Hello. The longer the Democrats are in Washington, the more the mask slips with respect to their true beliefs regarding freedom online. They claim they don’t want a government takeover, they claim they don’t want to regulate content, they claim they don’t want a kill switch, they claim they want to respect privacy, but time and again all of these issues just keep coming up.
Witness the new disaster coming out of the White House which would force private firms like Facebook, Skype, and RIM to assist the government with spying on you. They are to cripple, deliberately, any safeguards they have on your privacy to make it easier for government snoops.
Remember: already nothing prevents them from listening in on the Internet. What they are demanding now is a huge expansion of power to require encryption in America to be crippled for the benefit of domestic Internet spies. Or at least, that’s the phrasing the left used throughout the Bush administration, so I’m going to throw it back in their disingenuous faces every single chance I get.
Remember when fining Janet Jackson’s breast was the worst thing going on in Washington with respect to this stuff, and how horrible that was? As the sign goes, “Miss me yet?”
Continue reading »
Good evening. Welcome to the special, totally planned, and not at all a fallback because I wore out after a week of catching up after the RS Gathering, Saturday edition of Tech at Night. I did want to make sure we all read about this poll by Hart Research Associates which shows over 75% of likely voters (MoE should be about 3.4 for a sample of 800) saying that the Internet works.
Further, support for regulating the Internet is trailing badly at 51 against to 37 for, which means per my handy analysis tool I wrote myself for Unlikely Voter, there’s only a 1% chance per this poll that likely voters actually favor regulating the Internet. This poll is a clear and convincing rejection of the entire FCC/Free Press agenda.
Continue reading »
Hello! As it crosses midnight here in California, I apologize for the lateness but do return with yet another installment of Tech at Night.
Still don’t believe the socialist pushes at the FCC are driven in part by a desire to get free stuff? Take a look at the ITU Broadband Plan for the whole world, what with its insistence that governments must build Internet infrastructure, which of course would result in greater state ownership of the Internet.
Ars Technica points out also that the ITU claims that state Internet development will end poverty and hunger. Talk about socialist utopian thought! And we’re supposed to let these types get more power over the Internet with magical thinking like this?
Continue reading »
I skipped Tech at Night on Friday because I was in Austin for the Red State Gathering 2010, but I’m back now, so here we go.
We start off with what would have been the lead story on Friday, too: Net Neutrality hero and all around socialist gasbag Al Franken is now under a cloud of suspicion for ethics violations, violating Senate rules to spend money inappropriately on Net Neutrality advocacy, as well as using his role as Senator to raise money for private groups.
He’s crooked enough, he’s dishonest enough, and doggone it, people pay him.
Continue reading »
I’ve worn myself out tonight making last minute preparations for my trip out to Austin for the RedState Gathering this weekend, so this will be brief. Additionally, Tech at Night will not appear on Friday because I will be in Austin and away from Safari, whose great RSS reader is the most important tool I use to complete my Tech at Night research.
First off, the Google backlash is well underway. The firm seems to operate under the assumption that there will be no serious objections from the technical community to whatever they do, because of that “Don’t be evil” mumbo jumbo. But when articles like this at IT World show up with no purpose but to question the attitude displayed by Google and CEO Eric Schmidt, it’s time for a new plan.
Continue reading »
Yesterday at the Daily Caller we found out why John Kerry was such a flip-flopper during his Presidential run. The reason is that he just can’t help it. He even flips around when he’s not running for anything. In 1998 he wrote a letter to the FCC explaining that the Telecommunications Act 1996 forbids the FCC to do the very same deem and pass Title II Reclassification that the FCC is talking about now… a move that John Kerry now supports.
So all that time we thought he was flip-flopping to become President we were wrong. He does even when nobody’s looking! If character is what you are in the dark, then we now know all about John Kerry’s character right now.
Continue reading »
Today Google and Verizon changed the landscape of the Net Neutrality debate in America, by putting out a joint proposal* for FCC Internet regulation. This is a proposal that ideally should be implemented by the Congress, which has the proper authority, and as described I support it. The fact that I’m fine with it of course means, as I predicted, the fringe radicals at Free Press are even more isolated from the mainstream now as they must turn on Google, their former ally.
Continue reading »
We’re very late “tonight” for Tech at Night on “Friday,” but that’s because the time I normally spend on these posts I instead spent setting up my new iPad, which I will need for next month’s RedState Gathering. So apologies all around, and here we go.
Net Neutrality news is picking up steam. While the official story is that the FCC has cowed before Free Press‘s complaints and has ended its meetings with industry leaders to plan its Net Neutrality action, that’s not the center of the action anymore, necessarily.
Not when industry, both for and against Free Press’s Net Neutrality, is going its own way.
Continue reading »
I hide nothing from you: I kicked back this Friday night. I slacked off. Now it’s Saturday at 2am and I’m finally getting to this. But, you all read this in the morning anyway so it really doesn’t matter much, right? (If I’m wrong I’ll surely hear in the comments)
Let’s start with a widely reported but badly reported story: DNSSEC. This is a framework for the Domain Name System (the framework for translating from hostnames such as www.redstate.com to IP addresses, which are the actual addresses used on the Internet). The system is akin to SSL for domains. Verisign will manage it for the Commerce Department and create a single “Root Key” which is then used to create certificates for domains, which will then be used to make sure your a domain’s DNS records are legitimate.
In my estimation, it’s just a big boondoggle for [Verisign] to get more customers. The vast majority of domains won’t be able to be secured by it, because Verisign is going to have a monopoly and will charge accordingly. This will only affect big businesses transacting large amounts of money, and they’re already secured against DNS-based attacks. If they’re smart they are, anyway.
What DNSSEC does that is bad, however, is create a new point of failure for the Internet, because there are 7 key holders which control escrowed access to the root key. If 3 of them lose the keys, the entire system will have to be re-keyed at expense and inconvenience to all, as pointed out by George Ou.
Continue reading »
A key story from today centers on John Dingell and his criticism of Chairman Julius Genachowski and the Obama FCC. Hillicon Valley reports that Dingell is criticizing the Commission harshly for failing to justify its Title II Reclassification plans to Deem and Pass Net Neutrality regulation of the Internet, and is telling them to stop and let the Congress do its job. Seriously, this is strong language from Democrat to Democrat:
“Unfortunately, the paucity of substantive responses to my [questions] has served only to substantiate my fear that the commission’s proposed path with respect to the regulation of broadband is based on unsound reasoning and an incomplete record, and is thus fraught with legal risk,” Dingell said.
He said the commission should instead look to Congress to grant it more power.
“In this way, the Congress and the commission may ensure the establishment of a steadfast legal foundation for an open Internet,” Dingell wrote.”
The fact is that the Free Press/Google “third way” to Net Neutrality is an illegal power grab online. Support for it is the radical extremist position.
Continue reading »