Page 28 of 49 FirstFirst ... 18262728293038 ... LastLast
Results 271 to 280 of 487

Thread: Al Franken Explains Net Neutrality To Ted Cruz

  1. #271
    The Dude
    Kobie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Western NY
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    42,861

    Re: Al Franken Explains Net Neutrality To Ted Cruz

    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post


    You are again showing that you do not know what you are talking about.

    Since your ignorance is painfully obvious, why don't you at least keep up by reading what he actually said, because it was not idiotic.

    Ted Cruz: Regulating the Internet threatens entrepreneurial freedom - The Washington Post
    It was stupendously idiotic.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
    Making it about you? Lol. You are irrelevant to this discussion. You add exactly zero
    I'm sorry you can't handle having had your ass handed to you by someone who adds "exactly zero," but maybe you should bow out of this thread before you further embarrass yourself.
    Freedom of speech is not freedom from criticism.

  2. #272
    The Dude
    Kobie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Western NY
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    42,861

    Re: Al Franken Explains Net Neutrality To Ted Cruz

    OK, let's parse Cruz's column for a moment. I'm skipping parts, because it's long, but feel free to fill in the gaps if you feel I've missed something.

    Never before has it been so easy to turn an idea into a business. With a simple Internet connection, some ingenuity and a lot of hard work, anyone today can create a new service or app or start selling products nationwide.
    Irrelevant to net neutrality. An app is not an ISP.

    In the past, such a person would have to know the right people and raise substantial start-up capital to get a brick-and-mortar store running.
    As opposed to an internet service provider, which is apparently free to start up.

    First, we must abandon the idea of further taxing Internet access and sales. At this very moment, online retailers face an enormous threat because Washington may pass a massive, new Internet sales tax during the next two months, in the lame-duck session of Congress. As the hashtag puts it, #NoNetTax.
    Literally nothing to do with net neutrality. I agree with him on this instance, but it has zero to do with the discussion here.

    Second, we should dismiss all plans to give nations hostile to human rights and democracy more influence over Internet policy.
    Literally nothing to do with net neutrality.

    Third, we must promote growth in the technological sector, a consistent bright spot for the U.S. economy. But we won’t realize more of that dynamic growth unless we keep the Internet free from the kind of unnecessary regulation that is strangling our health-care, energy and banking industries.

    And one of the biggest regulatory threats to the Internet is “net neutrality.”

    In short, net neutrality is Obamacare for the Internet. It would put the government in charge of determining Internet pricing, terms of service and what types of products and services can be delivered, leading to fewer choices, fewer opportunities and higher prices.
    Emphasis mine. Ted Cruz has no idea what net neutrality is. What he claims here is not it.

    What net neutrality actually is has been explained multiple times in the thread.

    President Obama this week came out aggressively for net neutrality and turning the Internet into a public utility. Some in the online community have embraced this call, thinking that cheaper prices would result. But when has that worked? Government-regulated utilities invariably destroy innovation and freedom. Which is more innovative, the U.S. Postal Service or Facebook and Twitter? Which is better for consumers, city taxi commissions or Uber and Lyft?
    Well, here's a boatload of bull****.

    The Postal Service certainly isn't innovative NOW, but it was 100-plus years before Mark Zuckerberg's was a glimmer in his father's eye. What's better for consumers, taxis or uber? Wait until an Uber driver plows into a bridge abutment with no insurance. Ted Cruz, who I guaran-goddamn-tee has never taken Uber or Lyft in the short part of his life that they've existed, is the last person to be lecturing us on them.

    That said, it's been stated multiple times in the thread that the desire for net neutrality is not automatically lockstep agreement with the idea of running the internet like a utility. There are other ways to accomplish that goal. Read and learn, don't just take this asshole's words as gospel.

    If the federal government seizes the power to regulate Internet pricing and goods and services, the regulations will never end.
    Again, NOT WHAT NET NEUTRALITY IS.

