NOT What Zordon Would Do: The Green Ranger Punched Some Dude’s Teeth Out

green-ranger-rage.jpg For those of you that don't keep up with ex-Power Rangers, Tommy the Green Ranger (aka nobody's favorite, aka Jason David Frank) is a mixed-martial arts fighter now because, shit, you've gotta do something tough after rockin' wiener-huggin' spandex on a children's show for so long. Well apparently he suffered a bit of Green Ranger rage after a fight last night and got all punchy on some dude's teeth. Why didn't you just call Dragonzord?!
So last night at Legacy fights in Houston, Jason David Frank, the former green power ranger, and owner of 'jesus didnt tap' knocked out a legacy promotions employees teeth. Apparently the guy was collecting the gloves and thought frank was not going to give them back. i wasnt there at the time, but was told by a guy back stage that the guy told him "jesus didnt steal gloves' and Frank got p'ed off. Frank claims the guy touched him first, and it was self defence, from what I'm told the guy didnt hit him, Frank claimed he pushed him I was told. Basically the kid was skinny and probably 60+ lbs less, and told [f]rank he wasnt going to fight him. Frank then burned off out of the place,a nd the kid went off with missing teeth. kinda ironic he's managed by suckpunch entertainment.
Ha. This story is so full of sadness I don't even know where to begin. So I'll just cut through the crap and get to the question that's on everbody's mind: did you ever bang the Pink Ranger? No? How about Zordon? Wink if he has holographic balls. Report: Power Ranger strikes event staffer after fight [mixedmartialarts] Thanks to Cobee, who agrees Power Rangers Dino Thunder was a little too steamy to be considered a children's show. God, tell me about it! (I own them all on VHS)
Posted in 2. New Media Trends, damn bro take some deep breaths, haha!, lolwut?!, mighty morphin' power wanksters, of course you did, power rangers, rage, roid rage, sadness, teeth, the world used to be your oyster!, you gonna be eatin' through a straw you hear me?! | Tagged | Comments Off

10 Downing

I had a quick jaunt over to London to meet with blogger, digital diplomacy, general social media guru Jimmy Leach in January. Our meeting was great, good discussions on how his team was set up at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. I had a great time tooling around London in the afternoon between meetings. The best bit was when I was on the train heading out to my brother in law’s place for dinner and I got a meeting request for the next day. I accepted and then went back to look at the location to make sure my eyes were not deceiving me. Sure enough, meeting, 10 Downing street. Awesome! I arrived at my brother’s and we watched a couple of episodes of Yes Minister and had dinner. The next day I sat in a chair older than Canada and then had a decent meeting with another social media guy in the UK, Richi Saha. Part of Cameron’s the lovingly dubbed “Vanity Team.” Good times all around.

Posted in 2. New Media Trends, featured, professional, social media | Tagged | Comments Off

Patriot Act extension fails to pass

Not a misprint: House Democrats and the Tea Party joined forces today to defeat the rest of the Republican party and the Obama Administration. [Wapo]

Posted in 2. New Media Trends, News | Tagged | Comments Off

Americans Don’t Want the FCC to Regulate the Internet [STATS]


A new survey from Rasmussen Reports reveals that just one in five American voters want the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to regulate the Internet, placing their faith instead in free market competition to protect the Internet’s U.S. users.

Rasmussen asked 1,000 likely U.S. voters, “Should the Federal Communications Commission regulate the Internet like it does radio and television?” Only 21% of those polled responded affirmatively, while a whopping 54% stated that they opposed FCC regulation of the Internet. One in four said they were not sure.

According to Rasmussen, the Republicans and independent voters surveyed, “overwhelmingly opposed FCC regulation of the Internet,” while Democrats were more evenly divided on the issue.

When asked whether government regulation or free market competition was a better mechanism to protect Internet users, 52% chose free market competition, while only 27% said government regulation was the best option. Again, Republicans and independents chose free market competition by a wide margin, but a plurality of Democrats said regulation was the answer (46%). Part of the reason for their choice was because the majority of likely U.S. voters polled (56%) say the FCC would use its authority to promote a political agenda, while only 28% disagree with that assertion.


We Need to Find the Net Neutrality Balance


We’re not surprised by the results of the Rasmussen poll, but here’s one reason why we believe they’re opposed to FCC regulation:

“The issue has attracted little public notice. Just 20% are following news of the net neutrality regulations Very Closely. Another 35% say they’re following it Somewhat Closely.”

