Page 1 of 22 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 215

Thread: Net Neutrality

  1. #1

    Default Net Neutrality

    Hooray!! the big corps are going to monetize and monopolize the last thing in the USA....truly the only way to control what people see....

    Seriously sometimes I don't understand the system....how is this setting an example for the rest of the world??

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    5,141
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Spiritsurge View Post
    how is this setting an example for the rest of the world??
    We're doing our best to provide the world with excellent examples of what not to do so that nobody else has to make the same mistakes.
    Just another Castle Age player
    army code: D422AE

  3. #3

    Default

    I hope I still can pirate my favorite chinese cartoons.
    Especially now that I just found out that there is a series about Boruto's father and is called Naruto.
    Last edited by Revolver Blast; 11-24-2017 at 05:13 AM. Reason: grammar

  4. #4

    Default

    do you know what the argument is for obama style net neutrality is? https://www.savetheinternet.com/net-...-need-know-now

    basically it's to free black people from slavery.

    the counter argument is here - http://fortune.com/2017/11/23/net-ne...hy-it-matters/

    basically Ajit Pai (appointed by trump) sees reclassification of the internet as a public utility as 1930s regulation of big telephone, and claims self regulation by ISPs responding to market forces will achieve a free and fair internet, the equivalent of net neutrality.

    as i've said, the political left are intolerant of things like legal clarity as to how to achieve a higher goal. Pai's argument is good: China's government already throttles and censors content where the FCC can't touch them, indeed mobile carriers already throttle content from competition and obama's reclassification applies not a whit to their methods, resulting in confusing litigation over how the internet is to be viewed as a public utility. Mark Cuban points out that a more agile method of regulation is in order, 21st century style. Pai and Cuban are right. Obama-style regulation out, Trump style market forces self regulation in, as the FCC looks to vote yes on the ouster of net neutrality achieved by excessive and unnecessary federal regulation.

    But we have to free blacks from slavery!

  5. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolver Blast View Post
    I hope I still can pirate my favorite chinese cartoons.
    Especially now that I just found out that there is a series about Boruto's father and is called Naruto.
    Y you do this??

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Where at night the wood grouse
    Posts
    9,458

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Revolver Blast View Post
    I hope I still can pirate my favorite chinese cartoons.
    Especially now that I just found out that there is a series about Boruto's father and is called Naruto.
    muahhahaha....youre funny
    CA KEEP
    Quote Originally Posted by Rev Sim View Post
    We are all one with the all great banana!

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Somewhere in Valeria.
    Posts
    10,303

    Default

    Back to the days where Netflix constantly stopped and buffered. Yep, that happened.

    It was just co-incidence that the video service that your ISP preferred ran perfectly.

    It is best that we give Comcast even more power over you. That way, your only choice is to pay the next big rate increase. On the plus side, you get the wonderful Comcastic Customer Service (tm).
    Last edited by Rev Sim; 11-24-2017 at 03:45 PM.
    ...Dwarven Miner - I found a free chest roll for ye, but I was ambushed by a Dev in the mine.
    Lil rascal made away with it...



  8. #8

    Default

    and what happens when netflix stream something controversial?? yup it will be unaccessible

  9. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ma la king ti ti View Post
    do you know what the argument is for obama style net neutrality is? https://www.savetheinternet.com/net-...-need-know-now

    basically it's to free black people from slavery.

    the counter argument is here - http://fortune.com/2017/11/23/net-ne...hy-it-matters/

    basically Ajit Pai (appointed by trump) sees reclassification of the internet as a public utility as 1930s regulation of big telephone, and claims self regulation by ISPs responding to market forces will achieve a free and fair internet, the equivalent of net neutrality.

    as i've said, the political left are intolerant of things like legal clarity as to how to achieve a higher goal. Pai's argument is good: China's government already throttles and censors content where the FCC can't touch them, indeed mobile carriers already throttle content from competition and obama's reclassification applies not a whit to their methods, resulting in confusing litigation over how the internet is to be viewed as a public utility. Mark Cuban points out that a more agile method of regulation is in order, 21st century style. Pai and Cuban are right. Obama-style regulation out, Trump style market forces self regulation in, as the FCC looks to vote yes on the ouster of net neutrality achieved by excessive and unnecessary federal regulation.

    But we have to free blacks from slavery!
    No, no, no, NO!

