FCC Votes to Kill Net Neutrality

Discussion in 'Politics and Religion' started by ATJ-Lucko, Feb 26, 2015.

  1. ATJ-Lucko

    ATJ-Lucko MMAtheist Survival Pool Champion

    Reputation:
    1,360,944,706
    or any-day lol

    - - - - - added to post - - - - -

    wow reason.com a libertarian conservative site hates net neutrality? shocker!!

    net Neutrality is a good thing period.

    go back yelling at the kids to get off your lawn..



    just know this thumper is on the side of Ted Cruz and Pat Robertson, nuff said


    http://youtu.be/AWirTXwfC-Y

    - - - - - added to post - - - - -

    <iframe src="http://player.theplatform.com/p/gZWlPC/cnbc_global?playertype=synd&byGuid=3000357565&size=530_298" width="530" height="298" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowFullScreen="true" bgcolor="#131313"></iframe>....
     
  2. Ct_L33T

    Ct_L33T Well-Known Member

    Reputation:
    41,348,243
    Didn't telephone service providers want to do the same thing a few years ago? They wanted to charge people more for calls to people with different service providers. With loss of call quality being a possibility.
     
  3. Sniggles

    Sniggles ex nihilo

    Reputation:
    -166,134,939
    Freakdog is Bizarro-Peezy.
     
    sourdough likes this.
  4. sourdough

    sourdough Sourdough Site Donor Asst. Bookie

    Reputation:
    1,064,690,216
    Speaking of Freak how much longer until his name goes back.
     
  5. Bran

    Bran The wolf dead.

    Reputation:
    1,552,174,913
    Can't remember for sure, but I think it was a five-year bet.
     
    sourdough likes this.
  6. unforgivn

    unforgivn Nunquam Fidelis

    Reputation:
    265,802,652
    Some people might be iffy on it, but there are basically only two types of people who outright oppose Net Neutrality: 1) big telecom and their assorted dickriders, and 2) people who are by default opposed to anything the government does ever.
     
    Sniggles and Poindexter like this.
  7. BiNgO

    BiNgO Totally aussum!!!

    Reputation:
    10,510,888
    If the main point of Net Neutrality is to lower my internet bill while still providing me with the same quality I receive now, then I'm all for it. If not, oh hell no! I'm also not sure I know what they mean by banning "paid prioritization". Again, IF it means everyone's internet runs at the same rate for the same price, great. If not...

    Has anyone here been blocked, throttled, or discriminated against for any reason, or for no reason at all by there internet provider? To me it just sounds like used car salesmen speak. I don't have any issue with what I have now other than the price.

    I do have to laugh at this. Basically what I'm reading here is, now that I've lost my control I can't make the money I used to...
     
  8. unforgivn

    unforgivn Nunquam Fidelis

    Reputation:
    265,802,652
    It has nothing to do with either of those things.

    Comcast just extorted a ton of money from Netflix by slowing their traffic to a crawl, and Time Warner spent years throttling WoW players during peak internet usage hours.

    Yes, it does happen.
     
  9. Ct_L33T

    Ct_L33T Well-Known Member

    Reputation:
    41,348,243
    Nobody here appears to be against net neutrality. so far the only negstive response was from Thumper, but that is simply because he thinks its only delaying the inevitable. This may be the first issue that had almost everybody on the same side.

    One big proponent of net nutrality was Google. I wonder how much influence they had in this decision.
     
  10. FrankieButNotEdgar

    FrankieButNotEdgar Well-Known Member Site Donor

    Reputation:
    471,157,505
    Based on what every one is saying, I don't see how anyone can be against it.
     
  11. Ct_L33T

    Ct_L33T Well-Known Member

    Reputation:
    41,348,243
    We live in a society where people can be gifted a new car, only to later complain abiut having to pay For their own car insurance. Im genuinely surprised that nobody has tried to argue against net nutrality here.
     
  12. ATJ-Lucko

    ATJ-Lucko MMAtheist Survival Pool Champion

    Reputation:
    1,360,944,706
    i often wonder why doesn't Netflix get into the ISP business.
     
