I disgree with doing nothing, I also disagree with doing a utility option right now....the best realistic option is to push over the next 2 to 5 years for it being codified into law
"I am appalled that somebody who is the nominee...would take that kind of position"
"A court took away a presidency"
"...the brother of a man running for president was the governor of the state..."
It's horrifying because Trump is blunt instead of making overt implications.
Semper Fidelis, Semper Liber.
Stolen fair and square from the Capt. Courtesey himself.I spit at lots of people through my computer screen. Not only does it "teach them a lesson" but it keeps the screen clean and shiny.
In concept it appeals to people that their portal goes anywhere equally.
The devil is in the details.
I dont trust the government to find a way to accomplish it. And I dont like govt dictating business decisions.
Just as a business can determine a need to put governors on there bandwidth so other businessrs could choose to use this as a opportunity to distinguish itself from the competition.
These sorts of things usually work themselves out. But when govt gets involved it makes things worse ala bank charges. We all got screwed with that.
The notion that the government can be more effective in regulating this that the market itself is mind blowing. If people aren't happy with their internet speeds and access, they make a change. They change the market. I think few people want to have specific ISPs blocked, why not force the hands of the major companies by not paying them. They want our money, we want an open internet, seems pretty easy to me.
Run your own nation, play Cybernations."Conservatism is the blind and fear-filled worship of dead radicals."
- Mark Twain