- Joined
- Aug 30, 2011
- Messages
- 5,411
- Reaction score
- 2,228
- Location
- In a Blue State
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Liberal
So there you go.
The internet is now a public utility.
Well it was good while it lasted. :shrug:
The internet certainly isn't going to end but you can reasonably expect sites like this one to become highly regulated if they collect any revenue from web traffic or subscriptions.
The internet certainly isn't going to end but you can reasonably expect sites like this one to become highly regulated if they collect any revenue from web traffic or subscriptions.
So there you go.
The internet is now a public utility.
Time will tell, however the goal here was to prevent content providers from creating unequal access to content producers, which was likely to happen. Sites like Netflix, Facebook, etc will have just as much access to the internet as everyone else.
If Comcast and other providers had their way, they would charge more for certain people to distribute their content than others. This would effectively capitalize the Internet instead of creating a free and equal internet.
Both sides of the argument have their ups and downs, but I'm siding with this decision. Internet should not be a right accessible to those with the most money. I don't trust content providers, Comcast has proven time and time again how willing they are to **** with their customers just because they can. I don't trust the FCC either. So it comes down to the lesser of evils here.
time just told us its going to be ruined.. and you will charged differently by content now.. it will up wildly in what you will pay in taxes and fees along with tons of content dissappearing..
tell me again how it got improved?
much like healthcare it was better befor Obama..and this is a raping of our freedoms
Time will tell, however the goal here was to prevent content providers from creating unequal access to content producers, which was likely to happen. Sites like Netflix, Facebook, etc will have just as much access to the internet as everyone else.
If Comcast and other providers had their way, they would charge more for certain people to distribute their content than others. This would effectively capitalize the Internet instead of creating a free and equal internet.
Both sides of the argument have their ups and downs, but I'm siding with this decision. Internet should not be a right accessible to those with the most money. I don't trust content providers, Comcast has proven time and time again how willing they are to **** with their customers just because they can. I don't trust the FCC either. So it comes down to the lesser of evils here.
Again, this decision is not a political or partisan decision. The fact that the biggest proponents of this decision like Ted Cruz receive insane campaign contributions from Comcast should say something. It is, was, and always will be able money. Unregulated access to the internet benefits everyone.
exactly.... sadly this site will be changin'...like so many others
time just told us its going to be ruined.. and you will charged differently by content now.. it will up wildly in what you will pay in taxes and fees along with tons of content dissappearing..
tell me again how it got improved?
much like healthcare it was better befor Obama..and this is a raping of our freedoms
The real question is why does the idea of regulated Internet spook people off?
ISP providers are, themselves, a regulatory body because they can control who and what goes over their connections. This action by the FCC (assuming our idiot Congress doesn't overrule it) limits their control and helps new companies and ideas to have equal footing with the communication giants.
The fact that ISP's are so vehemently opposed to this decision should say it all.
Actually being charged differently by content will be specifically prohibited. Thanks for playing.
Because all corporations are evil and all government is good?
We don't even know what got voted on today except that it is a huge piece of regulation of an industry that has absolutely exploded over the past two decades primarily because it was free and relatively unregulated. We also know that the reason given for the "need" to regulate it was, specifically, that freedom which had allowed it to expand.
Why is it that liberals hate freedom so much?