Net neutrality is a complicated subject filled with many factions and lots of nuances that can only be found in the detailed government paperwork the FCC and the courts have been generating for the last few years. Last year, the FCC stepped in to mandate net neutrality for the web. Internet activists cheered the move, but U.S. courts ruled that the FCC doesn’t have the authority to make such mandates.

The FCC skirted around the issue by making Internet lines subject to the same rules as telephone networks, but work on net neutrality slowed down. Then Google and Verizon made its controversial open Internet document, which proposes that different rules should apply to wireless networks.

The FCC wasn’t happy with Google and Verizon for essentially going over its head, but eventually the FCC approved an Open Internet Order that included many of Google and Verizon’s proposed rules. Now the FCC’s authority to regulate the web is being questioned by Congress and the issue could easily make its way back to court.

No wonder the vast majority of the American public aren’t paying attention; how can anybody be expected to follow all of these developments when they have a work and family life to manage? It’s a classic case of rational choice theory.

As we’ve written before, without net neutrality regulations, Internet service providers (ISPs) could have free reign to discriminate against the transmission of certain types of data, like video. Here are some of the potential worse case scenarios just to get started.

Excessive government regulation can stifle innovation, but a lack of intervention could turn the Internet into a wild west where Comcast, Verizon and other ISPs create fast tracks for some content while making it impossible for Internet users to access other websites. We need to find the right balance of net neutrality regulation that keeps the web open but doesn’t restrict the impressive innovations that have contributed to the rise of Facebook, Google and thousands of web startups.


Reviews: Facebook, Google, Internet

More About: democrats, fcc, net neutrality, Rasmussen, republicans

For more Tech coverage:

Posted in 2. New Media Trends, democrats, facebook, FCC, net neutrality, News, Rasmussen, republicans, Top Stories | Tagged | Comments Off

Americans Don’t Want the FCC to Regulate the Internet [STATS]


A new survey from Rasmussen Reports reveals that just one in five American voters want the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to regulate the Internet, placing their faith instead in free market competition to protect the Internet’s U.S. users.

Rasmussen asked 1,000 likely U.S. voters, “Should the Federal Communications Commission regulate the Internet like it does radio and television?” Only 21% of those polled responded affirmatively, while a whopping 54% stated that they opposed FCC regulation of the Internet. One in four said they were not sure.

According to Rasmussen, the Republicans and independent voters surveyed, “overwhelmingly opposed FCC regulation of the Internet,” while Democrats were more evenly divided on the issue.

When asked whether government regulation or free market competition was a better mechanism to protect Internet users, 52% chose free market competition, while only 27% said government regulation was the best option. Again, Republicans and independents chose free market competition by a wide margin, but a plurality of Democrats said regulation was the answer (46%). Part of the reason for their choice was because the majority of likely U.S. voters polled (56%) say the FCC would use its authority to promote a political agenda, while only 28% disagree with that assertion.


We Need to Find the Net Neutrality Balance


We’re not surprised by the results of the Rasmussen poll, but here’s one reason why we believe they’re opposed to FCC regulation:

“The issue has attracted little public notice. Just 20% are following news of the net neutrality regulations Very Closely. Another 35% say they’re following it Somewhat Closely.”

Net neutrality is a complicated subject filled with many factions and lots of nuances that can only be found in the detailed government paperwork the FCC and the courts have been generating for the last few years. Last year, the FCC stepped in to mandate net neutrality for the web. Internet activists cheered the move, but U.S. courts ruled that the FCC doesn’t have the authority to make such mandates.

The FCC skirted around the issue by making Internet lines subject to the same rules as telephone networks, but work on net neutrality slowed down. Then Google and Verizon made its controversial open Internet document, which proposes that different rules should apply to wireless networks.

The FCC wasn’t happy with Google and Verizon for essentially going over its head, but eventually the FCC approved an Open Internet Order that included many of Google and Verizon’s proposed rules. Now the FCC’s authority to regulate the web is being questioned by Congress and the issue could easily make its way back to court.

No wonder the vast majority of the American public aren’t paying attention; how can anybody be expected to follow all of these developments when they have a work and family life to manage? It’s a classic case of rational choice theory.