  13. thumper

    thumper all around great guy Staff Member

    Reputation:
    2,523,129,930
    i did say this is the better of the two options. if we have to choose one or the other, this is DEFINITELY the right one. it's the inevitable outcome that pisses me off, because this shouldn't even be an either/or option.

    if you actually take the time to READ what net neutrality is on both sides, and not just the part people are talking about, you'd see that.

    this is the way legislation is always introduced. one major push with a million hidden things that get lumped in with it that suck, but somehow don't get mentioned.

    in the end we will all lose, but based on the two options given this is BY FAR the better of the two

    - - - - - added to post - - - - -

    because you don't understand upstream providers, backbones, routing (BGP), peering, peering agreemtns, geolocation, dark fiber or any of the components that are involved with 'The ISP business' and I'm not saying that's bad, if it were something you did for a living you'd understand it better, but it's not something that's important to you so there's no reason for you to know it.

    - - - - - added to post - - - - -

    that's because you don't understand it in it's entirety, you just know what people are talking about. I'm not saying that's dumb, 99.99% of the world isn 't interested in actually researching the depths of the entire discussion/issue. it's no different than the people rioting in ferguson before any decision was reached, or the outcome announced or the evidence revelealed. until that time NOBODY knew what they were fighting for/against. and even now very few people will ever take the time to understand the depths of net neutrality. I DO know what it entails, but that's only because i understand the technology, and what the whole scope is (well I don't know ALL of it, but a pretty big chunk) and i only know it because it directly reflects what I do for a living, otherwise I highly doubt I would either
     
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2015
    sourdough likes this.
  14. unforgivn

    unforgivn Nunquam Fidelis

    Reputation:
    265,802,652
    That wouldn't have made any difference at all. Comcast would have still raped them.
     
  15. Sniggles

    Sniggles ex nihilo

    Reputation:
    -166,134,939
    Also known as: Dumb fucks.
     
  16. thumper

    thumper all around great guy Staff Member

    Reputation:
    2,523,129,930
    i don't think i've ever voiced my opinion about it until this event, but thats because trying to debate political events on a forum is like a monkey fucking a football. I would guess nobody has ever even witnessed people debating two sides to a political argument and one of them changing their stance.

    What you normally end up with (as is CLEARLY evident in this thread, is someone at some point coming in and saying that anyone at any position in the discussion is stupid.) You can see it directly above this post, I see two examples of it by people here in this page alone, and that is why it's completely useless to have debates about political positions on forums. so I rarely if ever even reply to those kinds of threads. because some people cannot mentally accept opposing views on things.

    this one is different to me becuase I am directly involved in it and my future will be altered by this process one way or the other

    this is also another big reason why i am so glad there is no freakdog here right now, though I do see it said he's posting as someone else, I haven't been around enough lately to notice
     
    Last edited: Feb 28, 2015
  17. Sniggles

    Sniggles ex nihilo

    Reputation:
    -166,134,939
    My post was aimed at anti-government nutbars who would rather live in anarchist, no regulation wasteland owned by corporations. For example, the nutbars who actually backed Palin's Koch-funded run.

    If the Koch's had their way blue collar Americans would be paid Indonesian textile wages and be tossed into the gutter if they need health care. The ignorance of people often amazes me when they support the very people who want to oppress them.

    My comment was linked to what I quoted which was unrelated to the current topic.
     
    Last edited: Feb 28, 2015
  18. ATJ-Lucko

    ATJ-Lucko MMAtheist Survival Pool Champion

    Reputation:
    1,360,944,706
    Don't get me wrong i am no pro-gov person either but i trust the big telecoms even less. They want to deliver the worse service and speeds at the most cost for consumer.

    I am not for regulation of the internet, i don't want any government board telling me what i can or cannot look at, i also don't want them prioritize bandwidth for certain company's.

    - - - - - added to post - - - - -

    i will say this also i don't want my internet to look like my cable where there are packages like if I want reddit i have to also get other sites i don't visit, I don't want bundles, i just want to go anywhere i wants, stream or download any content i want at anytime just give me acceptable speeds and i'll pay good money for that service, is that too much to ask?
     
  19. thumper

    thumper all around great guy Staff Member

    Reputation:
    2,523,129,930
    it is when reclassification comes in and that's exactly what's coming
     
  20. Sniggles

    Sniggles ex nihilo

    Reputation:
    -166,134,939
    I am pro-reponsible government. Government van be a force for good when politiciams have more time to spend governing than fundraising. As it is now south of the border, slezebags buy elections by selling out and offering their regulatory powers to the highest bidders. Other western countries, a good example would be Australia, have limited fundraising limits and creating reglations to make the playing level fair for the uncorrupt politicians who refuse to sell their principles. The Canadian model is flawed as can be seen from Harper's ingenious fundraising abilities. A more fair democratic system is possible but unlikely to happen.

    I am an idealist in thinking reform is one day possible where I was once apathetic.
     

Share This Page