Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Gubernatorial Candidate Speaks Out Against CAS

samzenpus posted about a year and a half ago | from the power-to-the-people dept.

Piracy 121

New submitter C0R1D4N writes "Carl Bergmanson, a New Jersey gubernatorial democrat running in the 2013 primary, has recently spoken out against the new 'six strike policy' being put in place this week by major ISPs. He said: 'The internet has become an essential part of living in the 21st century, it uses public infrastructure and it is time we treat it as a public utility. The electric company has no say over what you power with their service, the ISPs have no right to decide what you can and can not download.'"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Sadly, this is probably as good as it gets (4, Insightful)

crazyjj (2598719) | about a year and a half ago | (#43004615)

Well, at least consumers now have an obscure gubernatorial candidate, who stands no chance of winning either the primary or election, on their side. Guess that beats *nothing*.

Re:Sadly, this is probably as good as it gets (5, Insightful)

paiute (550198) | about a year and a half ago | (#43005355)

Well, at least consumers now have an obscure gubernatorial candidate, who stands no chance of winning either the primary or election, on their side. Guess that beats *nothing*.

You can make this guy into a major candidate by writing him a check. As a matter of fact, if he doesn't get a couple of hundred thousand checks from the Slashdot community pretty damn quick then you all might be the whining do-nothing slackers the more cynical among you have always claimed.

Re:Sadly, this is probably as good as it gets (3, Interesting)

SilentStaid (1474575) | about a year and a half ago | (#43005553)

You make an excellent point, sir. I don't even live in New Jersey but I'll give him 50 bucks. I know it's not much, but it's what I have to give and I really do want to show (with my dollars) that I support what he stands for.

Because whether or not you like it, that's how this government, and most others, work: Not by majority opinion, but by majority dollars.

Re:Sadly, this is probably as good as it gets (1)

Areyoukiddingme (1289470) | about a year and a half ago | (#43005825)

You can bet there's a lawyer printing off the boilerplate paperwork to establish a SuperPAC for his opposition as we speak. Probably already done. A messenger is frantically chasing around gathering signatures, so the RIAA/MPAA will have someplace safe to dump the literally millions they're going to give this guy's opposition.

I expect the first attack ads with the obvious stamp of whole bunches of money by the end of the week.

Re:Sadly, this is probably as good as it gets (1)

Pseudonym Authority (1591027) | about a year ago | (#43009067)

This is fine too. If they are willing to spend millions for every thousand our side wastes, then they'll run out of money before we do (maybe). Just call it a war of attrition and we are golden.

Re:Sadly, this is probably as good as it gets (2)

misterooga (1172837) | about a year and a half ago | (#43005573)

Can Kickstarter be used for funding purpose, I wonder?

With stretch goals such as "save the world."

Re:Sadly, this is probably as good as it gets (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43005957)

The problem with the US system of paying for political support is that even if the slashdot community did get him elected theres no chance he'll see that again. Once hes elected the MPAA/RIAA can buy him cheap as he'll know their income wont stop. The public with their 'single issue' campaigns will never make a dent in the systematic stripping of peoples basic rights.

Re:Sadly, this is probably as good as it gets (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43005983)

You make a good point. I wish we had good canidates like this in the UK, where I was born and am currently a citizen. Neverthless, I will write him a check for $100 in your currency, just like I did for Barack Obama.

Re:Sadly, this is probably as good as it gets (2)

phantomfive (622387) | about a year and a half ago | (#43006195)

Here's the link for donations [bergmanson...vernor.com] . You can put your money where your mouth is. I also suggest calling him and telling him why you've donated, and what other issues he can address to maintain your support.

Re:Sadly, this is probably as good as it gets (1)

Solandri (704621) | about a year and a half ago | (#43006959)

Is it legal to make a campaign donation to a candidate who does not (potentially) represent you? And even if it is legal, is it ethical? People got upset at the mere thought that China was making campaign donations to influence U.S. elections. But ideologically how different is that from, say, New Yorkers making campaign donations for a gubernatorial candidate in New Jersey? Being neighboring states, I'm sure there are lots of things they disagree on. It subverts the representative democratic process if people are able to influence the election of people who won't be representing them.