As we’ve written before, without net neutrality regulations, Internet service providers (ISPs) could have free reign to discriminate against the transmission of certain types of data, like video. Here are some of the potential worse case scenarios just to get started.

Excessive government regulation can stifle innovation, but a lack of intervention could turn the Internet into a wild west where Comcast, Verizon and other ISPs create fast tracks for some content while making it impossible for Internet users to access other websites. We need to find the right balance of net neutrality regulation that keeps the web open but doesn’t restrict the impressive innovations that have contributed to the rise of Facebook, Google and thousands of web startups.


Reviews: Facebook, Google, Internet

More About: democrats, fcc, net neutrality, Rasmussen, republicans

For more Tech coverage:

Posted in 2. New Media Trends, democrats, facebook, FCC, net neutrality, News, Rasmussen, republicans, Top Stories | Tagged | Comments Off

Watch out Big Content—RapidShare has hired a lobbying firm

Guess who is mad as hell and isn't going to take it anymore? The RapidShare file service says it has had it up to its storage capacity with the treatment it's getting from Capitol Hill here in the United States, and has hired a lobbyist to tell Congress what's what.

The firm will help RapidShare "counter negative attacks on the company from US copyright interests," according to the registration form that it has filed with the Clerk of the House of Representatives. The Swiss outfit's move comes following a big content backed Congressional caucus calling out RapidShare and five other companies as the world's worst websites.

"As you can imagine, we're not very happy about that," RapidShare's new spokesperson Daniel Ramier told the Deutsche Welle news service. The company joined The Pirate Bay and Canada's IsoHunt in the alleged hall of shame, even though a German court has ruled that RapidShare was not to blame for infringement by its users and had no responsibility to block content.

Read the rest of this article...

Read the comments on this post

Posted in 2. New Media Trends, copyright, dutkoworldwide, google, isohunt, mpaa, News, rapidshare, riaa, Web | Tagged | Comments Off

Vladimir Putin Orders Russian Government to Switch to Free Software by 2015


Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin has signed a government order that lays out the groundwork for the transition of federal bodies and agencies to use free software, including Linux, by 2015.

The 25-point document (available here) outlines specific steps the government must take in order to move off proprietary software and onto free and/or open source alternatives like Linux. The government order was approved on December 17 and affects all federal agencies of the federal budget.

Each point of the document names the specific action that must be taken, the agency responsible for implementing that order, the time frame for implementation, and the expected result. For example, one point instructs Russia’s Ministry of Communications to form “the base package of free software solutions for typical problems of the federal executive bodies,” with the expected result a free package of software that includes operating systems, drivers and application software for servers.

Another order calls for “creating and maintaining a single repository of free software used in the federal bodies of executive power,” while another requires “the development of departmental plans to move to the use of free software, including plans for transition of subordinate budget institutions.” The final order, to be implemented in Q3 2015, calls for “preparation of the draft orders of the Government of the Russian Federation on the adoption of a phased introduction of free software for the next planning period.”

Russia has been moving in the direction of free software for the past few years. In 2008, the government ordered schools to implement free software packages in all of its computers. Schools that now want to use proprietary software have to pay for it out of their own pockets.

[Source: CNews via Open...]


Reviews: Linux

More About: Linux, russia, Vladimir Putin

For more Tech coverage:

Posted in 2. New Media Trends, Channels, Linux, News, russia, software, Top Stories, Vladimir Putin | Tagged | Comments Off

Vladimir Putin Orders Russian Government to Switch to Free Software by 2015


Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin has signed a government order that lays out the groundwork for the transition of federal bodies and agencies to use free software, including Linux, by 2015.

The 25-point document (available here) outlines specific steps the government must take in order to move off proprietary software and onto free and/or open source alternatives like Linux. The government order was approved on December 17 and affects all federal agencies of the federal budget.

Each point of the document names the specific action that must be taken, the agency responsible for implementing that order, the time frame for implementation, and the expected result. For example, one point instructs Russia’s Ministry of Communications to form “the base package of free software solutions for typical problems of the federal executive bodies,” with the expected result a free package of software that includes operating systems, drivers and application software for servers.

Another order calls for “creating and maintaining a single repository of free software used in the federal bodies of executive power,” while another requires “the development of departmental plans to move to the use of free software, including plans for transition of subordinate budget institutions.” The final order, to be implemented in Q3 2015, calls for “preparation of the draft orders of the Government of the Russian Federation on the adoption of a phased introduction of free software for the next planning period.”

