Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 93

Thread: FCC set to back Internet traffic rules

  1. #21
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,798

    Re: FCC set to back Internet traffic rules

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    To my knowledge the only people doing this are wireless carriers, which is a little bit of a different ball of wax.

    What standard telecomm's do this for normal broadband internet?
    comcast does, they have a ceiling limit, now its something obnixious that Ill probably never hit but people have.



    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    I'll try and go back and find some of my old links and give you some references to what I'm about to say. But essentially, people are saying they are going to do this because they've either tried or there's been talk of it. There's been attempts at throttling certain information already. There's been talk of companies attempting to charge people for using a service from another company that they themselves offer. There's actually something that came out a few days ago with a company specifically pushing technology to telecomm's that would allow for this type of charging to happen.
    thanks and do be very clear again im not being a smart ass im honestly curious

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Essentially, what's stopped it up to now is a mix of public outrage and court cases with the potential threat to the companies if they make the gamble. If they win, they win big, but if they lose suddenly their ability to use the grey area as they do at times now goes away. .
    and that fine by me i just wonder if the public outrage is properly informed or driven by misinformation. The idea of comcast controlling ANYTHING traffic wise if a solid argument cant be made that it hinders over all traffic quality is not OK with me BUT neither is random EXTRA charges. So im kinda stuck and I also my be misinformed not having deeply researched.






    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    I'm not sure what you're getting at, but the quoted section was my opinion concerning the internet. Some of it is opinion, such as my belief its the openness of the internet that has let what has occured actually happen. Other is somewhat common sense, like suggesting that the huge consumer base of it is what allows for "obscure" things to still find a niche on the internet.
    I understand thats why I was looking for more, more solid info than just opinion




    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    See this, this isn't an opinion. This is stating a fact. Please link. What things are they censoring or restricting? What traffic is being rerouted?
    thats fair Ill see if I can find it, but I want trying to proove it to you or say you didnt know only saying they already do it so the srgument of "we dont want the internet regulated" is a good one but not 100% solid since its already being done or can be done.

    Ill see if I can find stories on it but if i recall correctly if had to do with comcast, some traffic was given priority for weak reasons, the reason were enough i guess law wise but to everybody out side of comcast who was technical and experts it didnt seem to add up. The other thing was comcast and share programs like bearshare, the searches where also being limited.

    Ill look for it




    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Except court cases were already backing that notion up. This is expanding it, stating that they can't do that...but specifically saying they CAN start charging for specific services or sites.
    well thats good I dont want ANYBODY to do it, and like i said if the bill is done right im fine with it if it just forces comcast and others to treat all similar traffic equal because thats what i want for sure
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  2. #22
    Sage
    Erod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    North Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:34 AM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    13,067

    Re: FCC set to back Internet traffic rules

    Well, the FCC ruling is official.

    FCC Gives Government Power to Regulate Web Traffic - WSJ.com

    Next comes the inevitable contitutional challenges.

  3. #23
    Student
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Last Seen
    01-03-11 @ 04:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    190

    Re: FCC set to back Internet traffic rules

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicup View Post
    Yep, that pretty much sums it up. It's the same as a luxury tax, except the communications companies get to pick and choose what luxuries they will tax. I think it's anti-competitive, and ultimately monopolistic in nature. There are various US legal precedents that will offer challenges to this law.
    Tim-
    It's worse than that. This is the Internet version of The "Fairness" Doctrine which progressives have been pushing in an attempt to get conversative talk shows and FoxNews off the air. It will allow the government to track your every move on the Internet and see everything you do online and charge you for sites like Facebook, YouTube or Skype. Progressives always come up with cutesy names for their insidious plans. It's not Net Neutrality. It's government invasion of your online privacy. I'm surprised they didn't throw in the word "Democratic" somewhere in the name.