I mean I'm all for more candidates with some common sense. But if anyone in the country can directly contribute to anyone else's representative's campaign, I fear we have much deeper problems than a 6 strikes law for ISPs.

Re:Sadly, this is probably as good as it gets (1)

CrimsonAvenger (580665) | about a year ago | (#43007345)

Is it legal to make a campaign donation to a candidate who does not (potentially) represent you?

That depends on the campaign finance laws of the individual State. Some allow it, some don't.

I don't know which side of the fence New Jersey comes down on, having never lived there, but it would probably be advisable to find out before donating money to this guy if you don't live/work in Jersey....

Re:Sadly, this is probably as good as it gets (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43005539)

In my state it was the 'repugs' that stood against this sort of thing. That was until they took power. Suddenly it was the 'dems' that stood against it. Highest bidder...

Common carrier (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43004667)

ISPs look like common carriers and quack like common carriers. It's high time we started treating them as common carriers (i.e., imposing net neutrality on them).

Re:Common carrier (1)

mill3d (1647417) | about a year and a half ago | (#43004893)

I'm all for it. Either that or at least remove the regional monopolies these guys abuse all too often.

Re:Common carrier (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43005081)

ISPs look like common carriers and quack like common carriers. It's high time we started treating them as common carriers (i.e., imposing net neutrality on them).

But but but think of the MONEEEEEEEEEEY!!!1! How can the ISPs possibly make money without constant kickbacks from the MPAA/RIAA for things like cooperating with them on things like CAS? They need all that money so they can continue to roll out such innovations like increasing downstream speed from 10MB/sec to 15MB/sec when the threat of someone offering 100MB/sec comes around! That's a whole 50% speed increase! You can't just flip a switch to make that happen! They need to set up a special case to make it different from their 20MB/sec service they charge more for!

Re:Common carrier (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43005225)

I suspect the profit the ISPs make off music and media is a flat triviality compared to the profit they make by charging for your phone activities.

Re:Common carrier (5, Interesting)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | about a year and a half ago | (#43006399)

"SPs look like common carriers and quack like common carriers. It's high time we started treating them as common carriers (i.e., imposing net neutrality on them)."

The FCC has wanted to classify ISPs as Title II Common Carriers since their inception. It was Congress that stopped it from doing so, by passing a law that made ISPs an exception. Backed by lobbying, no doubt. There was never any real, rational reason for doing that and I have been lambasting Congress for it ever since. (That is, "corporate profit" might be a "reason", but not a good one. This situation is definitely not in the public interest. Countries that treat internet more like a utility have significantly better service at lower rates than the U.S.)

The reality is, more than ever before, that ISPs are Common Carriers, in every meaningful way. We need to get Congress to let the FCC classify them as such.

The moment that happens, many of these problems -- and privacy problems too -- simply disappear.

Never waste an opportunity (0, Troll)

J'raxis (248192) | about a year and a half ago | (#43004679)

"... the ISPs have no right to decide what you can and can not download."

But the government does, right?

"The internet has become an essential part of living in the 21st century, it uses public infrastructure and it is time we treat it as a public utility."

Isn't it convenient how politicians use this situation to exert more control over the Internet? (And now watch as thousands of geeks who have otherwise been staunchly against the government regulating the Internet line up behind this guy.)

Re:Never waste an opportunity (4, Insightful)

Bob9113 (14996) | about a year and a half ago | (#43004895)

"... the ISPs have no right to decide what you can and can not download."

But the government does, right?

No.

"The internet has become an essential part of living in the 21st century, it uses public infrastructure and it is time we treat it as a public utility."

Isn't it convenient how politicians use this situation to exert more control over the Internet? (And now watch as thousands of geeks who have otherwise been staunchly against the government regulating the Internet line up behind this guy.)

He is not implying regulation of the Internet. He is implying regulation of the Internet service providers (to prohibit them from regulating the Internet).

The Internet is not their hardware, it is our network that we pay them to provision.

