Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
"As it is" in regards to censorship and access, not technology
Net Neutrality... No, really it will be faster and cheaper... Says the government.
- Thread starter NLXSK1
- Start date
Wrong. If there is no profit from inventing a new faster way to be on the Internet, then who will do it? As soon as someone invents a faster way, he cannot start a new internet service provider company promising 200 Gb/sec speeds if the government tells you that you can't charge those people more than joe schmoes internet service?
What incentive is there to do it? None.
People didn't make things better and faster so you could have more spank time, they did those things to MAKE A PROFIT!
Why do you hate profit so much?
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
Again, it's not about the technology to create faster internet speeds, it's about equal access to content. Watch this clip;
Net Neutrality will stifle internet progress.
Have you read the 322 pages that has been set forth on the subject by the President?
I haven't, but pretty sure abandonintellect said you can't be for a change unless you have read all the citations.
Its a scam, it doesn't take 322 pages of lawyer speak to say " all data will be treated equally". It gives government control, the government only stifles innovation, it needs to stay out of the way.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
Can you explain why you think equal access to content will "stifle progress"?
Does equal access to electricity "stifle progress"?
Did you watch that 3 minute clip I posted?
there is no profit incentive to give anyone a faster speed
If your netflix stutters, check to see if its a SONY device that is doing the streaming. SONY forces all content through their servers first. Just another link in a chain.
Electricity is the same everywhere, there is no advantage using one over the other. Try some other tactic.
I don't need to watch the clip to have all the promises of what it will be if we only let government take it over. Government can stay out. Forever. They can go after kiddie porn users like they do now, they don't need anymore say in anything the net has to offer.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
Where do you get this idea that the government is going to "take over the internet" by classifying it as a utility just like electricity?
Do you think it would encourage progress if the electric company had the ability to dim your bulbs and charge you a subscription fee for standard lighting? That is what the ISP's are attempting to do with the internet, slow your speeds and charge you more for access to higher ones.
One final thing on this, it was the government (Tom Wheeler, chairman of the FCC) who opposed net neutrality to begin with, he used to work at Comcast for fucks sake. It was all the rest of us citizens who supported it and voiced opinions which led to the change in tune over at the FCC.
You are arguing the wrong side if it's government control you're against. Watch the clip.
The first sentence you post clearly says it all. Public utilities are regulated in the USA, ALL of them. Regulations come from who? Excited civic minded housewives? Or the government?
Regulation= Government control. Government control=Restrained. Do you know what that thing the military would put on the Jeeps so they couldn't be driven faster than 55MPH was called? Governors.
We don't need no stinking governors.
The internet isn't hurting anyone, it has been making our lives better every minute, a truly great track record. get government involved and progress will be greatly restrained i.e STIFLED.
If I want faster internet service I can get it, I just need to pay more, that is perfectly fine with me, but I don't need all that bandwidth.
Electricity is regulated, it took 50 years to get solar panels from 8% efficiency to 16% efficiency. Stifled.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
"Net neutrality (also network neutrality, Internet neutrality or net equality) is the principle that Internet service providers and governments should treat all data on the Internet equally, not discriminating or charging differentially by user, content, site, platform, application, type of attached equipment, or mode of communication."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality
Point out where it says anything about speed
It's not about speed, it's about access. ISP's want to charge more for access, proponents of net neutrality want to keep it how it is now; equal access
It's clear you don't really understand the argument. Watch the clip, it's only 3 minutes, or read the wiki page about it if you want to talk to me about this any further
Your video claims that ISP's have promised to give you greater and greater speeds just as long as you give them absolute power over the internet forever, no backsies.
If my ISP starts throttling my content, I will just go to another ISP, there are thousands and thousands of them to choose from.
Why do you hate choices?
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
why people who clearly don't even understand what the bill is choose to make asses out of themselves is beyond me.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
why do you love regurgitating GOP talking points that have nothing to do with what this bill is about?
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
Dumb
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
but you don't.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
That's not what the clip claimed
There are not "thousands and thousands" of ISP's
That is what the clip claims, almost verbatim.
there are more than 6000 ISP's in the USA. I have a choice of 7 different ones in my rural area.
http://www.giiresearch.com/press/cg8742_en.shtml
ILoveYouSweetLeaf
Well-Known Member
Highway system.
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
Update on my most recent run-in with Comcast; first they provide unacceptable internet service- then tell me that because I tested it I was using it and therefore they can charge me for it.
The bill also magically rose from less than fifty dollars to $79.03.
Please join my protest against self serving corporate giants by doing your account with them and choosing an alternative. If we cost them enough money, they'll find a way to behave. It's the only language they seem to understand.
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
one could also vandalize and destroy private infrastructure in public places, just sayin
