fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #3997 ]

[ SECRET POST #3997 ]

⌈ Secret Post #3997 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

[Guardians of the Galaxy, Vol. 2]

__________________________________________________

03.

[Neil Gaiman, Good Omens]

__________________________________________________

04.

[Tonya Harding, Nancy Kerrigan / I, Tonya]

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 21 secrets from Secret Submission Post #572.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

anyone else worried about it? :(

Very. I mean... I have enough to worry about in life and the internet being accessible is one thing I thought I could always count on.

same. :( it's always been a constant. personally I think it should be a basic right.

yeah, I agree, I mean it's accessible information.

Oh yeah, I'm stressing hardcore.

I keep seeing people on my dash be like "it's not the end of the world guys" and I'm over here like YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND. YOU DON'T FUCKING GET IT. YOU'RE A MIDDLE CLASS AMERICAN MILLENNIAL, YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT CENSORSHIP FUCKING MEANS.

Will things instantaneously suck? No. But it will open the door to massive amounts of fuckery, and the bad guys will take advantage of that. Quickly.

yeah, but on the other hand, it's a regulatory thing that can be rolled back relatively easily under a different executive branch

that's the reason that I am, not unconcerned, but not apocalyptic about it.

I don't actually think censorship is the problem here - at least, not state censorship. I think the problem is ISPs, like any other greedy corporation, will extort the working class for every penny they can squeeze out of us, and information and communication will become more difficult for most people to access and prohibitively difficult for some, which is not only fundamentally unjust but will lead to further breakdown of democracy. :/

The thing is, those ISPs are owned by megacorporations. The same tiny incestuous set of companies that own fucking everything. There's no need for state censorship, because the same businesses that have bought our govt own the ISPs and the social media platforms like tumblr.

Think how hard it is to get solid reliable info about things. How hard it can already be for people to sift through mountains of conflicting research (often biased and scientifically shitty), to get good data when half of it's hidden behind paywalls or buried in some univerity's password-locked internet archives.

And now imagine that you're researching whatever the fuck you want. War in the Middle East. Whether milk causes cancer. Superhero movies that aren't Marvel. Whatever. But your ISP owns half the country's dairy production, has a long-standing trade deal with Raytheon, oh and also they're partnered with Disney and it's subsidiaries.

And now you find yourself in a position where you don't know what information you can trust, what news sources you could turn to. And when you try to look up general information, maybe some of the websites are blocked, or they simply don't load, or you never even got to see them because that negative perspective was bad for business.

That's true, it's another negative consequence. Though the last bit is pretty much everything I've already been saying.

People who fear big government see big corporations as benign and it blows my mind.

Maybe you know, but - why are we being threatened with this *every year*? Seems like it's been an issue for ten years or something. Why are all our 'nos' not sticking?

Because the ISPs have bought the Republicans and really, really, really want this to happen.

But if the FCC ruled against it last year, and the year before, and the year before....

I just don't get it. Fucking bullshite.

They're going to keep trying, though, like why wouldn't they? And this year they have more of a shot with Congress and the White House all being really red.

Re: net neutrality

tabaqui - 2017-12-14 02:18 (UTC) - Expand

Re: net neutrality

diet_poison - 2017-12-14 02:35 (UTC) - Expand

Re: net neutrality

tabaqui - 2017-12-14 02:37 (UTC) - Expand

Re: net neutrality

(Anonymous) - 2017-12-14 04:16 (UTC) - Expand

Re: net neutrality

tabaqui - 2017-12-14 04:17 (UTC) - Expand

Re: net neutrality

diet_poison - 2017-12-14 19:44 (UTC) - Expand

Re: net neutrality

(Anonymous) - 2017-12-14 21:02 (UTC) - Expand

Re: net neutrality

diet_poison - 2017-12-15 17:03 (UTC) - Expand

not just the republicans

fair point indeed.

I'm very worried. The net is a huge part of my life. Which is maybe not that good a thing, but the end of net neutrality would still suck for me and lots of other people.

I mean, we use the net for so much basic stuff that it's really a necessity at this point. We use it not only for entertainment but also for buying and selling, banking, making and keeping appointments, finding information for everything from how to do a needed task to how to be more involved in the political process to academic research, communicating with each other, sharing our thoughts, sharing and consuming art, forming communities, and organizing events and movements. It's part of the fabric of our lives, and it's extremely difficult if not impossible to function in today's society without it, unless you 1. have a lot of money and 2. want to be a hermit.

It's weird because I spent half my life without the net and now I don't know how I lived without it. If I wanted to look something up, I went to the library when it was open. Unless I had a giant set of encyclopedias at home, which I didn't. And if it was something relatively trivial I might just never know. That's not the best example of a vital thing the internet does, but still, I'm weirded out when I think about how hard it was when it didn't exist.

I'm very worried about it. My fandom friends and online friends are worried about it. My coworkers are not. They see it as "no big deal" and, though I've tried my best to explain it, they just think it's cute that I'm concerned and start talking about how they didn't have any internet in their day. Then they pull out their phones and start scrolling through Facebook.

bACK IN MY DAY,,,,

the internet wasn't required to function in daily life

that's really dumb that's like saying "you don't have a car or access to public transit? well you can WALK, just like my pa did when he grew up without a car" when their pa lived two miles from work and you live twenty.

>______>

I've actually had one of them tell me, "If you're so concerned about the environment, why don't you walk to work?". Right. Let me just walk four hours along a twisted mountain road with no sidewalks. That's not dangerous at all.

Re: net neutrality

diet_poison - 2017-12-14 19:43 (UTC) - Expand

THIS. It's scary when I think about all the basic things that require the internet, or at least are made a million times easier.

The small clinic system where I used to go to the doctor got swallowed up by the largest clinic and hospital system in town, and they make it insanely hard to make or change appointments by talking to an actual person on the phone. You have to do it online. This is also where test results get posted and billing is usually done.

This Thanksgiving, we all went out to dinner instead of cooking. I made the reservations. When I called the restaurant, the recording directed me to their website.

I was called to be a reserve juror this spring. I was directed to go online the night before and then again late the next morning to see if I would be required to go in to the courthouse the following morning or afternoon. (I'm pretty sure there was a phone number I could have called as an alternative, though). The website also had far more details about what to expect if I had to go be a juror.

If you want a permit for that, you have to fill out an application. The form and instructions are on our website.

Now, all this stuff is incredibly easy on the internet, so I'm not complaining about that, but back when I would be expected do these things by phone, mail, or in-person rather than on-line, it didn't matter if I could access the relevant websites or not. All these businesses and government bodies are going to have to change the way they do things if people have a harder time accessing their websites.

Re: net neutrality

diet_poison - 2017-12-14 20:40 (UTC) - Expand

I have been pretty upset about it.

I work for a big public library system and we may already be losing a day’s worth of open hours due to budget shortfalls. I’d say I can’t imagine the damage having a fractured, more expensive, more exclusive internet would do to us and everyone who relies on us for information, help, and internet access, but unfortunately I can.

Gonna call my local reps tomorrow and ask them to help draft, or sign on to already in the pipeline, legislation to protect net neutrality and keep the internet a utility. Also it’d be great if my state reps could repeal a law currently on the books that forbids municipalities/counties in the state who have at least one ISP from offering a government owned and run alternative.

It kind of blows my mind that the internet isn't already considered a utility. :/

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only