Re:Never waste an opportunity (2)

Vaphell (1489021) | about a year and a half ago | (#43005479)

while i agree the op went too far in his rant, the wording does imply govt regulations. Show me any public utility that doesn't have a long list of govt strings attached. Roads and airports are public utility and you begin to have TSA and other 3letter wonders everywhere. In the age of terrorist and pedophile bogeymen the fate of the internet is sealed.

Re:Never waste an opportunity (2)

PlusFiveTroll (754249) | about a year and a half ago | (#43006387)

The problem is we have only two choices currently. Government control of the internet or corporate control of the internet. (And govt' control may just be puppet control by corps that write fat checks).

Who do you want controlling the internet, the FBI, who can send death squads to trash your house? Or the MPAA who can send the FBI death squads to trash your house?

Re:Never waste an opportunity (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43004957)

what exactly is wrong with this? the internet does use public infrastructure. in fact it works very much like electricity. paying by the amount of bandwidth you use makes a hell of a lot of sense to me, even though that's an unpopular opinion. i'd love to see a pay-per-kb system, but prices need to be much cheaper. the government could help with that while still keeping the internet open.

Re:Never waste an opportunity (5, Insightful)

runeghost (2509522) | about a year and a half ago | (#43005089)

You're conflating two different things and confusing the issue. Bergmanson is speaking of using government power to *prevent* corporations from engaging in censorship. You are implying that any government attempt to exercise the power to stop corporate censorship will itself be creating a situation where the government can and will censor the internet itself - something that is not exactly accurate.

I find it disheartening how, whenever there is a semi-serious discussion of using government power to stop flagrant corporate abuse, someone inevitably hauls out the "OMG! We can't allow the government to have that much power! They'll abuse it and our freedom will suffer!" While I certainly am concerned about government tyranny and over-reach, I fail to understand why we settling for corporate tyranny and abuse instead is the only possible alternative. American history would seem to demonstrate that it is possible to have a government that keeps corporations in check without becoming some sort of nightmare police-state.

Re:Never waste an opportunity (2)

Vaphell (1489021) | about a year and a half ago | (#43005569)

American history would seem to demonstrate that it is possible to have a government that keeps corporations in check without becoming some sort of nightmare police-state.

are you serious? Govt that keeps corporations in check? So why everybody and their dog whine about the citizens united and the money as speech thing? Ever heard of regulatory capture (plain as day in case of FDA, EPA, SEC)?

Not sure... (1)

houstonbofh (602064) | about a year and a half ago | (#43004689)

Having seen how government regulation works in New Jersey, I am not sure that Internet oversight would be any kind of improvement there...

Not a big fan of "six strikes" but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43004695)

Do we really want the internet to be regulated as a public utility? You would still have someone telling you what you can and can't download, only instead of the ISP's, it would be the FCC.

Scary thought.

Re:Not a big fan of "six strikes" but... (4, Insightful)

crazyjj (2598719) | about a year and a half ago | (#43004715)

At least you could appeal to the FCC, if your ISP made a mistake.

Poor analogy (-1, Troll)

abigsmurf (919188) | about a year and a half ago | (#43004697)

When you use electricity to power your porn, that porn doesn't pass through the electricity company to get to you.

An ISP absolutely has the right to refuse letting some stuff pass through their servers if they want.

Re:Poor analogy (2)

Khyber (864651) | about a year and a half ago | (#43004711)

"When you use electricity to power your porn, that porn doesn't pass through the electricity company to get to you. "

Uhhhhhh, broadband over powerline?

Re:Poor analogy (1)

tepples (727027) | about a year and a half ago | (#43004805)

Broadband over powerline has negligible market share.

Re:Poor analogy (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43004781)

Going along with your line of reasoning, the ISPs are distributors of child pornography and all of their executives should be jailed for life.

Re:Poor analogy (1)

abigsmurf (919188) | about a year and a half ago | (#43005763)

It's like banning someone from a shopping mall because they're carrying weapons. You may not be liable for crimes they commit with those weapons but you still want to prevent it.

