Re: [NNagain] NTIA: national spectrum strategy

[Jack Haverty <jack@3kitty.org>]

[-- Attachment #1.1.1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1573 bytes --]

On 3/14/24 05:16, Dave Taht via Nnagain wrote:
> In other news, the House voted to ban tiktok yesterday.  I do not
> understand how simultaneously,
> we can accept security cameras (largely built around Linux and
> violating the GPL) also built elsewhere,
> or IoT, or home routers rife with CVEs...
My naive explanation---

Policy-makers seem to focus on how technology is used.    To 
policy-makers, "The Internet" is a poorly understood technology with 
many possible uses.  Whoever and wherever "we" are, our policy-makers 
create laws and regulations to constrain those uses. For every "we" 
there is likely a number of "them".

Security cameras allow "them" to spy on us.  That's generally considered 
bad, but apparently not as bad as Social Media, which allows "them" to 
control us, by flooding us with misinformation, disinformation, and what 
we curiously call "spam".   When advertisers or even our government does 
it, it's OK.  When "they" do it, it's bad.

Spying of course also allows "us" to spy on "us" as well.  That's 
apparently not as bad as allowing "them" to control "us", especially if 
we can create policy that retains the ability for "us" to exert control 
on "us" while preventing "them" from communicating with "us".   Those 
techies simply have to figure out how to make it happen.

I personally do not understand how "network neutrality" relates to other 
policies.  Perhaps it conflicts with other policies such as one that 
outlaws communications based on ownership of a company?

Jack Haverty


[-- Attachment #1.1.1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 2017 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #1.1.2: OpenPGP public key --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-keys, Size: 2469 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 665 bytes --]