08-26-2014, 04:40 PM
08-26-2014, 04:57 PM
08-26-2014, 05:12 PM
08-26-2014, 05:13 PM
08-26-2014, 05:14 PM
Quote:http://dailycaller.com/2011/10/27/un-int...rge-soros/
Oh man, I couldn't keep reading past this part, I was laughing too hard!
Quote:
La Rue’s statements on Internet freedom caused alarm among conservatives who believe “net neutrality” is a vehicle for a government takeover of the Internet.
It's almost as if they think the government didn't create the internet.
08-26-2014, 05:58 PM
Quote:<a class="bbc_url" href='http://poorrichardsnews.com/post/6175581039/fcc-worked-with-soros-funded-free-press-group-on-net'>http://poorrichardsnews.com/post/6175581039/fcc-worked-with-soros-funded-free-press-group-on-net</a>
Do your homework, hoss. This blog you've linked (as if a blog is a source) is quoting the Washington examiner, which, lo and behold, and let me tell you I am just so surprised by this, is just yet another partisan republican mouthpiece.
<a class="bbc_url" href='http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Washington_Examiner'>http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Washington_Examiner</a>
Anyway, your crap blogs aside, how do you feel, FBT, about the current goings on about net neutrality?
For the unitiated:
<a class="bbc_url" href='http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality'>http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality</a>
08-27-2014, 10:03 AM
For even more on net neutrality, see netflix and their dealings with comcast, at&t, and verizon.
The upshot of it is that you pay for an internet connection, and in America you pay more for that connection than most of the industrialized world does. Additionally your connection in America is usually much slower and less reliable than those other countries who have cheaper broadband.
Additionally you have massive monopoly level companies like comcast (only thing close to decent broadband I can get where I live is comcast) saying to innovative businesses like Netflix that if they want the people who paid comcast for the ability to watch Netflix to be able to actually get what they've been paying comcast for, then Netflix will have to also pay comcast, because comcast only made billions of dollars in net profit last year.
If you really think it's good to allow a private corporation to be the troll under the bridge making the people you invited in pay a toll then you probably need some mental help.
The upshot of it is that you pay for an internet connection, and in America you pay more for that connection than most of the industrialized world does. Additionally your connection in America is usually much slower and less reliable than those other countries who have cheaper broadband.
Additionally you have massive monopoly level companies like comcast (only thing close to decent broadband I can get where I live is comcast) saying to innovative businesses like Netflix that if they want the people who paid comcast for the ability to watch Netflix to be able to actually get what they've been paying comcast for, then Netflix will have to also pay comcast, because comcast only made billions of dollars in net profit last year.
If you really think it's good to allow a private corporation to be the troll under the bridge making the people you invited in pay a toll then you probably need some mental help.
08-27-2014, 12:33 PM
Get rid of net neutrality, I can't wait to load jaguars.com at 28kbs
08-27-2014, 01:21 PM
Quote:Do your homework, hoss. This blog you've linked (as if a blog is a source) is quoting the Washington examiner, which, lo and behold, and let me tell you I am just so surprised by this, is just yet another partisan republican mouthpiece.
<a class="bbc_url" href='http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Washington_Examiner'>http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Washington_Examiner</a>
Anyway, your crap blogs aside, how do you feel, FBT, about the current goings on about net neutrality?
For the unitiated:
<a class="bbc_url" href='http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality'>http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality</a>
Yet Motherboard is a completely neutral, legitimate news source. Gotcha. It's not just a left leaning "crap blog" as you so deftly put it. It's right up there with the paragons of news. No agenda at all.
Regarding net neutrality, it puts control over the internet in the hands of the government by giving the FCC all sorts of controls. I'm sure nothing bad would come from that. No filtering of content, or additional restrictions whatsoever, right? The government is always well intentioned when they want control of something.
08-27-2014, 01:27 PM
Quote:Yet Motherboard is a completely neutral, legitimate news source. Gotcha. It's not just a left leaning "crap blog" as you so deftly put it. It's right up there with the paragons of news. No agenda at all.
Regarding net neutrality, it puts control over the internet in the hands of the government by giving the FCC all sorts of controls. I'm sure nothing bad would come from that. No filtering of content, or additional restrictions whatsoever, right? The government is always well intentioned when they want control of something.
Gotcha, we're better off putting monopolistic corporations in charge of possibly the most significant technology of the last 40 years. (possibly behind only the integrated circuit)
Broadband isn't a luxury, for this country and this economy it's a necessary utility. People lived without indoor plumbing or running water in parts of the country through much of the 20th century, but that didn't make those things utilities.
It's in the national interest for the government to ensure free communication and open association, and that's not something that private corporations can be depended on to ensure.
08-27-2014, 01:42 PM
I don't understand how anyone, not in the pocket or employed by the telecoms could be against net neutrality.
08-27-2014, 02:02 PM
Quote:Yet Motherboard is a completely neutral, legitimate news source. Gotcha. It's not just a left leaning "crap blog" as you so deftly put it. It's right up there with the paragons of news. No agenda at all.
Regarding net neutrality, it puts control over the internet in the hands of the government by giving the FCC all sorts of controls. I'm sure nothing bad would come from that. No filtering of content, or additional restrictions whatsoever, right? The government is always well intentioned when they want control of something.
Net Neutrality ensures that all websites are treated equally. You think the government won't ask "Hey, put this anti-government stuff in the slow lane for us?" and all of a sudden people accessing anti-government websites reach 28kbps. (Half the speed of dial-up) if they get rid of Net Neutrality?
