and paste this code below...hope it helps


<center><FORM METHOD=POST ACTION="http://www.scroogle.org/cgi-bin/nbbw.cgi">
<INPUT type=text name="Gw" SIZE="10" MAXLENGTH="225">
<INPUT type="submit" value="Anonymous Search">
<BR><font size=1><INPUT type=hidden name="n" value="2">
<INPUT type=radio name="d" value="www.calgarycmmc.com" CHECKED>Cannabis Research A-Z
&nbsp;<INPUT type=radio name="d" value="*">All Web
&nbsp; &nbsp;



Comment by truth on November 8, 2011 at 9:13am

Israel Denies Anonymous Cyber-Attack to Blame for Websites Failure

Matthew Kalman in Jerusalem
In a YouTube video posted last Friday, Anonymous threatened to "strike back" at Israel if it continued to block vessels attempting to reach Gaza by sea. The video was released shortly after Israeli naval commandos boarded a Canadian and Irish vessel sailing to Gaza and arrested the passengers and crew.

Comment by truth on November 7, 2011 at 6:28pm
Comment by Maria De Wind on October 14, 2011 at 10:18pm

They actually did it. Last week, the FCC published its net neutrality order in the Federal Register, stating that effective November 20 the federal government will begin regulating the Internet.

Americans didn't want this. Congress rejected it decisively -- it only had 27 sponsors last year. The courts rejected it-- they said the FCC did not have the power to do this. And voters rejected it, defeating all 95 of the candidates who campaigned on the issue. That's right a perfect zero for 95.
But unless the Senate votes to overturn this order before it takes effect November 20, we will start down the path to a government regulated and government controlled Internet.

Demand your Senators kill this new STEALTH THEFT OF YOUR RIGHTS **

"A society of sheep must in time beget a government of wolves."
Comment by truth on September 25, 2011 at 12:13pm


  • Add Photos
  • View All



Please remember this website is supported by your donations...


  • Add Videos
  • View All

© 2018   Created by truth.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service

content and site copyright 12160.info 2007-2015 - all rights reserved. unless otherwise noted