  4. #24
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:02 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,316
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: FCC set to back Internet traffic rules

    Quote Originally Posted by VF500 View Post
    Really? You need to have your nose checked. This is straight out of Obama and George Soros' play book. Obama stated in a speech that "there's too much 'confusing' information on the Internet" and he wanted it "controlled". Well duh. What doesn't he want controlled?
    I am pretty sure that is not what Obama said. He addressed the need to get information from more than once source.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  5. #25
    Global Moderator
    Silent Bob for President!

    RedAkston's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    33,787
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: FCC set to back Internet traffic rules

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    I am pretty sure that is not what Obama said. He addressed the need to get information from more than once source.
    How is this the government's role exactly?
    Welfare (Food Stamps, WIC, etc...) are not entitlements. They are taxpayer funded handouts and shouldn't be called entitlements at all. Social Security and Veteran's benefits are 'Entitlements' because the people receiving them are entitled to them. They were earned and paid for by the recipients.

  6. #26
    Sage


    MaggieD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Chicago Area
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    43,243
    Blog Entries
    43

    Re: FCC set to back Internet traffic rules

    Quote Originally Posted by Erod View Post
    Well, the FCC ruling is official.

    FCC Gives Government Power to Regulate Web Traffic - WSJ.com

    Next comes the inevitable contitutional challenges.
    Here's what Obama said about the internet in his inaugural address:

    "The internet today is an open platform where the demand for websites and services dictates success. You’ve got barriers to entry that are low and equal for all comers. And it’s because the internet is a neutral platform that I can put on this podcast and transmit it over the internet without having to go through some corporate media middleman. I can say what I want without censorship. I don’t have to pay a special charge. But the big telephone and cable companies want to change the internet as we know it. They say they want to create high-speed lanes on the internet and strike exclusive contractual arrangements with internet content-providers for access to those high-speed lanes. Those of us who can’t pony up the cash for these high-speed connections will be relegated to the slow lanes … We can’t have a situation in which the corporate duopoly dictates the future of the internet and that’s why I’m supporting what is called net neutrality."
    http://www.computerweekly.com/Articl...ogy-quotes.htm

    Am I correct that he, then, does not agree with the FCC? (I find this all very confusing.)
    The devil whispered in my ear, "You cannot withstand the storm." I whispered back, "I am ​the storm."

  7. #27
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:19 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,787

    Re: FCC set to back Internet traffic rules

    Quote Originally Posted by VF500 View Post
    It's worse than that. This is the Internet version of The "Fairness" Doctrine which progressives have been pushing in an attempt to get conversative talk shows and FoxNews off the air. It will allow the government to track your every move on the Internet and see everything you do online and charge you for sites like Facebook, YouTube or Skype. Progressives always come up with cutesy names for their insidious plans. It's not Net Neutrality. It's government invasion of your online privacy. I'm surprised they didn't throw in the word "Democratic" somewhere in the name.
    This... isn't at all what you described.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  8. #28
    A Man Without A Country
    Mr. Invisible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    New Jersey
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    4,960
    Blog Entries
    71

    Re: FCC set to back Internet traffic rules

    Here is a great Democracy Now! Video on Net Neutrality.
    "And in the end, we were all just humans, drunk on the idea that love, only love, could heal our brokenness."

  9. #29
    Global Moderator
    Silent Bob for President!

    RedAkston's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    33,787
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: FCC set to back Internet traffic rules

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Invisible View Post
    Here is a great Democracy Now! Video on Net Neutrality.
    Ah yes, Democracy Now - another George Soros funded progressive bastion of lies...
    Welfare (Food Stamps, WIC, etc...) are not entitlements. They are taxpayer funded handouts and shouldn't be called entitlements at all. Social Security and Veteran's benefits are 'Entitlements' because the people receiving them are entitled to them. They were earned and paid for by the recipients.

  10. #30
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,274

    Re: FCC set to back Internet traffic rules

    Amy Goodman is a washed up Marxist.


    j-mac
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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