<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: FCC-backed free internet promises certain conflict with porn industry, ISPs</title>
	<atom:link href="http://tech.blorge.com/Structure:%20/2008/12/01/fcc-backed-free-internet-promises-certain-conflict-with-porn-industry-isps/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://tech.blorge.com/Structure:/2008/12/01/fcc-backed-free-internet-promises-certain-conflict-with-porn-industry-isps/</link>
	<description>Top Technology news</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2012 20:30:36 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Triston McIntyre</title>
		<link>http://tech.blorge.com/Structure:/2008/12/01/fcc-backed-free-internet-promises-certain-conflict-with-porn-industry-isps/comment-page-1/#comment-149963</link>
		<dc:creator>Triston McIntyre</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Dec 2008 03:38:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tech.blorge.com/?p=9633#comment-149963</guid>
		<description>Ah Ken, I&#039;ve missed you terribly.  I don&#039;t believe I was complaining, per se; I tend to think I try to illustrate the flaws in systems suggested for delivering free internet.  Many cities have tried similar setups and failed miserably.  I wasn&#039;t taking a hard stance on anything; I simply illustrated possible problems with the proposed project.  There&#039;s a lot of people who have a serious problem with the way FCC decides what is or isn&#039;t appropriate.  A whole new set of issues will arise when the FCC starts ruling on the propriety of content on the internet (not just television).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ah Ken, I&#8217;ve missed you terribly.  I don&#8217;t believe I was complaining, per se; I tend to think I try to illustrate the flaws in systems suggested for delivering free internet.  Many cities have tried similar setups and failed miserably.  I wasn&#8217;t taking a hard stance on anything; I simply illustrated possible problems with the proposed project.  There&#8217;s a lot of people who have a serious problem with the way FCC decides what is or isn&#8217;t appropriate.  A whole new set of issues will arise when the FCC starts ruling on the propriety of content on the internet (not just television).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ken</title>
		<link>http://tech.blorge.com/Structure:/2008/12/01/fcc-backed-free-internet-promises-certain-conflict-with-porn-industry-isps/comment-page-1/#comment-149889</link>
		<dc:creator>Ken</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Dec 2008 19:06:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tech.blorge.com/?p=9633#comment-149889</guid>
		<description>This is similar in concept to the way telephone service was rolled out to everyone with long distance subsiding basic service where the lack of population was an issue.

 As Ralph mentioned, it&#039;s not really different than OTA broadcasting. The FCC dictates what is acceptable content and it doesn&#039;t seem to hurt the availability of Adult content for those who want it. I&#039;m pretty sure banning porn from OTA broadcasts hasn&#039;t killed it.

 It should drive down the price of pay broadband, it gives an option without needing to pay for it and someone will start offering cheap netbooks to specifically serve that market.

 Give me porn or give me death is a questionable stance. Making a law prohibiting any access to material is a free speech issue.   

 Mandating full access to all material when alternatives exist is not.

 Weren&#039;t you complaining about free wireless access everywhere a couple of months ago?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is similar in concept to the way telephone service was rolled out to everyone with long distance subsiding basic service where the lack of population was an issue.</p>
<p> As Ralph mentioned, it&#8217;s not really different than OTA broadcasting. The FCC dictates what is acceptable content and it doesn&#8217;t seem to hurt the availability of Adult content for those who want it. I&#8217;m pretty sure banning porn from OTA broadcasts hasn&#8217;t killed it.</p>
<p> It should drive down the price of pay broadband, it gives an option without needing to pay for it and someone will start offering cheap netbooks to specifically serve that market.</p>
<p> Give me porn or give me death is a questionable stance. Making a law prohibiting any access to material is a free speech issue.   </p>
<p> Mandating full access to all material when alternatives exist is not.</p>
<p> Weren&#8217;t you complaining about free wireless access everywhere a couple of months ago?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ralph</title>
		<link>http://tech.blorge.com/Structure:/2008/12/01/fcc-backed-free-internet-promises-certain-conflict-with-porn-industry-isps/comment-page-1/#comment-149751</link>
		<dc:creator>Ralph</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Dec 2008 02:28:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://tech.blorge.com/?p=9633#comment-149751</guid>
		<description>One scenario, the free version will have the porn blocked. The non free version will have no limits.

This could follow the same exact model as what cable/satellite TV service uses. You want uncut movies, you pay for it. You want free TV, you can&#039;t watch uncut movies.

However, if they can block porn. They also can block other sites too that can be deemed &quot;too political&quot; ....sites like Alex Jones. 

And then we open yet a whole new can of worms and that is who determines whats &quot;right&quot; for the American people? 

A national censorship board? Or a self imposed rating system like the movie and gaming industry?

Or make it available to anyone over the age of 18 and provide some free filtering to those that want certain sites blocked?

One must also ask if this is the part of the long talked about &quot;Internet 2&quot; where it will be highly restricted and controlled.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One scenario, the free version will have the porn blocked. The non free version will have no limits.</p>
<p>This could follow the same exact model as what cable/satellite TV service uses. You want uncut movies, you pay for it. You want free TV, you can&#8217;t watch uncut movies.</p>
<p>However, if they can block porn. They also can block other sites too that can be deemed &#8220;too political&#8221; &#8230;.sites like Alex Jones. </p>
<p>And then we open yet a whole new can of worms and that is who determines whats &#8220;right&#8221; for the American people? </p>
<p>A national censorship board? Or a self imposed rating system like the movie and gaming industry?</p>
<p>Or make it available to anyone over the age of 18 and provide some free filtering to those that want certain sites blocked?</p>
<p>One must also ask if this is the part of the long talked about &#8220;Internet 2&#8243; where it will be highly restricted and controlled.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