    Fourth, we must recognize that our constitutional rights are digital rights, too. In 2012, those who care about Internet freedom were shocked as bills such as the Stop Online Piracy and Protect IP acts, which would regulate speech on the Internet under the guise of protecting property rights, started gaining popularity in Washington. Thankfully, online activists were quick to mobilize to protect their free-speech rights. But we must remain vigilant. Intellectual property must be defended, but any threat to quell speech on the Internet must be treated seriously and subsequently defeated.
    A well-intentioned if not likely focus-group provided rant against SOPA, but a nice sentiment and one I agree with. Again, NOTHING TO DO WITH NET NEUTRALITY.

    The topic of the thread is Cruz's tweet:



    ... and Franken's response to it, which is correct -- NN is not remotely comparable to Obamacare, and Ted Cruz doesn't know dick about the subject. That's it.
    Freedom of speech is not freedom from criticism.

  3. #273
    Global Moderator
    Moderator
    Helix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    37,063

    Re: Al Franken Explains Net Neutrality To Ted Cruz

    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post

    Did I say "no regulation"?
    Or perhaps did I say making it a utility is what is not needed?
    Would you like me to tell you?
    i'd like you to answer my question. what is your preferred method of ensuring net neutrality?

  4. #274
    Sage
    Excon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    10-14-17 @ 01:26 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,997

    Re: Al Franken Explains Net Neutrality To Ted Cruz

    Quote Originally Posted by Helix View Post
    i'd like you to answer my question. what is your preferred method of ensuring net neutrality?
    And again.
    Did I say "no regulation"?
    Or perhaps did I say making it a utility is what is not needed?
    Would you like me to tell you?

    Your comment was absurd and your question irrelevant.

    As I said.
    It is the way that Obama wants to accomplish it which is wrong.
    It does not have to be, nor should it be classified as a utility.
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  5. #275
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,219

    Re: Al Franken Explains Net Neutrality To Ted Cruz

    Quote Originally Posted by Kobie View Post
    Well, considering what Time Warner charges for broadband, kinda, and if they get their way, they'll be ****ing me more.
    Get wifi.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  6. #276
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,219

    Re: Al Franken Explains Net Neutrality To Ted Cruz

    Quote Originally Posted by Helix View Post
    i'd like you to answer my question. what is your preferred method of ensuring net neutrality?
    Supply and demand.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  7. #277
    Global Moderator
    Moderator
    Helix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    37,063

    Re: Al Franken Explains Net Neutrality To Ted Cruz

    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post
    And again.
    Did I say "no regulation"?
    Or perhaps did I say making it a utility is what is not needed?
    Would you like me to tell you?

    Your comment was absurd and your question irrelevant.

    As I said.
    It is the way that Obama wants to accomplish it which is wrong.
    It does not have to be, nor should it be classified as a utility.
    i missed the part where you answered my question

    Quote Originally Posted by Helix
    I'd like you to answer my question. what is your preferred method of ensuring net neutrality?

  8. #278
    Global Moderator
    Moderator
    Helix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    37,063

    Re: Al Franken Explains Net Neutrality To Ted Cruz

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    Supply and demand.
    as much as i'd love to live in fantasyland, supply and demand is not going to ensure net neutrality.

  9. #279
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

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

    Re: Al Franken Explains Net Neutrality To Ted Cruz

    Quote Originally Posted by JayDubya View Post
    No. The consumer provides the market force in question. They do so by conveying to current provider that their continued service provision is dependent upon their stance on this issue.
    No, it doesn't because the market in question isn't a free on because it's largely a duopoloy, if not a monopoly, in the vast majority of the country. Market force can not be exerted on a product that is nearly a requirement for existance in the modern day and yet you only have one to three choices to actively pursue.

    This is the problem with the internet currently and why there is a problem.

    In the early days of the internet and ISPs you're right, the consumer provided the market force. Significant censorship would be fought against. Even things like AOL and CompuServe had to open up their walled gardens to those who wanted to expand beyond their limits, and those services eventually died as people gravitated more and more to truly free and wide open ISPs. Neutrality was enforced by the market.

    In the past decade or so that no longer exists. The move to High Speed Internet has significantly narrowed the market in question and has created defacto duopolies controlling broadband access. Customers have little choice other than to bend over and be reamed in the ass by these telecoms or simply live without internet access in their homes.

