Net Neutrality... No, really it will be faster and cheaper... Says the government.

NLXSK1 said:
Give me an example of one thing government has gotten involved in which has become better, cheaper and faster.
Click to expand...

NASA
manufacturing
medical technology
healthcare
teen pregnancy
HIV/AIDS
cancer (via tobacco products)
crime
equality
racism
etc.
 
AlecTheGardener said:
He already has a copy from the NSA prisims in San Fransisco, and most other internet backbone sites. How would letting the FCC call them a utility enable them any more or less to spy on us?

They already violate our Consitution to get the information, another regulating entity won't increase or decrease that I suspect. Spies gonna spy, intelligence apparatuses are slippery and dangerous when they get out of hand.
Click to expand...


That's like saying it's okay to rape a pregnant woman because you won't knock her up.

Regulations are another word for freedom restrictions and enable crony capitalism. Fuck the FCC and the stolen horse they rode in
on.
 
Padawanbater2 said:
NASA
manufacturing
medical technology
healthcare
teen pregnancy
HIV/AIDS
cancer (via tobacco products)
crime
equality
racism
etc.
Click to expand...


"The only idea they have ever manifested as to what is a government of consent, is this -- that it is one to which everybody must consent, or be shot." ~ Lysander Spooner


You forgot to mention that the various governments are the world leaders in murder, they are very good at that.
 
Rob Roy said:
That's like saying it's okay to rape a pregnant woman because you won't knock her up.

Regulations are another word for freedom restrictions and enable crony capitalism. Fuck the FCC and the stolen horse they rode in
on.
Click to expand...
Rob Roy says it's OK to rape pregnant women!!

(sorry man, figured I'd go ahead and get that out of the way for ya)
 
Rob Roy said:
That's like saying it's okay to rape a pregnant woman because you won't knock her up.

Regulations are another word for freedom restrictions and enable crony capitalism. Fuck the FCC and the stolen horse they rode in
on.
Click to expand...
Not what I was intending, but you should stop using rape as a comparison device. It really discredits your arguments since rape is often used as an emotional plea.

The Internet is far bigger then just US corporations and many of you do not see that. The US carries the largest data load in the world, what we legislate here effects the entire planet ultimately. It would allow ISP companies here to extort businesses worldwide, Indeed it was planned and going to be in place if the regulations were against neutrality. The Internet is part of our infrastructure now, these companies are for profit and without placing limitations on them they will gouge their customers and ultimately do what is most profitable. I don't want profit involved in my infrastructure, sorry. I want as much stability and regulation as possible on these things, the Internet is as vital as roads. To allow distinction between different forms of data is insanity.

Let me explain it this way:

Scenario one
I send you a parcel in the mail, a typical piece of college ruled notebook paper in a envelope. A picture of a cat is taped to the paper.
Postage cost: ¢49 Standard letter cost

Scenario two
I send you the same size and weight parcel, same envelope, this time I actually write you a letter.
Postage cost:$5.50 because of the type of data in the parcel, it was a letter, letters with writing are more.

To allow arbitrary pricing of things that are indifferent make zero sense.
 
AlecTheGardener said:
Not what I was intending, but you should stop using rape as a comparison device. It really discredits your arguments since rape is often used as an emotional plea.

The Internet is far bigger then just US corporations and many of you do not see that. The US carries the largest data load in the world, what we legislate here effects the entire planet ultimately. It would allow ISP companies here to extort businesses worldwide, Indeed it was planned and going to be in place if the regulations were against neutrality. The Internet is part of our infrastructure now, these companies are for profit and without placing limitations on them they will gouge their customers and ultimately do what is most profitable. I don't want profit involved in my infrastructure, sorry. I want as much stability and regulation as possible on these things, the Internet is as vital as roads. To allow distinction between different forms of data is insanity.

Let me explain it this way:

Scenario one
I send you a parcel in the mail, a typical piece of college ruled notebook paper in a envelope. A picture of a cat is taped to the paper.
Postage cost: ¢49 Standard letter cost

Scenario two
I send you the same size and weight parcel, same envelope, this time I actually write you a letter.
Postage cost:$5.50 because of the type of data in the parcel, it was a letter, letters with writing are more.

To allow arbitrary pricing of things that are indifferent make zero sense.
Click to expand...

You might drive your car really fast into some people and kill them.

The government should install a speed limiter in your car for safety reasons.

It doesnt matter that you havent killed anyone yet, it is the fact that you could kill someone which leads to this necessity.

The above is one of the things our framers fought against as it is an argument the government can use to control nearly every aspect of your life.
 
NLXSK1 said:
ISP's compete with one another. If one raises it's rates then you can go to another one. The competition is what keeps costs down despite inflation and the decreased buying power of the dollar.

You dont see how it will slow things down because of monitoring software?

You dont see how it will be more expensive with the extra reporting requirements?

You dont understand that taxpayers will have to fund a new bureacracy entitled to decide who is being treated fairly/unfairly regarding the internet? Someone probably the age of your grandpa and more worried about votes than bytes right?

You dont see how it will be more expensive and slower for everyone in the name of fairness??
Click to expand...


It doesn't sound like you're entirely clear what net neutrality is.
 
AlecTheGardener said:
You fail to understand the issue at hand here, not regulating the Internet will turn it into a free for all. Ultimately it would stifle competition and tech companies so badly that it is a NET LOSS for the entire planet if it remains a non-utility.

Currently: broadband is unregulated, traffic flows freely to and from all sources at the same rate. Video traffic is the same importance as university data, same as emails. Everything is not priced according to the type of data, why would it be? All types of data require the same amount of ONs and OFFs, the electricity requirement is exactly the same bit for bit.

