they can freely suppress any content on their network that "tends to" say
anything negative about them.
The little cockroach-sized version, the modern Ma Bell, also feels that
"net neutrality" is unnecessary and a bad idea. They seem to think it'd
be a bad thing if service providers can't supress the speech of those they
don't like, and/or can't demand extra money for free speech and access to
free speech. And I never once mentioned Google.
Wonderful how free enterprise has improved the quality of dialog in the
American Experiment and the worldwide experiment in the freedom of man.
This company brings back memories of Sosthenes Behn, who used to be the
the leader of ITT, the lovechild of Bell Telephone and the Third Reich.
Wikipedia doesn't have much, but here's the link:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sosthenes_Behn> There's more, but you need
to see if Google will let you find it.
Fascinating stuff. The "new at&t" and their behavior reminds me of ITT.
Note that ITT is -not- the same as the old AT&T, which is why there's no &
in the name. There's a lot of history in there, much of it deeply and
And this is the company that wants to decide what the users of the
Interweb ought to be able to do, especially when they're talking about
Not ITT, not AT&T, but at&t. Something completely different. Some entity
without the long-running monopolistic history of a company like AT&T and
the Bell Telephone Company. I'm talking about a completely different
company, and naturally I wouldn't want to accuse the new at&t as compared
to the old AT&T of something someone else is guilty of.
Only things they're doing themselves.
The lovely thing about math, you can do the math yourselves, and come up
with the same results, and come to the same conclusions. Or different
results, and different conclusiions.
You do the math.
grizzlysgrowls at gmail dot com
The Life and Times of a Minor Local Celebrity