I saw an article today about the FCC's unanimous (3 Dems, 2 Repubs) decision to put the propose rule out for comment. Of course, Drudge was trying to make it look like a loony Dem-led item, when in fact, it is a fairly sensible idea that has been pushed by people from both sides of the aisle. And, even at least one of the major telecom ISP's (Verizon) is cautiously moving away from its strong opposition to it.

I haven't looked at the proposed rule (we have until January to comment), but I have mixed feelings on the subject. Perhaps it is because I don't fully understand the structure of the internet or the nature of the regulations - but it does not intuitively seem to me that the regulation is necessary. However, I do not think that it would be the first step on a "slippery slope" towards "regulation of the Internet", with the fear of content regulation that some on the right are trying to play (scare) up.

By the way, I looked for McCain's bill in the obvious places (thomas.loc.gov and his website), but nothing yet. Just his press release, replete with scary allusions of "ONEROUS" regulation: (http://mccain.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressOffice.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=7ccc25b5-9d63-321c-0238-805ed7bafc6b&Region_id=&Issue_id= ) (BTW, McCain's position does not surprise me - I expect that he has some close relationships with some of the lobbyists for the telecoms.

I'm going to have to do some more reading up on the regulation, the bill, and what the proponents (http://www.savetheinternet.com/ ) are saying, but my gut tells me that if Drudge, McCain and others in the conservative wing are demagoguing on it, it is probably worth doing.

http://www.reuters.com/article/regulatoryNewsConsumerGoodsAndRetail/idUSN2237873320091022?sp=true

I think that the ISP's should not have the right to allow and disallow certain kinds of traffic, but the should (and need) to be able to prioritize traffic. More and more services are being moved to the internet. Critical communications happen there now because it is cheaper. I can imagine scenarios where people need to have communications into and out of an area (disaster areas for example) and what would happen i that communications cannot happen because a bunch of people are surfing porn. They need to be able to make 911 types of traffic take precedent over everything, even it if means that effectively the other traffic never makes it through. Whatever laws get passed need to take this into consideration.

I read this and I am feeling like someone just gave me some double talk. Can you please translate it a little? I think the wording was a little too superior for the likes of me.