If things were allowed to be run by comcast:
All data could be priced according to an arbitrary number from someone's ass.

Massive additional fees will results in the inability of small business to have a web presence.

Not getting the Internet turned into a utility would be a nightmare for our economy.
Click to expand...
Except that the internet isn't regulated now and none of those problems exist.
 
NLXSK1 said:
I sit here at my computer thinking of the ways I can connect to the internet.

I am connected by landline to mediacom. However, I could get my signal beamed in through my direct TV or sign up for satellite computer service through a number of providers. In addition to my hot spot provided by verizon which I could actually convert my phone over to.

I probably have over 20 choices of how to connect to the internet right now and they all have to compete for my dollars.

But somehow, it could suddenly become unfair in the future and supar expensive so we have to make it more expensive and slower now to prevent that hypothetical thing from happening. Does this sound like the Global Warming hype all over again to someone else??

Ask yourself... Do you have a problem with internet load speeds now? Is this just a bullshit boogyman like climatedisastergateamageddon? Is there really a problem?
Click to expand...

you realize all those providers use backbones that only a handful of people own and these few offer their own ISP services. It doesn't take much to piece this together. I have 1 choice of an ISP provider at my home and they rape me. Satellite latency and FAPs (not masturbation) make it useless to most. Phones also have data caps with are easily exceeded. We invented the internet and now our infrastructural has fallen to 15th globally and we're falling behind everyday. We have data hungry smart phones pumped out daily and we can tap out our data caps in 1 day essitily making them paperweights . This shits getting ridiculous and I don't think we want to sit around and lets the monopolized ISPs start calling the shots on how the internet is going to run in the US.
 
nontheist said:
you realize all those providers use backbones that only a handful of people own and these few offer their own ISP services. It doesn't take much to piece this together. I have 1 choice of an ISP provider at my home and they rape me. Satellite latency and FAPs (not masturbation) make it useless to most. Phones also have data caps with are easily exceeded. We invented the internet and now our infrastructural has fallen to 15th globally and we're falling behind everyday. We have data hungry smart phones pumped out daily and we can tap out our data caps in 1 day essitily making them paperweights . This shits getting ridiculous and I don't think we want to sit around and lets the monopolized ISPs start calling the shots on how the internet is going to run in the US.
Click to expand...



Actually,...Al Gore invented the internet,....It just isn`t fair to say that those who own the towers, conductors/lines, and satellites, can`t dictate who uses them and for what.

"I has the dumb" when it comes to understanding how this internet and computer language works, but those in Government still shouldn`t be able to dictate it.
 
I remember when the first Cablevison wires went up and the Gov. praises for creating jobs and now the Gov. wants it after it`s finished.....That`s not right........
 
OddBall1st said:
I remember when the first Cablevison wires went up and the Gov. praises for creating jobs and now the Gov. wants it after it`s finished.....That`s not right........
Click to expand...

It's a muddled subject. Those cable companies may have run the lines and put up the dishes, but they are receiving signals from satellites that someone else put up.

If I wanted to start a new company to compete with Cablevision, should I be allowed to tap into those lines? Does a new phone company have to run new phone lines?

It's not a simple answer, but I'd like to see more companies rather than more barriers.

Would be a good discussion for an ethics class.
 
Last edited:
ginwilly said:
It's a muddled subject. Those cable companies may have run the lines and put up the dishes, but they are receiving signals from satellites that someone else put up.

If I wanted to start a new company to compete with Cablevision, should I be allowed to tap into those lines? Does a new phone company have to run new phone lines?

It's not a simple answer, but I'd like to see more companies rather than more barriers.
Click to expand...



Yes. they do. or pay them to use theirs. Even though it`s under treaty protection, you still gotta pay to use the Panama Canal by the hull.............same with the lines.
 
OddBall1st said:
Yes. they do. or pay them to use theirs. Even though it`s under treaty protection, you still gotta pay to use the Panama Canal by the hull.............same with the lines.
Click to expand...

Understood, but they are using the telephone poles to get to my house, then they buried cable in my yard. Is that mine now? Did they pay for the poles or use of them? (honestly don't know that one, figure they would have to at least get permission)

Back when it was easy to descramble Direct TV, I bought all of the equipment myself, installed it myself and and watched all of the channels. I was told that it was serious fines and jail times. Why? What was I doing different than them?
 
ginwilly said:
Understood, but they are using the telephone poles to get to my house, then they buried cable in my yard. Is that mine now? Did they pay for the poles or use of them? (honestly don't know that one, figure they would have to at least get permission)

Back when it was easy to descramble Direct TV, I bought all of the equipment myself, installed it myself and and watched all of the channels. I was told that it was serious fines and jail times. Why? What was I doing different than them?
Click to expand...


You gotta buy every pole they put on your property for electricity...in MA.

Take the 30.06 chamber, should Remington want to compete with Winchester or Springfield, they either make their own or buy one from Springfield,...both Winchester and Remington buy from Springfield. (chambered in Springfield). Springfield isn`t the only producer of the round.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Padawanbater2
Democrat with financial ties to AT&T just gutted California's net neutrality law
Replies
17
Views
869
ttystikk
ttystikk
vostok
FCC Repeals U.S. Net Neutrality Rules
Replies
5
Views
383
curious2garden
curious2garden
G
How the Doug Ford government lost $42 million selling pot he always sucked as a small time dealer lo
Replies
1
Views
196
gb123
G
G
You can buy live pot plants when they’re legal — at least in theory
Replies
19
Views
1K
cannadan
cannadan
abandonconflict
say goodbye to net-neutrality
2 3
Replies
55
Views
2K
NoDrama
N
Back
Top