No net neutrality? Jaguars.com now takes 1 minute to load because they decided not to pay for the 'fast lane access'
08-27-2014, 02:23 PM
Quote:Net Neutrality ensures that all websites are treated equally. You think the government won't ask "Hey, put this anti-government stuff in the slow lane for us?" and all of a sudden people accessing anti-government websites reach 28kbps. (Half the speed of dial-up) if they get rid of Net Neutrality?
No net neutrality? Jaguars.com now takes 1 minute to load because they decided not to pay for the 'fast lane access'
Not surprisingly, you are completely upside down on this issue. Completely upside down.
We are functioning under a de facto net neutrality. Right now. The government isn't trying to end net neutrality; it actively enforces it.
Comcast, et al, is currently trying to change this to allow them to do exactly what you are concerned the government would do, despite the fact that it isn't the government lobbying itself to to wrestle control from itself lol--it's big business via republican politicians.
08-27-2014, 02:38 PM
Quote:Yet Motherboard is a completely neutral, legitimate news source. Gotcha. It's not just a left leaning "crap blog" as you so deftly put it. It's right up there with the paragons of news. No agenda at all.
Regarding net neutrality, it puts control over the internet in the hands of the government by giving the FCC all sorts of controls. I'm sure nothing bad would come from that. No filtering of content, or additional restrictions whatsoever, right? The government is always well intentioned when they want control of something.
What you are describing is what Comcast, et al, are lobbying to do.
<a class="bbc_url" href='http://motherboard.vice.com/about?trk_source=nav'>http://motherboard.vice.com/about?trk_source=nav</a>
What's wrong with investigative journalism?
08-27-2014, 02:56 PM
Quote:Not surprisingly, you are completely upside down on this issue. Completely upside down.
We are functioning under a de facto net neutrality. Right now. The government isn't trying to end net neutrality; it actively enforces it.
Comcast, et al, is currently trying to change this to allow them to do exactly what you are concerned the government would do, despite the fact that it isn't the government lobbying itself to to wrestle control from itself lol--it's big business via republican politicians.
Do you even understand how our government works?
Comcast is lobbying to get rid of Net Neutrality -- but you can lobby for a lot of things, it doesn't mean it will happen without government support.
Let's not forget that PIPA was introduced by the Democrats, and was co-sponsored by more democrats than Republicans.
08-27-2014, 03:05 PM
Quote:Do you even understand how our government works?
Comcast is lobbying to get rid of Net Neutrality -- but you can lobby for a lot of things, it doesn't mean it will happen without government support.
Let's not forget that PIPA was introduced by the Democrats, and was co-sponsored by more democrats than Republicans.
Actually you have it backward. Comcast doesn't have to maintain neutrality at all, and hasn't been. They've intentionally been intentionally forcing Netflix traffic through crowded peering points to degrade their service, something the other big players (at&t and verizon) have also been doing.
The problem was the government's authority to regulate them as an information service was struck down by a court. The FCC needs to classify broadband as a common carrier utility (like phone service) then it could be properly regulated again.
![[Image: isp-speed.png]](http://knowmore.washingtonpost.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/isp-speed.png)
Note that September of 2013 (when the big three started degrading Netflix's service) was when the FCC's authority to regulate broadband as an information service was struck down and January of 2014 is when Netflix relented and started paying comcast to deliver the data which comcast's customers already paid to receive.
08-27-2014, 03:16 PM
And the reason the FCC doesn't do anything about it is because the FCC Chairman -- appointed by President Obama -- Tom Wheeler, is opposed to Net Neutrality.
08-27-2014, 03:23 PM
Quote:And the reason the FCC doesn't do anything about it is because the FCC Chairman -- appointed by President Obama -- Tom Wheeler, is opposed to Net Neutrality.
Yes, the prevalence of bad governance brought about by the republican mantra of the only good government being that which governs least is the root of this issue.
Until there's a shift of recognition to the fact that government isn't the problem for the people, it's the power of the people to solve the problems of the people, this issue won't be fixed.
The best we can hope for in the mean time is a disruptive force such as Google rolling out broadband to usurp the monopolistic incumbents.
08-27-2014, 03:47 PM
Quote:Yes, the prevalence of bad governance brought about by the republican mantra of the only good government being that which governs least is the root of this issue.
Until there's a shift of recognition to the fact that government isn't the problem for the people, it's the power of the people to solve the problems of the people, this issue won't be fixed.
The best we can hope for in the mean time is a disruptive force such as Google rolling out broadband to usurp the monopolistic incumbents.
But the government is a problem. Especially when it's not being used for the good of the people (but for corporations). Tom Wheeler should not be the FCC Chairman. He was a bad choice from the beginning being an industry insider.
08-27-2014, 03:55 PM
Quote:But the government is a problem. Especially when it's not being used for the good of the people (but for corporations). Tom Wheeler should not be the FCC Chairman. He was a bad choice from the beginning being an industry insider.
Government isn't the problem, government is the mechanism.
When someone pulls a lever to drop a wrecking ball on someone, do you say the wrecking ball is the problem or do you say the guy pulling the lever is the problem?
The problem we have is the failure of the citizenry of our nation to recognize anything about the problems our nation faces.
That we have people who believe anyone is better off letting psychopaths (and CEOs of large corporations are on the order of 10x more likely to be a psychopath than a randomly selected subject) run amok and that government is bad because it's possible for it to be run by the wrong people and ideology is the real governmental problem faced in the US.