hgsigala

Which is exactly why we have to make it easier for people to form and join unions everywhere.

If folks want to join the movement the staff is building, you can get involved here: https://citizensagainstmonopoly.org/

If you want to do more than that, here is some more information on the staff, story and other action items: https://goo.gl/9a7KkC

I took this course. It used Idle when I did it. Got a very high percentage but still do not know how to do much with python. Learned how to use the basic, how to compute Big O, but not really how to "make" anything.

I think you have a very, very oversimplified and course view of this topic. Nice hook though!

take the time to read this

http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2015...

Order forbears 27 provisions of title II and over 700 associated regulations. Will not impose rate regulation, tariffs, burdensome administrative filing requirement or network sharing requirements. The proposed Order would apply fewer sections of Title II than have applied to mobile voice networks for over twenty years.

Key provisions (only four pages, take the time): http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2015...

This is great news. Over a years worth of fighting on this one.

I use this EVERY DAY. I get a notification at 9:30am (you can set your own time) telling me about a new organization. I donate about$1 a week and about every other week I will search for tech organizations (example: Helping bolivians connect to the internet) and do a "match" donation of $5. It is great.

The notifications display perfectly on my moto 360 too!

Yes and No. They must reply to all comments in their FNPRM. They must say why the did and didn't do something that someone suggested.

Why does it have to be violent at all? Many people on this site are a fan of Larry Lessig. Check out his alternative to the "violent end" of big business Mayday.us

Isn't Apple leading the beacon tech though?

Yeah. I think the folks above have it backwards. Remember that EPB stands for Electric Power Board (90% sure of this). They then knew that the logical thing to follow from providing these services was to provide the "new electricity" aka Internet connectivity.

also, if you're really interested, New America Foundation recently published a good study on public broadband options http://www.newamerica.net/sites/newamerica.net/files/policyd...

Congress did grant the FCC explicit authority to regulate. It was the Telecom Act. What the FCC has to decide on its own is what part of the Telecom Act to use in enforcing. This is not a Congressional issue. And the Court made that very clear. The FCC currently has everything it needs.

edit: I think that the bill you are referring to is Leahy's which would only give political support and not really give it new authority.

I would agree if it were not for the fact that they are only bound to the Open Internet Order until 2018.

They also did this while fighting it in court. The Verizon suit which struck down the Open Internet Rules only came as a result of a previous Comcast suit.

The fact is that there are two ways to go about this: Allow fast lanes or do not allow fast lanes. If you do not want to allow fast lanes then there are two routes to go about this: section 706 of telecom act or title ii of telecom act.

The route via 706 was just struck down in court. Hence the next routes available are a) allow fast lanes or b) do not allow fast lanes via title II.

It wasn't so "voluntary" when you are doing it to get FCC/ Justice Department approval for a 6 billion dollar merger.

I received the same message but with $16

If anyone is willing to go 50/50 let me know! theadictspunk (a) gmail

Well, that's the issue. ISP's are being classified as telecoms.

At this point everyone is officially invited to comment on the proposal. In around 60 days, the FCC will respond to your comments and redraft a proposal. Please comment! http://www.fcc.gov/comments

The administration gets to nominate commissioners. The Senate confirms them. These are partisan bodies.

The commissioners themselves have theories that fit into party politics as well.

This is a vote to receive comments on the proposal. IN 60 days the FCC will respond to comments and redraft a proposal. A final vote on final rules will come in about 120 days.

The website says to add $12 for extra spools and a promise to update the site with individual purchase options when campaign is over.

Can someone shed some light on the reasoning behind paying 3.2 billion for Nest (thermostats) and only 400 million for DeepMind (artificial intelligence). Is it really that Nest was a consumer, revenue positive company?

Do you honestly think that carrying a weapon in the san francisco bay area is a good idea?

Hispanic here: tried the same thing and had the same reaction. Dampne is not a hispanic name...

Corporations get first amendment rights at the cost of the people's.

Danny, in your view, what would the political ramifications be? Corporate lobbyists or actual politicians fighting against this label?

But what mjmahone17 is saying is that the FCC should label broadband providers (in my view: both wired and wireless) as common carriers which would undo the "information services" label put on them in 2002 (http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/News_Releases/2002/n...)

You're right. I shouldn't have done that but I just couldn't believe that that was the top/first comment. It was one of my first posts and if I wanted to comment I should have taken the time to write an useful response.