    This situation has given rise to the need for this. It has given rise to Comcast throttling peer to peer services in the past. It's lead to smaller regional ISP's hijacking popular search engines to route people to their own. It's visible in the wireless carriers, who at least are SLIGHTLY less of a psuedo-monopoly setup but still is pretty close, who have blocked all video but youtube or who have stopped access to an entire website for their users or who have disabled one means of using a service while allowing another.

    The various big telecoms are NOT operating in a free market and thus they aren't substantially affected by market force, and as such there's no reason they won't continue to push in the direction they've already shown, and stated, a desire to go. And there's nothing the "Market" can do about it.

    The only two options, OTHER than just let them rape the consumer in the ass in a non-free market, are to have the government bust up their monopolies or have the government actually put guidelines on what they're able to do in regards to how they treat data.

    As hard as the telecoms are fighting Net Neutrality, they'd fight busting of their monopolies ten times as hard. There is no chance that option is likely to happen.

  10. #280
    Sage
    Excon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    10-14-17 @ 01:26 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,997

    Re: Al Franken Explains Net Neutrality To Ted Cruz

    Quote Originally Posted by Kobie View Post
    It was stupendously idiotic.
    Wrong Kobie.
    Nothing he said was idiotic.
    It was spot on.


    Quote Originally Posted by Kobie View Post
    OK, let's parse Cruz's column for a moment. I'm skipping parts, because it's long, but feel free to fill in the gaps if you feel I've missed something.

    Irrelevant to net neutrality. An app is not an ISP.

    As opposed to an internet service provider, which is apparently free to start up.

    Literally nothing to do with net neutrality. I agree with him on this instance, but it has zero to do with the discussion here.

    Literally nothing to do with net neutrality.

    Emphasis mine. Ted Cruz has no idea what net neutrality is. What he claims here is not it.

    What net neutrality actually is has been explained multiple times in the thread.

    Well, here's a boatload of bull****.

    The Postal Service certainly isn't innovative NOW, but it was 100-plus years before Mark Zuckerberg's was a glimmer in his father's eye. What's better for consumers, taxis or uber? Wait until an Uber driver plows into a bridge abutment with no insurance. Ted Cruz, who I guaran-goddamn-tee has never taken Uber or Lyft in the short part of his life that they've existed, is the last person to be lecturing us on them.

    That said, it's been stated multiple times in the thread that the desire for net neutrality is not automatically lockstep agreement with the idea of running the internet like a utility. There are other ways to accomplish that goal. Read and learn, don't just take this asshole's words as gospel.

    Again, NOT WHAT NET NEUTRALITY IS.

    A well-intentioned if not likely focus-group provided rant against SOPA, but a nice sentiment and one I agree with. Again, NOTHING TO DO WITH NET NEUTRALITY.

    The topic of the thread is Cruz's tweet:

    [IMG]http://images.dailykos.com/images/115950/large/CruzNetNuetrality_tweet.png?1415911919[IMG]

    ... and Franken's response to it, which is correct -- NN is not remotely comparable to Obamacare, and Ted Cruz doesn't know dick about the subject. That's it.

    Yep. As I thought.
    You literally do not know of what you speak.

    He was addressing two things there.
    1. The internet as a whole.
    2. Obama's desire to have it treated as a utility.

    You are mistakenly conflating the issue, and as such are as wrong about it as the idiot Franken is.



    Quote Originally Posted by Kobie View Post
    In short, net neutrality is Obamacare for the Internet. It would put the government in charge of determining Internet pricing, terms of service and what types of products and services can be delivered, leading to fewer choices, fewer opportunities and higher prices.
    Emphasis mine. Ted Cruz has no idea what net neutrality is. What he claims here is not it.

    What net neutrality actually is has been explained multiple times in the thread.

    Cruz did not say that was neutrality, he is saying that is what will happen by making it a utility.
    This is nothing more than Cruz being spot, as compared to you not knowing what you are talking about.
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

Page 28 of 49 FirstFirst ... 18262728293038 ... 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
  •