Re:Poor analogy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43007069)

It's like banning someone from a shopping mall because they're carrying weapons. You may not be liable for crimes they commit with those weapons but you still want to prevent it.

Which is perfectly within your rights on private property. Banning someone because their nosy neighbor told you they or their friend might own a gun somewhere in their possession (more similar to the CAS penalties, applied without any proof or due process) would raise eyebrows. But banning someone from public streets, or even privately-operated establishments on publicly-owned land, based on such hearsay would constitute a violation of your rights. Same thing with CAS and ISPs banning you from their publicly-subsidized networks based on the automatically-generated accusations of big content.

Re:Poor analogy (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43004787)

Just like the phone company absolutely has the right to refuse letting some calls pass through their switches if they want, right?

Re:Poor analogy (1)

abigsmurf (919188) | about a year and a half ago | (#43005791)

Phone companies can and do throw people off of their services for breaking their ToS.

Re:Poor analogy (1)

candeoastrum (1262256) | about a year and a half ago | (#43006875)

Phone companies can and do throw people off of their services for breaking their ToS.

AC was a little more specific than ToS. Can you name a phone company that ended someones contract for calling someone they didn't want them to call?

Re:Poor analogy (1)

sjames (1099) | about a year ago | (#43009199)

Imagine if the RIAA listened in on your conversation and one of the things that could get you banned from the telephone is letting a friend hear your music collection playing.

Re:Poor analogy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43004859)

Not if they want to claim they are dumb pipes. If they do it, fine, but then they are partly responsible for everything you download that does pass.

Re:Poor analogy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43004917)

When you use electricity to power your porn, that porn doesn't pass through the electricity company to get to you. An ISP absolutely has the right to refuse letting some stuff pass through their servers if they want.

Ah, "right to refuse" and "legally inclined to give a shit" are worlds apart, especially in financial terms.

And the worst issue with that statement is the fact that the financial burden is NOT on the business, it is being pushed back on the consumer, which is bullshit.

Re:Poor analogy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43004943)

Except the power company owns the electricity running through their lines. ISPs don't own the data passing through theirs.

Re:Poor analogy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43005689)

Mod this fucker troll. ISPs are dumb pipes and should not be inspecting my traffic.

Unless they're seeing Windows malware going across their network, then it's their RESPONSIBILITY to cutoff that user until they've installed linux.

captcha: hypocrite

Re:Poor analogy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43005865)

When you use electricity to power your porn, that porn doesn't pass through the electricity company to get to you.

"Packet inspection? No sir! ...we'd prefer to inspect the whole JPEG!"

Make no mistale (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43004707)

This is a Democrat, by definition a tyrant, a liar and a fraud.

"the ISPs have no right to decide what you can and can not download."

No doubt. But I guarantee you this man will see to it that the state is able to make this decision for you.

Vote Democrat and Vote for tyranny! Yea!

Re:Make no mistale (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43004841)

Last I checked, there was tyranny going on both sides of the isle, not just Democrats. In fact, Republicans cater to the rich and powerful, when in history was there ever a poor tyrant?

Re:Make no mistale (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43004907)

A tourist walked into a Chinese curio shop in San Francisco . While looking around at the exotic merchandise, he noticed a very lifelike, life-sized, bronze statue of a rat. It had no price tag, but it was so incredibly striking the tourist decided he must have it. He took it to the old shop owner and asked, "How much for the bronze rat ?"

"Ahhh, you have chosen wisely! It is $12 for the rat and $100 for the story" said the wise old Chinaman.

The tourist quickly pulled out twelve dollars. "I'll just take the rat, you can keep the story."
As he walked down the street carrying his bronze rat, the tourist noticed that a few real rats had crawled out of the alleys and sewers and had begun following him down the street. This was a bit disconcerting so he began walking faster. A couple blocks later he looked behind him and saw to his horror the herd of rats behind him had grown to hundreds, and they began squealing. Sweating now, the tourist began to trot toward San Francisco Bay. Again, after a couple blocks, he looked around only to discover that the rats now numbered in the MILLIONS, and were squealing and coming toward him faster and faster. Terrified, he ran to the edge of the Bay and threw the bronze rat as far as he could into the Bay. Amazingly, the millions of rats all jumped into the Bay after the bronze rat and were all drowned.

