Maybe you missed it but, THE FCC TO REGULATE INTERNET AND PCs!!!!!

[Melodybe]

Hello, we all knew this was coming!

http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/11/16/0518234

[dolo amber]

1. A link, perchance?

Thanks! :hi:

[markbark]

2. BFEE Sez:

ALL YOUR COMPUTERS ARE BELONG TO US!


:evilgrin:


--MAB

[MadHound]

3. Well folks, it's been nice, now it is time to go to Plan B

If these asshats shut down the internet, then let us go to BBS again. It will be slower, more of pain in the ass, but information will flow. Which is exactly what this misadministration doesn't want happening. The faster information flows, the more of a threat it is to Bushco. They woke up to the threat of the internet during this election cycle, and they're not going to let it happen again, hence they will shut the internet down. All that will be allowed is commercial RW BS sites. Anything like DU will be axed.

But we can still exchange information over the old fashioned, dial in bulletin boards. It will be slower, and we won't have as good an idea of how numerous we are, but it will be better than nothing. Certainly can't count on the MSM, that's for sure. And it will be guaranteed that foreign papers and sources of information will not be allowed to be read on these shores.

[City Lights]

5. What is BBS?

:dunce:

[MadHound]

9. LOL, a BBS is a text only bulletein board system

Back in the late eighties, early ninties they were quite numerous around the country. Many towns and cities had one or more BBS, usually dedicated to a particular topic, games, politics, etc. You would get the phone number from a friend in the know, set your 9000bps modem to dial the number, and after some set up, off you would go, text messaging into the night.

BBS' are hard for outside entities to crack open. Due to their limited reach, most people know each other, and can keep trolls and spies out easier. It is also harder for the wider world at large to know what a particular BBS is saying, if the members are quiet about it. Information would still flow though, it would just take longer.

[RoyGBiv]

11. 9600 baud HA! I laugh!

:-)

The BBS I ran (The Rainbow's Edge, fwiw) was connected via a 1200baud modem. I upgraded to a 2400baud and eventually had a screaming system with two modems and two lines, a 9600baud for "supporters" (people who gave me a few bucks to help offset the costs) and the 2400 for non-supporters.

The first one of which I was a regular member ran at 300baud. Text scrolled so slowly I could actually read it as it came on the screen, one letter at a time.

Sorry ... tangent.

[City Lights]

12. Thanks! eom

[Winamericaback]

14. 9600 Baud ROFL

I was at 300 Baud on a 2000 person BBS... oh THAT was fun..
But hey I'll be able to play a REAL tradewars game again LOL

Ugh It was my first foray into any kind of chat interface. I used it in the mid 90's right before the "internet" became popular.

Guess I should go buy a modem.
I took all of mine out of the computers at the house. I have DSl.. didn't think I would need them..

[nostamj]

4. FOUR postings of the same thing?

calm down and stop spamming the board. thanks.

[Melodybe]

6. Hello, this is of great importance, if Mosh gets a million threads

then this deserves 10 million, until they take it away, that is.

[nostamj]

8. uh, the 'million mosh threads'

were started BY DIFFERENT PEOPLE.

you are spamming the board and DILUTING any discussion by opening multiple ones.

annoying and pointless no matter how important the subject.

[King_Crimson]

7. I agree with you nostamj...

If the fascists know they've got us paranoid, they'll really pour it on!
Fear not...since Al Gore invented the "Internets" I'm sure he'll find a way to remedy this problem! Not to worry. :headbang:

[SleepingDragon]

10. I recommend reading the actual brief

Here's the link

http://scrawford.net/courses/04-1037%20(Amer.Lib.)%20FCC%20Brief.pdf

The primary issue in the brief is the FCC's imposition of the broadcast flag in Digital TV content as a copy protection scheme.

Susan Crawford, an Assistant Professor of Law at Cardozo Law School, points out the FCC is assuming in this case a broader authority than that granted by law. Oral arguments are scheduled for February 22, 2005.

While this is an important issue, it is not an immediate peril. There's enough histeria on this board right now.

I don't see the need for multiple posts.

[RoyGBiv]

13. Agreed to a point ...

This is an exceptionally irritating development, but as was said in the initial message, we, people who are paying attention anyway, did see this coming, and it's not all-out Internet regulation as some people envision it. This is more about copyrights and the slow pace of conversion to digital (compressed) television signals.

One difficulty is determing exactly what this means, not to mention how the sort of controls being suggested would be implenented. Powell, indeed the FCC in general, has shown itself to be incredibly ignorant of how the Internet works, what is and is not possible, and what it would cost. They may well claim the regulatory authority and have it upheld by the Republicans, who are after all the party of excessive regulation. (GASP!) Now, what they manage to do with that authority is going to be interesting to see. The government simply does not have the money to implement the kind of system necessary for this kind of regulation.