New FCC rules on Net neutrality -----

[wayneflorida 0]

I must admit I don't understand what the FCC is going to do.
My default position concerning government is always bad/skeptical.

[RonD1120 58]

Quote

1. Shared service mediocrity on the Internet
2. Increased consumer cost for Internet use
3. Internet taxes
4. Users may be charged with hate crimes when expressing First Amendment Rights on the Internet.
5. Provider exemptions may be purchased creating political party obligation.
6. Another nail in the Fourth Amendment coffin
7. A financial boon to attorneys, same with Obamacare

My post from another thread.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[jakee 1,255]

RonD1120

Quote

1. Shared service mediocrity on the Internet
2. Increased consumer cost for Internet use
3. Internet taxes
4. Users may be charged with hate crimes when expressing First Amendment Rights on the Internet.
5. Provider exemptions may be purchased creating political party obligation.
6. Another nail in the Fourth Amendment coffin
7. A financial boon to attorneys, same with Obamacare

My post from another thread.

Yeah, but no.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[RonD1120 58]

I have been reading your posts for six years and have determined you only offer negativity, criticism and objections. You do not share any positive solutions. You are truly a devil's advocate.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[jakee 1,255]

Yes, because the post of yours I just replied to was so positive, constructive and complimentary!

You just keep seeing what you want to see Ron.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[rushmc 18]

jakee

Yes, because the post of yours I just replied to was so positive, constructive and complimentary!

You just keep seeing what you want to see Ron.

BOOM

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[ryoder 1,384]

And WTF does Palin have to do with net neutrality?

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[kallend 1,625]

ryoder

And WTF does Palin have to do with net neutrality?

She can see it from her back door.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rushmc 18]

kallend

***And WTF does Palin have to do with net neutrality?

She can see it from her back door.

Still believe that old lie I see

it is ok
Nothing new from you

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[normiss 622]

I'd like to see her back door.

[billvon 2,400]

>Still believe that old lie I see
>it is ok
>Nothing new from you

Humor - it is a difficult concept.

[rushmc 18]

billvon

>Still believe that old lie I see
>it is ok
>Nothing new from you

Humor - it is a difficult concept.

Not really....

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Anvilbrother 0]

On reddit, they have been foaming at the mouth for years about Comcast's shitty practices, and Verizon charging or throttling speeds for Netflix users. So they are for net neutrality, and since a million people visit that site, it's a very popular topic, so I figured it was a good thing.

Contrast this to local talk radio who are saying we should be worried about this due to the fact that this opens the door to censorship and burdensome regulations that could oppress small businesses, or people trying to get the word out about politics. Kinda opening the door to a North Korea Internet in a small small fraction.

Does anyone here REALLY fucking know what it's all about. Not the just going by the title, ooh cool net nutrality, that sounds nice, the Internet should be neutral, but the deep seateded page 568 of 2000 type hidden shit of this, that bites us in the ass later. Pass it to find out what's in it kind of thing.

Postes r made from an iPad or iPhone. Spelling and gramhair mistakes guaranteed move along,

[Stumpy 256]

RonD1120

Quote

1. Shared service mediocrity on the Internet
2. Increased consumer cost for Internet use
3. Internet taxes
4. Users may be charged with hate crimes when expressing First Amendment Rights on the Internet.
5. Provider exemptions may be purchased creating political party obligation.
6. Another nail in the Fourth Amendment coffin
7. A financial boon to attorneys, same with Obamacare

My post from another thread.

None of that is true, but you carry on.

Never try to eat more than you can lift

[jakee 1,255]

Quote

Contrast this to local talk radio who are saying we should be worried about this due to the fact that this opens the door to censorship and burdensome regulations that could oppress small businesses, or people trying to get the word out about politics.

Oh sure, they're saying it. But are they saying how it does those things?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[Stumpy 256]

jakee

Quote

Contrast this to local talk radio who are saying we should be worried about this due to the fact that this opens the door to censorship and burdensome regulations that could oppress small businesses, or people trying to get the word out about politics.

Oh sure, they're saying it. But are they saying how it does those things?

I really struggle to see why this has become a partisan issue, but then I work in the internet industry so I probably understand it a little better than #foxnewsfacts.

If nothing else, surely most people realise that if the likes of comcast, verizon and AT&T are pushing against something, then its probably a GOOD idea?

