Forwarded from Gmail Bot
✉️ Senator Todd Young <contact@young.senate.gov>
A Response to Your Inquiry
Dear Mr. Young,
Thank you for contacting me regarding net neutrality. I appreciate hearing from you on this issue.
Since its inception, the internet has flourished with minimal government intervention and revolutionized our ability to share information and carry out commerce here at home and around the world. Today, Americans typically connect to the internet through a residential broadband service or through a wireless broadband service. Companies that provide these broadband services spend billions a year advancing and maintaining the infrastructure that has allowed the internet to thrive. As a result, internet speeds are thousands times faster than they were just a couple decades ago, and available to nearly 96% of the population.
This has all occurred under light-touch regulation from the federal government, and not under the heavy-handed rules of common carrier regulation, which has unfortunately become synonymous with the notion of ‘net neutrality’ today. While there is no single accepted definition of ‘net neutrality,’ most agree it is the notion that these broadband companies should not be allowed to favor or block any legal content on their network, or discriminate against any legal content providers.
On February 26, 2015, the FCC voted along party lines in favor of reclassifying the internet as a telecommunications service under Title II of the Communications Act – effectively putting 1930s era regulations in charge of the modern day internet economy. While some have applauded this move as ensuring net neutrality concepts are protected, many others have expressed concerns that the FCC simply applied an already outdated regulatory framework to the most dynamic industry in human history.
On December 14, 2017, the FCC voted to return the classification of broadband service from a Title II telecommunications service to a Title I information service. I applaud the FCC for voting to return to the traditional light-touch framework that promoted Internet growth, transparency, and freedom for nearly 20 years before the 2015 reclassification.
I believe we must keep the internet ecosystem open and vibrant. I also believe that major decisions on how to regulate the internet ought to come from Congress, not unelected bureaucrats dreaming up how depression-era laws can regulate the internet. I believe it is imperative for Congress to work toward bipartisan, light-touch regulations that ensure the internet remains accessible and unrestricted by government intrusion for future generations.
Again, thank you for contacting me. It is an honor to represent you in the United States Senate.
Sincerely,
Todd Young
United States Senator
A Response to Your Inquiry
Dear Mr. Young,
Thank you for contacting me regarding net neutrality. I appreciate hearing from you on this issue.
Since its inception, the internet has flourished with minimal government intervention and revolutionized our ability to share information and carry out commerce here at home and around the world. Today, Americans typically connect to the internet through a residential broadband service or through a wireless broadband service. Companies that provide these broadband services spend billions a year advancing and maintaining the infrastructure that has allowed the internet to thrive. As a result, internet speeds are thousands times faster than they were just a couple decades ago, and available to nearly 96% of the population.
This has all occurred under light-touch regulation from the federal government, and not under the heavy-handed rules of common carrier regulation, which has unfortunately become synonymous with the notion of ‘net neutrality’ today. While there is no single accepted definition of ‘net neutrality,’ most agree it is the notion that these broadband companies should not be allowed to favor or block any legal content on their network, or discriminate against any legal content providers.
On February 26, 2015, the FCC voted along party lines in favor of reclassifying the internet as a telecommunications service under Title II of the Communications Act – effectively putting 1930s era regulations in charge of the modern day internet economy. While some have applauded this move as ensuring net neutrality concepts are protected, many others have expressed concerns that the FCC simply applied an already outdated regulatory framework to the most dynamic industry in human history.
On December 14, 2017, the FCC voted to return the classification of broadband service from a Title II telecommunications service to a Title I information service. I applaud the FCC for voting to return to the traditional light-touch framework that promoted Internet growth, transparency, and freedom for nearly 20 years before the 2015 reclassification.
I believe we must keep the internet ecosystem open and vibrant. I also believe that major decisions on how to regulate the internet ought to come from Congress, not unelected bureaucrats dreaming up how depression-era laws can regulate the internet. I believe it is imperative for Congress to work toward bipartisan, light-touch regulations that ensure the internet remains accessible and unrestricted by government intrusion for future generations.
Again, thank you for contacting me. It is an honor to represent you in the United States Senate.
Sincerely,
Todd Young
United States Senator
Forwarded from Deleted Channel
之前用假地址抗议并用GV联系议员要求反对废除网络中立性的法案，今天和半个月前各收到一封回复。这封回复算是干货，特此贴出
Forwarded from Telegram 种植园
【Telegram 在 App Store 神秘下架】
Telegram 的两款官方 iOS 客户端 Telegram 及 Telegram X 现已从 App Store 全球范围内下架。据称此事件为意外。
建议 iOS 用户在应用重新上架前请勿手滑。已经手滑的用户可以尝试通过「已购项目」或 iMazing 重新安装（未经测试）。
Telegram 的两款官方 iOS 客户端 Telegram 及 Telegram X 现已从 App Store 全球范围内下架。据称此事件为意外。
建议 iOS 用户在应用重新上架前请勿手滑。已经手滑的用户可以尝试通过「已购项目」或 iMazing 重新安装（未经测试）。
9to5Mac
Telegram & Telegram X messaging apps both disappear from App Store without explanation [U] - 9to5Mac
Popular messaging app Telegram has today disappeared from the App Store on iPhone and iPad. Interestingly, both the primary Telegram...
Forwarded from AIM扩散力场 (零件)
【哔哩哔哩清晰度全新升级，60帧视频来了】
原720P画质码率上限放宽至2000K，原1080P画质码率码率上限放宽至3000K；
原大会员专享1080P画质，升级至“高清1080P+”，码率上限放宽至6000K。
另外，还将推出“高清720P60”、“高清1080P60”两路大会员专享60帧率新画质，视频画面“丝般润滑”，新清晰度仅对参加内测UP主新上传稿件生效。 t.cn/R8JiEdf
原720P画质码率上限放宽至2000K，原1080P画质码率码率上限放宽至3000K；
原大会员专享1080P画质，升级至“高清1080P+”，码率上限放宽至6000K。
另外，还将推出“高清720P60”、“高清1080P60”两路大会员专享60帧率新画质，视频画面“丝般润滑”，新清晰度仅对参加内测UP主新上传稿件生效。 t.cn/R8JiEdf
Forwarded from G F W Co.,Ltd牢骚频道-应试教育者的无病呻吟-现已加入坐和放宽联盟 (Google Fcm What Co.,Ltd)
a站倒了。。。
bog横行
bog横行