Net neutrality...done deal

"FCC to approve Net neutrality rules Tuesday"

by

Marguerite Reardon

December 20th, 2010

CNET News

The Federal Communications Commission is set to vote on official Net neutrality rules tomorrow, which the agency claims will provide consumers, service providers, device makers, and application developers clear rules of the road for the Internet.

With the support of all three Democrats on the FCC, the regulation is set to pass. And the vote will mark the next step in what has been a politically charged debate between telephone and cable companies and consumer groups advocating for a free and open Internet.

The five-member commission, which is made up of three Democrats and two Republicans, has been working on developing these official rules of the road for more than a year. In September 2009, Chairman Julius Genachowski suggested adding to the original Internet Openness principles adopted by the commission under former Chairman Michael Powell.

The debate of what should be included in the new rules has raged ever since. Democratic supporters and consumer advocates along with some Internet companies have pushed for more stringent regulations. Meanwhile, Congressional Republicans and major telephone and cable companies have lobbied for lighter regulation.

Genachowski, who offered a preview of the plan earlier this month, has attempted to give each side a little of what it wants in the new rules, but neither camp has said they are completely satisfied. In fact, the two Democrats on the commission, Michael Copps and Mignon Clyburn, have been reluctant to go along with the chairman's plan because they believe it may be too favorable to major broadband providers. But FCC officials say the chairman has worked closely with these commissioners to satisfy their concerns. And now it looks as though the two Democrats will support the new rules, albeit somewhat reluctantly.

Clyburn released a statement today stating she will vote in favor of the new rules. Copps also said he'd vote for the rules, but in a statement today he noted that he believes things are missing from the order.

"While I cannot vote wholeheartedly to approve the item, I will not block it by voting against it. I instead plan to concur so that we may move forward," Copps said in a statement.

Meanwhile, Republican Commissioner Robert McDowell, who has long opposed Net neutrality regulation, said in an op-ed for The Wall Street Journal on Monday that the new rules are trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist.

"On this winter solstice, we will witness jaw-dropping interventionist chutzpah as the FCC bypasses branches of our government in the dogged pursuit of needless and harmful regulation," McDowell wrote. "The darkest day of the year may end up marking the beginning of a long winter's night for Internet freedom."

He went on to say:

"Nothing is broken and needs fixing, however. The Internet has been open and freedom-enhancing since it was spun off from a government research project in the early 1990s. Its nature as a diffuse and dynamic global network of networks defies top-down authority. Ample laws to protect consumers already exist. Furthermore, the Obama Justice Department and the European Commission both decided this year that Net neutrality regulation was unnecessary and might deter investment in next-generation Internet technology and infrastructure."

Senior representatives from the FCC held a press conference this afternoon to provide an overview of what the order will actually say. At a high level, there are three provisions that will become official FCC regulation.

The first rule is about transparency. Network operators of both fixed and wireless networks will be required to disclose to consumers, content providers, and device makers information that will be necessary for them to deploy services. In other words, if a broadband network operator is using network management techniques that affect an application or if a wireless broadband network provider doesn't allow a certain type of application, the service provider must provide information about the requirements for its network.

The second Net neutrality rule prohibits the blocking of traffic on the Internet. The rule applies to both fixed wireline broadband network operators, as well as to wireless providers. But the stipulations for each type of network are slightly different.

For wired networks, operators will not be allowed to block any lawful content, services, applications, or devices on their network. For wireless providers, the rule is somewhat limited and only prohibits the blocking of access to Web sites or applications that specifically compete with a carrier's telephony voice or video services.

The blocking rule for wireless and wireline networks also includes allowances for reasonable network management. This means that wireline and wireless broadband providers will be able to reasonably manage their networks during times of congestion to ensure every user can adequately access services.

And finally, the last rule applies only to fixed broadband providers. It prohibits fixed wireline broadband providers from unreasonably discriminating against traffic on their network.

Net neutrality zealots have already expressed dismay in Copps' support of the new rules.

"Internet users across America will have lost a hero if Commissioner Copps caves to pressure from big business and supports FCC Chairman Genachowski's fake Net neutrality rules--rules written by AT&T, Comcast, and Verizon, the very companies the public is depending on the FCC to regulate strongly," Jason Rosenbaum, the senior online campaigns director for the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, said in a statement.

But not everyone is upset that a compromise appears to have been reached.

Senator John Kerry (D-Mass.), released a statement today applauding the three Democratic commissioners for reaching a consensus on the rules.

"While he (Commissioner Copps) and Commissioner Clyburn, as well as many of the champions of network neutrality, including myself, would have supported a stricter order, I commend them for rising to the moment and making possible very meaningful progress to preserve the freedom to communicate and compete over the Internet," he said in the statement. "I also join them in commending Chairman Genachowski for his inclusive, thoughtful, and creative work in bringing parties together, airing all points of view, and finding a principled center."

Strike it rich poll

Ever strike it rich...like on Antiques Road Show?

No...1

Slightly...0

Yes...1

Some are lucky.

A physicist's philosophical perspective

Israel Perez has provided his insight into the physical world. I cannot totally agree with the paper.