    Instead of making this a partisan issue, how about you try the truth for once?

    - Net neutrality is not a some left conspiracy based on intolerance.
    - What China does or doesn't do is not in any way or form relative to what the US should do.
    - Carriers also do -not- throttle anything from their competition, the law literally -forbids- that.
    - There also is no confusing litigation over how the internet is to be viewed, in fact, it's very clear, ISP's provide us with access to the network and that is it.

    (Really... all of this can so easily be learned online. sigh)

    Net neutrality is not about anything else than freedom of information.
    It's about treating every bit of data the same, whether it be that adult entertainment you may like or the news you shouldn't be watching.
    It's about letting -you- decide what you can and can't see as opposed to letting your ISP decide what you can and can't see.

    The -main- argument Pai has made is that the current regulations have hindered the investment by providers in their networks which is halting progress.
    This is absolutely nonsense as is evidenced by the providers themselves stating that the regulations have -not- in fact had -any- impact on investments in the networks.

    Now, do we need more modern regulations? Perhaps.
    But at the core of such regulations should -always- remain the situation where -we- decide what we can and can't do with our internet connection and -not- our ISP.
    Last edited by Shadow Reaper; 11-24-2017 at 10:42 PM.
    "Build a man a fire, keep him warm for a night. Set a man on fire, keep him warm for the rest of his life!" - Rev Sim

    "Gratuitous acts of senseless violence are -my- forte!" - Max

  10. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Reaper View Post
    No, no, no, NO!
    Instead of making this a partisan issue, how about you try the truth for once?
    alright, where am i lying?
    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Reaper View Post
    - Net neutrality is not a some left conspiracy based on intolerance.
    who said it was a conspiracy. a misguided ideal perhaps, but no one is plotting anything.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Reaper View Post
    - What China does or doesn't do is not in any way or form relative to what the US should do.
    it is in fact quite pertinent. net neutrality means nothing in China, unless we insist that our law should be theirs, and china is a prime example of what government regulation really is. the argument that we should free lgbtq from oppression simply does not apply, unless we're china.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Reaper View Post
    - Carriers also do -not- throttle anything from their competition, the law literally -forbids- that.
    "Still, various preferential treatments of Internet usage already exist today. When AT&T customers access the company’s DirecTV Now video streaming service, that usage isn’t included in calculations for data limits. The same goes for Verizon and its Go90 and FiOS TV services as well as T-Mobile and services such as those from HBO, Hulu, Netflix, and YouTube. The practice, known as “zero rating,” was scrutinized by Wheeler’s FCC. Under Pai, it’s freely practiced." - http://fortune.com/2017/11/23/net-ne...hy-it-matters/
    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Reaper View Post
    - There also is no confusing litigation over how the internet is to be viewed, in fact, it's very clear, ISP's provide us with access to the network and that is it.
    Pai argues that it shouldn't be viewed as a public utility. I would argue further that ISPs shouldn't be regulated at all, just because 'ISPs provide us with access to the network and that is it'. What is the use of creating any litigation at all?
    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Reaper View Post
    (Really... all of this can so easily be learned online. sigh)
    I could do without the snide insult, thanks.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Reaper View Post
    Net neutrality is not about anything else than freedom of information.
    It's about treating every bit of data the same, whether it be that adult entertainment you may like or the news you shouldn't be watching.
    It's about letting -you- decide what you can and can't see as opposed to letting your ISP decide what you can and can't see.
    and information should't be viewed as a public resource. you already can't view kiddy ****, it's illegal. you already can't view al-qaeda, it's treason. ISPs without regulation would be free to self regulate and market forces would enable the same net neutrality without the overhead of govt regulation.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Reaper View Post
    The -main- argument Pai has made is that the current regulations have hindered the investment by providers in their networks which is halting progress.
    This is absolutely nonsense as is evidenced by the providers themselves stating that the regulations have -not- in fact had -any- impact on investments in the networks.
    and Pai is just a partisan dumb****? He's doing it to reverse obama policy, yes, but more to let the principle of less government operate.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Reaper View Post
    Now, do we need more modern regulations? Perhaps.
    But at the core of such regulations should -always- remain the situation where -we- decide what we can and can't do with our internet connection and -not- our ISP.
    ISP's have all stated that they uphold the idea of net neutrality. There is no need for government to step in and decide how to interfere with efficient access to the internet.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •