Page 9 of 10 FirstFirst ... 78910 LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 93

Thread: FCC set to back Internet traffic rules

  1. #81
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 03:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,272

    Re: FCC set to back Internet traffic rules

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    Many conservatives, due to the things they're being told by Beck/Limbaugh, think that Net Neutrality is a bad thing. That it is some sort of internet version of radio equality deal. It's not. They think Net Neutrality is somehow designed to push liberal views over conservative views. That's not how it works. That view is the polar opposite of reality. It's not my projection or my opinion, it's reality. Up is down. Black is white.

    Could we please stop with the ad hominem attack that conservatives are too stupid to make up their own minds about anything? There is opinion out there, and liberals don't have a lock on what is the truth of the matter, so you can just cut that **** out right now.


    You can remain skeptical if you like, but Net Neutrality is really simple. Net Neutrality means that data is data. Essentially, the ISPs are required to be blind. 10GB from NetFlix is the same as 10GB from FoxNews.com or 10GB from scatporntorrents.com.
    Is that a problem now? Because I don't see anyone coming forth with proof that this is indeed an ongoing problem that needed to be corrected immediately.


    The FCC's ruling does not actually create Net Neutrality. (the opposite, really) Maybe that's where you're drawing the confusion. Net Neutrality is anti-authoritarian, as it would ensure that no entity, private or public, could treat data from msnbc.com any differently than it treats data from foxnews.com. No entity could charge you more for data from foxnews.com than from msnbc.com. The FCC's ruling really does exactly the opposite. Your ISP can now charge you an extra fee to get data from foxnews.com and not charge you that fee for msnbc.com, with the express intent of funneling subcribers towards msnbc.com instead of foxnews.com. Net Neutrality would have prevented this.
    Again, could you provide proof that this is an ongoing problem right now that mandated the FCC to side step the constitutional method of congress, and making law themselves through regulation?


    There is a de-facto monopoly on that last-mile piece of cable that delivers internet data to your home. That cable was largely paid for with your money. Taxpayers funded this infrastructure. We paid tax dollars to fund all these highways we have around, imagine if those same construction companies could arbitrarily plant a toll booth on your driveway. You paid for them to build that residential street, and now they have the ability to selectively charge an extra fee to anyone going in and out of your driveway. They like Toyota, so Toyota vehicles get a pass. You like GM cars? Parking fee $10.99/month. It's your goddamned driveway, they're your goddamned roads, but the FCC has given this power to ISPs, who, by the way, have a government-sanctioned monopoly in most markets.
    You are basing a lot of this on could be's and might happens....I don't see where this is happening now.

    The worst part is, it's not you, the subscriber, who is really going to shoulder the burden. It's the little guy with his little website who can't afford to pay off a multibillion dollar ISP that is really going to suffer. The internet small business man is going to be stuck with 56k speeds for his website. Bestbuy.com can pay off the ISPs for access to the fast lane. Can Joe's Web Shop?
    Again....Gheeze....Does this happen now?


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

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  2. #82
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,937

    Re: FCC set to back Internet traffic rules

    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post
    Is that a problem now? Because I don't see anyone coming forth with proof that this is indeed an ongoing problem that needed to be corrected immediately.
    Numerous things in this thread have shown that it is starting to become a problem. Companies have hindered bandwidth for competitor services to bolster their own. Companies have already begun to attempt to charge netflix additional money for the data they use compared to other services. Companies have made statements to their desire for such things and businesses are already building software that allows for it.

    If I remember right you were one of those screaming about Obama care and what it could lead to, what it could set up and cause down the line, etc. People would go on and on about "knowing these people" and what their end goal is based on history and what they've said.

    Hell, even in this...peoples argument AGAINST net neutrality is that they know the government and know they'll just use it for censorship in the end.

    And yet you demand proof of it happening at its worst right this absolute moment or you refuse to believe the issues that people bring up when pushing for net neutrality?

    The telecoms have shown, repeatedly, through action and words what their intent is.

    Again, could you provide proof that this is an ongoing problem right now that mandated the FCC to side step the constitutional method of congress, and making law themselves through regulation?
    Its not an ongoing problem, its a growing problem that needs to be acted upon prior to the point where it has became prevalent. It is far more difficult, and far more damaging, to try to stop something when its in full go rather then when its just ramping up.

    I highly dislike the FCC making this ruling...I also dislike the ruling, as do MANY on the net neutrlaity side. But it is possible to dislike the idea of the FCC making something happen while at the same time agreeing with the principle of WHAT is happening.

    This is not an issue of messing with a "free market" because we do not have a free market currently with telecoms, we have pseudo-monopolies created by the government. The options are either net neutrality or breaking up those monopolies to assure that the internet, as we know it to function, remains in tact. Out of those two options, one is difficult and one is going to be near impossible to make happen.

  3. #83
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 03:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,272

    Re: FCC set to back Internet traffic rules

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Numerous things in this thread have shown that it is starting to become a problem. Companies have hindered bandwidth for competitor services to bolster their own. Companies have already begun to attempt to charge netflix additional money for the data they use compared to other services. Companies have made statements to their desire for such things and businesses are already building software that allows for it.

    If I remember right you were one of those screaming about Obama care and what it could lead to, what it could set up and cause down the line, etc. People would go on and on about "knowing these people" and what their end goal is based on history and what they've said.

    Hell, even in this...peoples argument AGAINST net neutrality is that they know the government and know they'll just use it for censorship in the end.

    And yet you demand proof of it happening at its worst right this absolute moment or you refuse to believe the issues that people bring up when pushing for net neutrality?

    The telecoms have shown, repeatedly, through action and words what their intent is.

    So that is what America is becoming now? We go after business we don't like based on a pre emptive mindset of supposed protection? Or is it that we just go after business we don't like?


    Its not an ongoing problem, its a growing problem that needs to be acted upon prior to the point where it has became prevalent. It is far more difficult, and far more damaging, to try to stop something when its in full go rather then when its just ramping up.

    Why'd the court disagree with you then?


    I highly dislike the FCC making this ruling...I also dislike the ruling, as do MANY on the net neutrlaity side. But it is possible to dislike the idea of the FCC making something happen while at the same time agreeing with the principle of WHAT is happening.
    Then the way to do that is to pressure congress to do it. NOT as we have seen lately through regulatory bodies taking it upon themselves to hamfistedly go after political foes of the administration.

    This is not an issue of messing with a "free market" because we do not have a free market currently with telecoms, we have pseudo-monopolies created by the government. The options are either net neutrality or breaking up those monopolies to assure that the internet, as we know it to function, remains in tact. Out of those two options, one is difficult and one is going to be near impossible to make happen.

    Oh, do tell what this ruling will do to break up Comcast, or Charter?


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

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  4. #84
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,937

    Re: FCC set to back Internet traffic rules

    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post
    So that is what America is becoming now? We go after business we don't like based on a pre emptive mindset of supposed protection? Or is it that we just go after business we don't like?
    America has gone after businesses that have monopolies in attempts to protect the consumer many times in its history. Sorry, but I deal with reality. Reality is that yes, the government got us into this mess by creating the quasi-monopolies that exist now in telecoms. Which means its NOT a free market, and which means those businesses aren't opperating in the normal type of sector that I would say government shouldn't be sticking its nose in as much. They are functioning on tax payer funded backbones, with government backed monopolies.

    Why'd the court disagree with you then?
    Ah, so J-Mac supports all court decisions now yes? Glad to know you're suddenly pro Roe v. Wade

    Then the way to do that is to pressure congress to do it. NOT as we have seen lately through regulatory bodies taking it upon themselves to hamfistedly go after political foes of the administration.
    Indeed, and pressuing congress is the main way I'd personally like to see it done. I'd much rather the FCC NOT have their hands involved in it. That being said, the FCC doing this kind of thing doesn't really set a gigantic new precedent...the FCC does this kind of crap and is already involved with internet communications anyways. And unlike the Health Care Debate...where "Do nothing" was a better option than do Obama Care but worse than doing what many republicans suggested...in this case "Do Nothing" is a worse option than the FCC creating net neutrality but the FCC creating it isn't as good as congress creating it.

    However, none of that happened. what the FCC passed was worthless and harmful and was worse than doing nothing because it basically was a smoke and mirrors act. I don't like what the FCC did, nor how the FCC did it, but their action doesn't make net neutrality as an ideal and a goal a bad or wrong thing.

    Oh, do tell what this ruling will do to break up Comcast, or Charter?
    Nothing, because as I elluded too, it is a neigh impossability that people on either side of the aisle are going to seriously and legitimately attempt to break up the telecom monopolies. I've stated numerous times on this forum that it would be my primary preference...but its kind of like saying winning the lottery would be my primary preference for earning money in the next 10 years. All well and good to say, but then you have to deal with reality.

  5. #85
    Sage
    Renae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    San Antonio Texas
    Last Seen
    10-23-17 @ 10:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    38,972
    Blog Entries
    15

    Re: FCC set to back Internet traffic rules

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    America has gone after businesses that have monopolies in attempts to protect the consumer many times in its history. Sorry, but I deal with reality. Reality is that yes, the government got us into this mess by creating the quasi-monopolies that exist now in telecoms. Which means its NOT a free market, and which means those businesses aren't opperating in the normal type of sector that I would say government shouldn't be sticking its nose in as much. They are functioning on tax payer funded backbones, with government backed monopolies.



    Ah, so J-Mac supports all court decisions now yes? Glad to know you're suddenly pro Roe v. Wade



    Indeed, and pressuing congress is the main way I'd personally like to see it done. I'd much rather the FCC NOT have their hands involved in it. That being said, the FCC doing this kind of thing doesn't really set a gigantic new precedent...the FCC does this kind of crap and is already involved with internet communications anyways. And unlike the Health Care Debate...where "Do nothing" was a better option than do Obama Care but worse than doing what many republicans suggested...in this case "Do Nothing" is a worse option than the FCC creating net neutrality but the FCC creating it isn't as good as congress creating it.

    However, none of that happened. what the FCC passed was worthless and harmful and was worse than doing nothing because it basically was a smoke and mirrors act. I don't like what the FCC did, nor how the FCC did it, but their action doesn't make net neutrality as an ideal and a goal a bad or wrong thing.



    Nothing, because as I elluded too, it is a neigh impossability that people on either side of the aisle are going to seriously and legitimately attempt to break up the telecom monopolies. I've stated numerous times on this forum that it would be my primary preference...but its kind of like saying winning the lottery would be my primary preference for earning money in the next 10 years. All well and good to say, but then you have to deal with reality.
    What about the property rights of the ISP's to protect their interests?
    Climate, changes. It takes a particularly uneducated population to buy into the idea that it's their fault climate is changing and further political solutions can fix it.



  6. #86
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:19 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,709

    Re: FCC set to back Internet traffic rules

    Quote Originally Posted by MrVicchio View Post
    What about the property rights of the ISP's to protect their interests?
    Property that taxpayers paid for and a business that the government handed them a monopoly in?
    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.

  7. #87
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:19 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,709

    Re: FCC set to back Internet traffic rules

    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post

    Is that a problem now? Because I don't see anyone coming forth with proof that this is indeed an ongoing problem that needed to be corrected immediately.

    Again, could you provide proof that this is an ongoing problem right now that mandated the FCC to side step the constitutional method of congress, and making law themselves through regulation?

    You are basing a lot of this on could be's and might happens....I don't see where this is happening now.



    Again....Gheeze....Does this happen now?


    j-mac
    It wasn't a problem until now because the recent FCC ruling is what gives them the right to do this. The FCC has just created the problem, not fixed it.
    Last edited by Deuce; 12-29-10 at 12:27 PM.
    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. #88
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 03:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,272

    Re: FCC set to back Internet traffic rules

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    It wasn't a problem until now because the recent FCC ruling is what gives them the right to do this. The FCC has just created the problem, not fixed it.

    Now I am really confused.


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

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  9. #89
    Sage
    Renae's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    San Antonio Texas
    Last Seen
    10-23-17 @ 10:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    38,972
    Blog Entries
    15

    Re: FCC set to back Internet traffic rules

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    Property that taxpayers paid for and a business that the government handed them a monopoly in?
    Was part of the deal restrictions on their use? You can't use that after the fact.
    Climate, changes. It takes a particularly uneducated population to buy into the idea that it's their fault climate is changing and further political solutions can fix it.



  10. #90
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,937

    Re: FCC set to back Internet traffic rules

    Quote Originally Posted by MrVicchio View Post
    What about the property rights of the ISP's to protect their interests?
    The ISP's such as Comcast, Cox, etc? Who use the infastructure that was federally subsidized by tax payer dollars? Who exist as pseudo-monopolies due to government regulations?

    No, sorry, their property rights are less important than those of companies that are functioning in a truer free market and a truer private sector than the telecoms.

Page 9 of 10 FirstFirst ... 78910 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
  •