The man walked back to the curio shop in Chinatown. "Ahhh," said the owner, "You come back for story ?"

"No sir," said the man, "I came back to see if you have a bronze Democrat."

Re:Make no mistale (1)

Bucc5062 (856482) | about a year and a half ago | (#43006115)

"No sir," said the man, "I came back to see if you have a bronze politician."

ftfy

Re:Make no mistale (1)

desdinova 216 (2000908) | about a year and a half ago | (#43006341)

"No sir," said the man, "I came back to see if you have a bronze Politician."

FTFY

Typesetting/spacing (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43004725)

I see they are going for a newspaper look,
but the words

are so spread out

it makes my brain bleed

to try and read it. and it looks like

the articles are all smashed. together. and junk

The Last Paper (in free verse) (1)

ClayJar (126217) | about a year and a half ago | (#43005049)

They wrote a story

typeset in the form of a seventh-grade paper

where only the page count matters.

But the trick never worked

as the teacher docked them anyway.

It was worth one more try.

Re:Typesetting/spacing (4, Funny)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | about a year and a half ago | (#43005171)

Burma Shave.

Re:Typesetting/spacing (1)

Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) | about a year and a half ago | (#43006553)

Somene pasted in an article with hard carriage returns at the end of each "line", whatever length they define it as, and they got interpreted as paragraph breaks instead (and quite reasonably. Only inferior editors from the dark ages before most of you were born did this. Also, Notepad fucks up doing this from time to time if wrap size changes.

Re:Typesetting/spacing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43009591)

It was late at night and politicker was being a pain =p

CAS (4, Funny)

femtobyte (710429) | about a year and a half ago | (#43004791)

Finally, someone standing up against Computer Algebra Systems! Those whizzy calculators are destroying education in this country, leaving children mathematically crippled, unable to manage the simplest symbolic manipulation in their own heads.

Yeah, I didn't RTFS beyond the headline; why do you ask?

Re:CAS (5, Funny)

freeze128 (544774) | about a year and a half ago | (#43004929)

I disagree completely! I don't think that any member of the government has any authority to dictate whether memory controllers should or should not use Column Address Select. It's a technical problem that politicians should clearly stay away from!

Re:CAS (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43004995)

I agree, the Compare-and-Swap instruction is crucial to efficient multi-threading synchronization!

Re:CAS (1)

neminem (561346) | about a year and a half ago | (#43005025)

I agree with you. Why should our government care if Microsoft provides us with the ability to require privileges to load custom assemblies via Code Access Security? It's not like you have to use it if you don't want to...

Re:CAS (2)

medcalf (68293) | about a year and a half ago | (#43005257)

You'd think the government would be all over the Central Authentication Service [jasig.org] .

Re:CAS (1)

dkf (304284) | about a year ago | (#43009389)

You'd think the government would be all over the Central Authentication Service.

It'd be nice if they were; it might encourage someone to come up with a solid Apache plugin to handle CAS-based authentication right.

Wrong (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43005105)

This article is clearly about the dreaded Channel Associated Signaling. Better late than never that someone stands up and raises his voice against this atrocity

Re:Wrong (1)

tqk (413719) | about a year and a half ago | (#43006869)

This article is clearly about the dreaded Channel Associated Signaling.

In case anyone else wants to play:

(0) infidel /home/keeling_ dict cas
8 definitions found

From The Free On-line Dictionary of Computing (18 May 2012) [foldoc]:

    CAS

          1. {Column Address Strobe}.

          2. (channel associated signaling) {in-band
          signalling}.