Russia has been moving in the direction of free software for the past few years. In 2008, the government ordered schools to implement free software packages in all of its computers. Schools that now want to use proprietary software have to pay for it out of their own pockets.

[Source: CNews via Open...]


Reviews: Linux

More About: Linux, russia, Vladimir Putin

For more Tech coverage:

Posted in 2. New Media Trends, Channels, Linux, News, russia, software, Top Stories, Vladimir Putin | Tagged | Comments Off

How the FCC failed the nation on Net Neutrality

Writing in Salon, Dan Gillmor takes a crack at explaining what a cowardly let-down the FCC's cop-out Net Neutrality rules are:
But when it came to rules that might boost network neutrality -- the notion that end users (you and me) should decide what content and services we want without interference from the ISPs -- the FCC's order paid lip service to the concept while enshrining its eventual demise. In theory, land-line carriers (traditional phone and cable companies, for the most part) won't be allowed to play favorites. In practice, the new rules invite them to concoct new kinds of services that do precisely that.

But even that fuzzy concept won't apply to mobile carriers, which means that discrimination will be explicitly permitted by companies like AT&T and Verizon for customers of the iPhone and iPad, among other devices that are increasingly the most important entry point to the Internet.

The rules are also an open invitation to ISPs to spy on their customers. Genachowski's repeated references to users' right to use "legal" content were code words for the entertainment industry's push to have ISPs become their enforcement arms in the copyright wars. Hollywood wants your ISP to watch everything people do, and then block users who are alleged to be infringing.

The FCC's weak new "open Internet" rules

Posted in 2. New Media Trends, Action, business, corporatism, FCC, law, netneutrality, Technology, usa | Tagged | Comments Off

Was It Google And Verizon Or The FCC That Just Screwed Us On Mobile Net Neutrality?

We’ve already covered the FCC Net Neutrality vote earlier today, but something new has come to light. Something that’s very odd. Something that’s quite frankly a little terrifying.

Engadget dug up the FCC’s release [PDF] and found the following nugget buried in the all-important section “Measured Steps for Mobile Broadband”:

Further, we recognize that there have been meaningful recent moves toward openness, including the introduction of open operating systems like Android.  In addition, we anticipate soon seeing the effects on the market of the openness conditions we imposed on mobile providers that operate on upper 700 MHz C-Block spectrum, which includes Verizon Wireless, one of the largest mobile wireless carriers in the U.S.

In light of these considerations, we conclude it is appropriate to take measured steps at this time to protect the openness of the Internet when accessed through mobile broadband

While that may read like it’s a statement from Google or Verizon — actually, the entire section reads a lot like their joint proposal — it’s actually the FCC’s statement. Yes, that’s the FCC citing Android’s openness as a reason why they don’t need to impose net neutrality rules for mobile broadband.

Except wait. What the hell does an open operating system have anything to do with network access? Nilay Patel wonders this. John Gruber wonders this. Everyone should wonder this. It really does almost read as if they just copied what Google and Verizon laid out and forgot to remove the self-promotion.

As Patel writes:

… if we were slightly more paranoid, we’d be pretty sure there’s a link between the FCC’s Android mention and the combined furious lobbying of Google and Verizon.

I am slightly more paranoid. What the hell is Android doing in that statement?

I’ve made my thoughts on Android’s “openness” very clear. So have others. I believe the carriers are taking advantage of it and will continue to do so to the detriment of consumers. Now the FCC is using the “openness” label to screw us on net neutrality? Great.

Why doesn’t the FCC just say something like: “We just attended this great Google conference and heard that Android was open. Therefore, we see no need to regulate mobile broadband. It’s open, you see. That’s good for everyone. That means that everyone is going to do the right thing. An open operating system ensures there won’t be any throttling or filtering. Why? Because. Well. Open! Verizon agrees.”

It was only a month ago that FCC head Julius Genachowski said that the Verizon/Google proposal “slowed down” the process of coming up with a net neutrality proposal. Apparently, that’s because they had to rewrite the thing to include exactly what Verizon and Google agreed upon.

And now you see the danger of Google backtracking and screwing us in this regard. It seems greed, for lack of a better word, was just too good.


Posted in 2. New Media Trends, FCC, featured, google, TC, Verizon | Tagged | Comments Off