I'm blogging again from the Netroots Nation conference in Austin, Texas, and continue to be impressed with how my fellow participants have jumped on this technology as a means of expressing ideas, opinions, and general information that might not have otherwise been available. As the conference has progressed, I have a deeper appreciation for how the Internet, including the blogosphere, has helped us connect with each other, even at the international level, almost instantaneously.

Many people would rather not believe that the businesses that provide us with high speed internet and cell phone service would allow the government to step in a monitor what we are doing and saying over the optical lines of our latest technology. The fact is that there is clear and obvious evidence that in the business of citizen monitoring there is a lot of money to be made. We are not so free as we think, especially when it comes to checking your email or making that call home to mom.

According to this article in the Los Angeles Times, AT&T's Lollapalooza webcast went silent when Pearl Jam’s lead singer started to criticize George W. Bush. The company claimed it was an accident, but a crew member has since come forward to say that “at a previous event...the instructions were to shut it down if...anybody starts getting political.”

The internet is about to change. In 5 days the FCC will rule on the issue of "Net Neutrality" which has been at the forefront of digital politics for the last year. What is Net Neutrality? "Put simply, Net Neutrality means no discrimination. Net Neutrality prevents Internet providers from speeding up or slowing down Web content based on its source, ownership or destination."

The big telecos want to be able to end Net Neutrality and charge consumers different prices for different "tiers" of internet speed and avaliablity. Wan't to get to Google? Pay a fee. Wan't to get to Google faster? Pay more.

This is not only harmful to the structure of the internet (a large network of smaller disconnected networks where data runs from Point A to Point B unhindered) but is harmful because it will furthur limit access to broadband for citizens who can't afford it.

Recently America was placed behind Estonia in terms of broadband distribution, speed, and price. We have some of the slowest, most expensive broadband internet of the industralized nations.

What can be done? Please go to savetheinternet.org and tell the FCC "your story" about why you feel the net should be a free and open domain where citizens can exchange any information without being subject to corporate oversight.

As a fourth element of my language debate is the ideas of anonymity and apathy. The ideas of anonymity and apathy being so easy and simple to carry out is evidenced in our society everyday. Many people would rather build-up their online profiles on social networking sites, than get to meet people face-to-face and interact without a digital middleman. Apathy runs rampant in our society as more people vote for an American Idol winner than for the American President. A friend told me the other day, "I should be one of those people who are not allowed to vote, I don't know anything." These ideas are a plague on the future of our society. These two words represent double trouble for our world.

When our generation wants to plan a vacation, find a great new band or pick a really good read, we rarely rely on just one source.

We're used to looking at peer reviews, community ratings and open dialogue easily accessible on the internet. We may not always agree, but there is comfort in hearing more than one take on any given product before making a choice.

Now available: Nationwide peer reviews for elections.  

Peruse freely, assert your opinions and decide for yourself.

Ever heard of a computer hacker for human rights? When most people think of a hacker they think of an anti-social heavy metal ultra nerd who lives in his parent's basement tinkering with processors and writing programs for their own nefarious deeds. This common misconception is actually due to a commonly held belief that the term hacker only describes a person who tries to bypass security for ill purpose. Many hackers are actually security experts (paid or unpaid) who simply enjoy trying to find their way into things they "aren't supposed to" for mere curiosity. Many of these individuals are free thinking `progressives' who are opposed to intrusive government, unrestrained corporate domination, racism, and other forms of subjugation of the masses that exist both online and off.

One such group of individuals is the activist hackers known as "Hacktivismo". Formed from the famous hacker group Cult of the Dead Cow hacktivismo seeks to use hacking and technology to better society as a whole. Their mission statement explains that they exist "to conduct and publish scientific research in the areas of information technology, communications and electronic media; and, to assist (where possible) non-governmental organizations, social justice groups and human rights entities in the use of advanced information technologies for the furtherance of their works." Hacktivismo is not only made up by some brilliant progressive hackers but also has a board made up of distinguished professionals as well.