Never try to eat more than you can lift

[RonD1120 58]

Please explain why it is not true and why I am so wrong.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[jakee 1,255]

RonD1120

Please explain why it is not true and why I am so wrong.

Explain why your negative, critical objections are true.

For instance, shared mediocrity. Under the previous paradigm, State laws had developed to stop municipalities from doing this " Local governments in Chattanooga, Tennessee, and Wilson, North Carolina, have built their own fast networks... [Chatanooga] is one of the only places on Earth with internet as fast as 1 gigabit per second – about 50 times faster than the US average." Now the FCC has opened the door for a municipality in any State to do the same, breaking free of the mediocrity (or worse) on offer from the 'Big Cable' monopoly.

How does that fit your narrative, Ron?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[RonD1120 58]

Here is what Mark Cuban has to say about net neutrality.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/102459578#.

https://gigaom.com/2015/02/25/mark-cuban-on-net-neutrality-fcc-cant-protect-competition/

"The courts will rule the Internet."

As with all things governmental, it is a power and control issue. The system was not broken but they felt it needed to be fixed. As I said before, it is a financial boon for the attorneys.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[Stumpy 256]

OK Ron - I concede that this is without me obviously having the exact text - and if you can point me at when it's available then I will read and evaluate with comments here.

However speaking about Net Neutrality in general, it's not about government (or indeed anyone) regulating content. Just the opposite in fact.
To give an example, say you are a Comcast customer, and in your region comcast is the only provider - its effectively a monopoly. Now imagine that they partnered with, say, microsoft who paid them vast sums of money to be their "Primary provider for SaaS" (or some such marketing speak). What this could mean would be that comcast would let Microsoft traffic through faster, basically handicapping any competition so that they would not be able to compete. If you want to use Google, or Duckduckgo instead of bing for your search, sure it would work, but in such a way that it could be practically unusable. The only way to compete would be for the competition to pay the comcast ransom. If this was to happen, then it would severely stifle innovation, as the startups - the next twitter/facebook/google/snapchat/netflix whatever, would never be able to compete with the established players.
With net neutrality, it basically levels the playing field and allows everyone to compete on equal terms, and allows the market to make its own choices (which is why I am so puzzled that the GOP are against it.)

What I believe the FCC want to do is push towards ISP's being a dumb pipe (a utility), in that the packets go out in the order they come in. This is why the ISP's are against, as it is removing a potential revenue stream for them

Thats a massive over-simplification but it'll do for now.

Never try to eat more than you can lift

[RonD1120 58]

See my post above #19.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[Stumpy 256]

RonD1120

Here is what Mark Cuban has to say about net neutrality.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/102459578#.

https://gigaom.com/2015/02/25/mark-cuban-on-net-neutrality-fcc-cant-protect-competition/

"The courts will rule the Internet."

As with all things governmental, it is a power and control issue. The system was not broken but they felt it needed to be fixed. As I said before, it is a financial boon for the attorneys.

He says some interesting things but there are a few points in there that are patently wrong.
For example - "Who controls access to mobile? Google and Apple." - well, no. Google and Apple currently build the devices that people use to access the internet, but AT&T (who, interestingly, are paying Cuban) and their elk () are the ones who have the control of the mobile broadband. And if you think Google and Apple have control of that, it can change VERY quickly. Anyone remember when blackberry was the smartphone to have? Now has 0.4% of the mobile market.

He also says that the ISP's haven't demonstrated behaviour like this and "dismissed Netflix's claims". Thats demonstrably false.

As for it being a boon to lawyers, true, but not implementing it would likely be worse in that there would be lawsuit after lawsuit about anti-competitive practices. So the lawyers win either was as usual (Damn you Andy!)

Never try to eat more than you can lift

[RonD1120 58]

Thanks for your input. I will, as everyone, wait and see.

Now, why does the BATF want to ban green tip ammo for the AR-15?

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[Stumpy 256]

RonD1120

Thanks for your input. I will, as everyone, wait and see.

Now, why does the BATF want to ban green tip ammo for the AR-15?

You are on your own on that one.
They don't like the color?

Never try to eat more than you can lift

[RonD1120 58]

Attempt at humor, it is another power and control issue. They were unsuccessful grabbing the guns so they are going after the ammo. Somebody will probably start a thread on the issue.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.