View Poll Results: Is net neutrality very important?

24. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    18 75.00%
  • No

    6 25.00%
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 23 of 23

Thread: Is net neutrality very important?

  1. #21
    Hawt Beaver
    Middleground's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Canada's Capital
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:24 AM
    Blog Entries

    Re: Is net neutrality very important?

    Quote Originally Posted by American View Post
    It is unnecessary regulation. Someone prove to me that there is a problem.
    Let's say that your IP decides to not allow you to connect to DP. Would you be okay with that?

    Or, say your IP decides that DP gets slower service than companies that they sponsor. Would you be a regular here if it took minutes for a single page to upload?
    "There is a lot of talk coming from CitiGroup about how Dodd-Frank isn't perfect, So let me say this to anyone listening at Citi I agree with you. Dodd-Frank isn't perfect. It should have broken you into pieces." -- Elizabeth Warren

  2. #22
    Sporadic insanity normal.

    The Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:48 PM

    Re: Is net neutrality very important?

    Something of the sort may be necessary in some areas.

    As there is not complete and total competition among ISP's...

    For example, in my current location, we had the following options for ISP a couple years ago...

    Our (then) current dial-up ISP, the only provider in the area.
    Satellite connection (a few ISP's, I think, but never seriously checked into it, as due to the limitations of the system, was not very interested.)
    DSL - Not available, outside DSL hub range.
    Cable - Not available, as no cable line to the building - after many phone calls and mostly as a direct result of new residence construction next door, cable line installed, allowing current service from Comcast, which leads to my point.

    Comcast is the only cable provider available in the area.

    Competition? Hah!


    Edit: That said, I think laws enforcing "net neutrality" could be far to easily abused, so...

    Instead, I would rather efforts to promote more competing ISPs in all areas would be better.

    Of course, a few protections for free speech via the internetz might be necessary.

    But if you take them too far, infringement on other rights might occur.
    Last edited by The Mark; 07-26-10 at 07:10 PM.

    Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller

  3. #23
    Educator Gabriel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Last Seen
    10-07-10 @ 06:38 PM

    Re: Is net neutrality very important?

    Quote Originally Posted by R. Shackleferd View Post
    Net Neutrality is anti-free market. The tele-communications market should not be even more anti-free market than it already is by law and not by market decisions. What we need is more telecom. infrastructure provided by the free market and less coercion from the state that sponsors corporate monopoly. More competition makes more choice. Net Neutrality perceives a skewed and exaggerated present that creates a bleak future if more government intervention isn't made. Net Neutrality creates a class struggle in this hypothetical future.

    Companies can make a whole lot of money from fiber optics but they don't want to be the ones that pay for it's development or be the ones to manage risk. They want the tax payer (victims of extortion) to pay for it. So they create this fraudulent "save the internet" campaign and most people buy into it crook, slime and stinker. Why is it do we always go on this reflexive crusade against corporations like Microsoft and Google for everything they do but then when they propose that the tax payer pay for infrastructure and endorse campaigns that fear people into it by making up hypothetical scenarios, we all of a sudden support them? I thought we all hated Corporations for all of the aggression they cause, lies they make, their irresponsibility and influence on public policy yet here we have net neutrality that is all of these things and more and we're supporting it? Probably because we think that it's going to hurt (other )corporations and make us, the proletarian mass, have more voice and control.

    We don't need net neutrality, we need government and justice neutrality by getting the government out of our lives and out of our business and by making corporations reliant on the voluntary contributions of consumers, not the extortion of taxes and aggressive "contracts".
    Yes it is anti free market and for good reason. Firstly they never paid for the roads they are using. (the internet) The equivalent would be something similar to companies taking over large portions of paved highway they never paid for.. saying which roads you can go on .. or paying more if you drive a lot .. or paying more for going off their roads.. etc. An unrestricted ISP market is ridiculous.

    So much for free market meaning an extension of individual liberty.. that is a flat out lie. In this case it is clearly a reduction of liberty and an extension of corporate liberty. One doesn’t have to wonder why DC is full of corporate cronies when you consider they run your government and libertarian fiscal policy is their dominate priority.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

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