From V.E.R.A. -- Virtual Entity of Relevant Acronyms (June 2006) [vera]:

    CAS
                  Code Access Security (VSTO, .NET, MS)

From V.E.R.A. -- Virtual Entity of Relevant Acronyms (June 2006) [vera]:

    CAS
                  Column Address Strobe (IC, DRAM)

From V.E.R.A. -- Virtual Entity of Relevant Acronyms (June 2006) [vera]:

    CAS
                  Communicating Applications Specification (FAX, Intel, DCA)

From V.E.R.A. -- Virtual Entity of Relevant Acronyms (June 2006) [vera]:

    CAS
                  Computer Aided Selling

From V.E.R.A. -- Virtual Entity of Relevant Acronyms (June 2006) [vera]:

    CAS
                  Computer Algebra System

From V.E.R.A. -- Virtual Entity of Relevant Acronyms (June 2006) [vera]:

    CAS
                  Content Addressed Storage (EMC)

From V.E.R.A. -- Virtual Entity of Relevant Acronyms (June 2006) [vera]:

    CAS
                  Computerized Autodial System

A breath of fresh air. (2)

candeoastrum (1262256) | about a year and a half ago | (#43004819)

Regardless to whether this candidate wins or loses, he offered an interesting perspective that others are forced to listen to. In my worthless opinion, one voice, leads to several voices questioning whether its feasible which leads to someone sponsoring a bill that gets debated. Its a humble process that sometimes snowballs into something meaningful. I am not so cynical that I believe his idea will change that industry overnight but I am hopeful that it gives others in power or wanting to come into power ideas that might be more useful to consumers.

Re:A breath of fresh air. (1)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | about a year and a half ago | (#43005041)

I'm glad he said it, but very few if any people are listening. Gov Christie has about a 75% approval rating and will win re-election in a landslide barring some sort of major screwup.

Re:A breath of fresh air. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43005395)

(Posting anon since I already modded) I know Christie got a big ratings boost in the aftermath of Sandy and all, but if you really believe 75% of Jersey residents approve of and/or will re-elect him, I want some of what you're smoking. RNC pipe dreams aside, Christie is hugely disliked by a tons of people in the state. Lots of others seem to love him for whatever reason. I'm predicting an extremely close election.

Re:A breath of fresh air. (1)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | about a year and a half ago | (#43005855)

> I'm predicting an extremely close election.

This sounds like the same cognitive dissonance that led Republicans to predict that Romney would win.

It turned out that the polls were right and they were wrong.

It's amazing how people who use math can be right so often.

Re:A breath of fresh air. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43007449)

Depends on who they run against him. Running the Democrat's Democrat against him will lose (like Romney, the Republican's Republican). An upstart candidate who shares things Christie is popular on(fiscal issues), but differs where Christie is unpopular (social issues mostly) is a strong oponent. Exactly where Bergmanson sits.

Re:A breath of fresh air. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43007757)

I have a theory that in our current polarized political environment, a candidate can switch parties, run on exactly the same platform and win just on the party affiliation of the voting majority.

He's already lost. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43004843)

Well, we'll just see how many "campaign contributions" he gets from the MAFIAA.

Please (3, Interesting)

Frankie70 (803801) | about a year and a half ago | (#43004849)

The electric company has no say over what you power with their service

Great. What effect is this statement more like to have
- ISPs stop telling you what you can download or not download
or
- Electric companies getting ideas about having a say over what you power with their service.

Re:Please (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43005131)

Electric companies "getting ideas"? Are you implying there are ways to siphon money out of their customers which they haven't already considered? As they say on the internet, "LOL".

There is no electric company in this country which hasn't already scoured every last square inch of possibility in this realm. You can bet your house they've already run the numbers on any possible scheme you can dream up.

Re:Please (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43005177)

The closest analogy would be cell carriers, which already silently drop long distance calls to reduces their costs.

Re:Please (1)

abigsmurf (919188) | about a year and a half ago | (#43005867)

Power companies frequently report people to the police for suspicious usage (ie if you're running lots of heat lamps). They're watching your usage patterns a lot more than you realise. Heck some power companies will turn down your air conditioning.

Re:Please (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43006139)

Power companies have turned people in for massive power-use, which generally means a house full of marijuana.

I burn a lot of power running heat-tape for reptiles, probably double what my neighbors use, and no one has ever questioned my usage.