Abstract:

Without a doubt many problems in physics arise as a consequence of our philosophical conception of the world. In this contribution however we endeavor to alleviate this scenario by putting forward a philosophical approach under which some of the most fundamental problems in modern physics might turn out to be fictitious. To accomplish such task we propound that everything that exists must be made up of matter which not only makes up space and the universe but also is in constant change. For such reason the existence of total emptiness and material discontinuity are rejected. Here physical fields are assumed as a particular state of matter. And time is understood as the result of the intrinsic dynamics of the universe. Furthermore, the infiniteness of the universe is also discussed and its implications are briefly mentioned, e.g., the laws of conservation. Finally, the regularity of the physical laws is questioned. In summary four great problems (from the perspective of physics) are suggested to be deeply studied: (1) What is matter?, (2) Why does the universe change? (3) is the universe infinite in extension? and (4) are there really regular (invariant) laws of physics?

"A physicist’s view of the universe: a philosophical approach" by Israel Perez

Shocking...Robert Van de Graaff

The three founders of HVEC stand by the company's Emperor tandem test facility. L-R: Robert Van de Graaff; Denis Robinson; John Trump.

Robert Van de Graaff
December 20th, 1901 to January 16th, 1967

An "American physicist and inventor of the Van de Graaff generator, a type of high-voltage electrostatic generator that can be used as a particle accelerator in atomic research. The potential differences achieved in modern Van de Graaff generators can be up to 5 MV. It is a principle of electric fields that charges on a surface can leap off at points where the curvature is great, that is, where the radius is small. Thus, a dome of great radius will inhibit the electric discharge and added charge can reach a high voltage. This generator has been used in medical (such as high-energy X-ray production) and industrial applications (sterilization of food). In the 1950s, Van de Graaff invented the insulating core transformer able to produce high voltage direct current"

Robert Van de Graaff [Wikipedia]

Van de Graaff Generator [Wikipedia]

The were college bowl games and there are college bowl games

G. E. College Bowl

1959

College Bowl Games. This season we think of the Cotton Bowl, the Orange Bowl, the Rose Bowl, etc. But in yesteryear times it also meant selected academic participants making mental moves...one college/university pitted against another--the G. E. College Bowl.

Wikipedia offers...

College Bowl was a format of college-level quizbowl run and operated by College Bowl Company, Incorporated. It had a format similar to the current NAQT format. College Bowl first aired on US radio stations in 1953, and aired on US television from 1959 to 1970. After a seven-year hiatus following its cancellation on television, the game reappeared on college campuses in 1977 through an affiliation with the Association of College Unions International (ACUI) that lasted for 31 years. In 2008, the College Bowl Company announced its suspension of the College Bowl program, citing increased costs and financial infeasibility of continuing to work with ACUI.

For television...

Though a pilot was shot in the Spring of 1955, the game did not move to television until 1959. As G.E. College Bowl with General Electric as the primary sponsor, the show ran on CBS from 1959–1963, and moved back to NBC from 1963-1970. Allen Ludden was the original host, but left to do Password full-time in 1962. Robert Earle was moderator for the rest of the run. The norm developed in the Ludden-Earle era of undefeated teams retiring after winning five games. One upset occurred in 1961, when the small liberal arts colleges of Hobart and William Smith in Geneva, New York, defeated Baylor University to retire undefeated as the third colleges, along with Rutgers and Colgate, to do so. Another example, Lafayette College retired undefeated in Fall 1962 after beating the University of California Berkeley for its fifth victory, a David and Goliath event.

One of the great upsets in College Bowl history—or indeed, in the history of any intercollegiate competition—came on March 6, 1966, when a small women's school, Agnes Scott College, took on the defending champions from Princeton University, which had challenged and defeated a team from Mount Holyoke College the previous week. Agnes Scott's four-woman team of Malinda Snow, Betty Butler (later Ravenholt), Katherine Bell (later Hunter) and Karen Gearreald fell behind 185-130 with less than two minutes remaining. With just a few seconds left on the clock, Butler correctly answered a toss-up question about Einstein, and Gearreald nailed the bonus question ("For twenty points, what were Balmung and Durandal?" "Swords!") to give Agnes Scott a shocking 220-215 victory. Ironically, Gearreald was blind and could not see the clock; she had no idea only a few moments were left in the game.

Agnes Scott came back the next week, but was defeated by Marietta College, 230-115; the 1966 games constituted its only College Bowl appearance.

Betty Butler Ravenholt went on to become a scholar and writer in the field of health policy in emerging nations. Katherine Bell Hunter earned a master's degree from Wake Forest University and a PhD from the University of Alberta; she later taught botany at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. Gearreald, Agnes Scott's first blind student, went on to earn a master's and doctorate from Harvard University in English literature and linguistics, and a juris doctorate from Duke University. In 1997, Gearreald was elected Agnes Scott’s Outstanding Alumna for Distinguished Career. Malinda Snow earned master's and PhD degrees from Duke University and teaches English at Georgia State University.

Princeton's captain, Steve Chernicoff, went on to become a five-time champion on Jeopardy! in its 1994-95 season and won over $83,000. He later advanced to the quarterfinals of the Jeopardy! Ultimate Tournament of Champions in 2005.

The complete episode...

Part 1



Part 2



Part 3

Charity to nonfamily poll

Are you charitable to nonfamily members at this time of year?

No...0

Yes...3

Why not, ya can't take it with you.

Quantification of "art" poll

Can "art" be quantified i.e., a theory of aesthetics?

No...1

Yes...1

Somewhat of an ambiguous poll. Certainly artistic movements can be quantified. but not, necessarily, individual pieces. I have been to many art fairs and I am repelled when an artist stands [or sits] there telling me what I am supposed to experience. "Aesthetics" should be personal and subjective perhaps within a movement framework.