http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/03/18/net-neutrality-awareness-and-lobbying-grows/ any technology distinguishable from magic is not sufficiently advanced Wed, 07 Jan 2009 22:27:30 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/03/18/net-neutrality-awareness-and-lobbying-grows/#comment-1351 Paulaner01 Thu, 23 Mar 2006 01:30:10 +0000 http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/03/18/net-neutrality-awareness-and-lobbying-grows/#comment-1351 Yeah I can't see any tangible benefit to letting the government join this debate. We'd just open ourselves up to more laws, more lobbying, more disputes - and thus less innovation, less competition, and fewer choices for the consumer. Not what we need at all. Yeah I can’t see any tangible benefit to letting the government join this debate. We’d just open ourselves up to more laws, more lobbying, more disputes - and thus less innovation, less competition, and fewer choices for the consumer. Not what we need at all.

]]> http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/03/18/net-neutrality-awareness-and-lobbying-grows/#comment-1331 oldhats Mon, 20 Mar 2006 21:42:05 +0000 http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/03/18/net-neutrality-awareness-and-lobbying-grows/#comment-1331 Bravo, Brandon. I've been asking myself the same question--what exactly is the problem that this legislation hopes to address? What crisis are we averting? Why regulate an industry that has done so well without it? Unanswered questions all... Bravo, Brandon. I’ve been asking myself the same question–what exactly is the problem that this legislation hopes to address? What crisis are we averting? Why regulate an industry that has done so well without it? Unanswered questions all…

]]> http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/03/18/net-neutrality-awareness-and-lobbying-grows/#comment-1330 Brandon Mon, 20 Mar 2006 19:30:08 +0000 http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/03/18/net-neutrality-awareness-and-lobbying-grows/#comment-1330 As I read through myriad posts and try to digest the noise generated in the blogosphere on this issue, I keep coming back to one fact: no one can cite any attempt anywhere to interfere with the sending or receiving of content that has not been successfully countered by the FCC. Where's the problem? As I read through myriad posts and try to digest the noise generated in the blogosphere on this issue, I keep coming back to one fact: no one can cite any attempt anywhere to interfere with the sending or receiving of content that has not been successfully countered by the FCC. Where’s the problem?

]]>