No big company money for him (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43004855)

With a stand like that, he won't find that big corporate America will back him, left or right.

not so fast (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43004869)

Because electricity companies NEVER report houses with extraordinarily high usage to the DEA, right? RIGHT?

Re:not so fast (1)

CheshireDragon (1183095) | about a year and a half ago | (#43005481)

And when they found out it was a fusion reactor, boy were they embarrassed....

Re:not so fast (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43005693)

The DEA has to get a search warrant from a judge, then prove in front of another judge that you've done something illegal.

With Six Strikes, there's no due process, the ISPs are acting like the police, judge, jury and jailer at the same time.

If only big brother saw it this way... (1)

Darth Twon (2832799) | about a year and a half ago | (#43004883)

Though its a breath of fresh air to hear a political candidate talking like this about the internet, I feel like its too little too late. The machine is already powering up, plus who listens to obscure gubernatorial anyways?

Acronym overload (1)

DoofusOfDeath (636671) | about a year and a half ago | (#43004931)

My first thought from the headline was, "Why would they have a problem with Continuous Active Sonar [strategypage.com] ?".

Not a NJ resident (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43004933)

Or he'd have my vote!

Not necessarily true. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43004983)

You start drawing significantly more power than your house (or apartment) has previously drawn, and the utility will investigate, and possibly report you to the police as a grow farm operation. Many a marijuana grower has been caught because of their utility bill.

Re:Not necessarily true. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43005517)

That's why I started out with Tomatoes and Peppers :D

Re:Not necessarily true. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43006481)

You start drawing significantly more power than your house (or apartment) has previously drawn, and the utility will investigate, and possibly report you to the police as a grow farm operation. Many a marijuana grower has been caught because of their utility bill.

Except there's a couple of big differences. First off, the power company doesn't disconnect you because of a suspicion. If they contact the police, then the police may conduct an investigation using due process. In the case of ISPs, there is no due process.

Secondly, growing weed is a crime (at least presumably in the places where this happens). Downloading copyrighted materials is a violation of the law but it is not a crime. In the case of the former, if police discover you are doing something legal like growing tomatoes or have a legal medical marijuana operation, then they're not going to shut off your power. Imagine if Monsanto could tell the power and water companies "we think that guy is growing copies of plants containing our patented DNA, and he's using electricity and water provided by you, shut him off!"

Great Golly! (1)

The Shootist (324679) | about a year and a half ago | (#43005029)

A democrat who speaks the truth!

I'd actually vote for this man.

Not just downloading (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43005033)

It is also the uploading of copyrighted material that triggers the strike.

Which is worse?: The ISP handing over your information so you can be sued or getting a warning?

Perhaps both are bad, but the warnings may cost the user less money.

YAY. (1)

interval1066 (668936) | about a year and a half ago | (#43005107)

Way to white knight the cause Carl. I'd vote for him.

Bergmanson (3, Informative)

twright0 (1877370) | about a year and a half ago | (#43005123)

His name is Carl Bergmanson, not "Bermanson". Come on, editors, what purpose do you even serve?

Seriously? (1)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | about a year and a half ago | (#43005191)

Would it kill you to define CAS?

Re:Seriously? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43005505)

> Would it kill you to define CAS?

Corporate America Sucks.

(captcha: copying)

Why bother? (1)

ButchDeLoria (2772751) | about a year and a half ago | (#43005219)

Government-adminned Internet is just as bad as capitalist-adminned. The only way to return to how the Internet truly should be is to put it in the hands of some sweaty neckbeards.

And this is why anarchy doesn't work (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43005237)

When the state surrenders power someone else will grab it.

Shrug - no real news here (1)

Ravensfire (209905) | about a year and a half ago | (#43005385)

Yawn. The linked "article" is just a press-release from a fringe candidate. I'll be impressed if I see a mainstream candidate saying something like this and it's not just in a press-release.

O'RLY? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43005545)

"He said: 'The internet has become an essential part of living in the 21st century, it uses public infrastructure and it is time we treat it as a public utility. The electric company has no say over what you power with their service, the ISPs have no right to decide what you can and can not download.'"

Then perhaps he can explain all the legislation out there where power companies can and do regulate how much power you use, when you use it...

Y'know... like California's restriction on Plasma TVs perhaps?

Actually, power companies do have some say (1)

Wansu (846) | about a year and a half ago | (#43005835)

If your consumption is much higher than the norm, they'll notify the police of a possible grow operation.

Help me out here... (1)

WoodstockJeff (568111) | about a year and a half ago | (#43006433)

"it uses public infrastructure and it is time we treat it as a public utility."

What part of "the internet" is publicly owned, outside of a few last-mile segments in municipalities that have elected to provide that service?

Last I read, the "backbone" of internet was owned by private companies. The ISPs are private companies. All of the tiers in between them are owned by private companies.

Or, is this to imply that Americans should consider all of that privately-owned property to be "public", because some foreign governments "own" the phone companies in their countries, and we can connect to them through our privately-owned infrastructure?

The last mile is all that matters. (1)

bussdriver (620565) | about a year and a half ago | (#43007121)

The most expensive, difficult, LARGEST, and publicly owned part of any direct connect service is the last mile. The ISPs must use public land or public airwaves to get to your home; they get permission from the public using public institutions (government which used to be by and for the people but that is off topic.) The same system which provides water, sewer, roads, phone, power - although some of those are too new to be public and instead are privatized at our expense (but we love to pay more so somebody can get rich off a monopoly, our water, sewer, and roads are next...)

ISPs didn't build up the infrastructure completely on their own, they had plenty of public (gov) support in doing it and they did a bad job of it too. ISP motives were to milk profit not keep the USA on top and so here we sit while the world advances. Asians are going to be video editing home videos faster on the cloud (500Gbps) while we get excited we can finally play 2 HD netflix streams at once and can't upload jack.

The public can demand anything they want because it is OUR land that allows the last mile connection to be possible. You can put your stuff on that land but if the landlord changes their mind, you are evicted!

If the people (gov) want your stuff, they are allowed to take it from you but must pay you for it; that is, unless they say it is a form of drug money or terrorism, then you lose it without due process and must prove your innocents. This loophole on fundamental rights never happens to corporations (cough, HSBC) but too often it happens to citizens. The government always had that power for the public good but thanks to the SCOTUS, Walmart can buy your house and kick you out by bribing your town council for the corporate good.

Re:The last mile is all that matters. (1)

tibit (1762298) | about a year ago | (#43007609)

Last mile is important, but quite often the long haul is also done with hidden and perhaps forgotten but still significant public subsidies. In many places the long haul fiber is carried by the power utility companies, tucked inside of their high voltage lines.

Actually, that's not entirely true... (1)

mark-t (151149) | about a year and a half ago | (#43006463)

There are often terms of service for any utility, and part of those terms can easily be that you do not use the service of that utility to break the law.

So yes... electric companies *can* say that you aren't allowed to use it to power things when you are using those things to commit a crime, such as powering heat lamps to illegally grow marijuana in your own home.

The only thing that might be argued to be wrong with this is that there may not necessarily be any tangible proof that a particular ISP subscriber had anything to with a particular crime.

Short Sighted Slashdot (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43007019)

Yeah, because subverting private industry to become part of the state is somehow going to stop the state from using that apparatus to restrict your rights.

Brilliantly short sighted Slashdot, as usual.

I would say that depends on something... (3, Interesting)

damn_registrars (1103043) | about a year ago | (#43007459)

Whether or not ISPs can dictate what you can or cannot download should be directly related to whether or not they can be liable for you gaining access to illegal material. If they have no liability, then they should just bug off. If however the copyright holders can go after your ISP for allowing you to violate their copyright then it is in the best interest of your ISP to see that you do not.

Copyright Reform dream coming true (1)

snadrus (930168) | about a year ago | (#43009159)

The biggest problem with getting copyright law reformed is "How do you get a few million more Americans to care?". Thanks CAS for solving that problem & guaranteeing this will be a political topic soon enough.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?