I'm probably a little slow, but is this in any way connected to the "fairness doctine" that Democrats seemed to be pushing for some years ago?
My question is, in all fairness, don't we the tax payer own the damn ISP's anyway? Aren't we the one's that paid for the damn cable and towers through massive subsidies?
As far as I'm concerned open internet is WHAT is intrinsic about the internet. This ruling opens the door for a tremendous amount of corruption, and is purely antithetical to consumer protections.
Tim-
He's talking about the isp's filtering content if the rules are changed to allow that. If your isp doesn't like thepiratebay they will make it so that you cannot connect to it through your internet service. So it won't matter if thepiratebay is up or not, you can't get to it.
Sadly this was bound to happen and eventually they will get everything they want. The internet will be just like many other pseudo "free market" industries. A few large corporations will control almost everything and nobody will be able to challenge their power. The libertarian dunces will be duped again into thinking this is "freedom". Ask yourself this, is the internet free and great now, with government regulation? yes it is. Ask yourself this same question in 20 years and tell me how the "free market" made the internet better. An internet structure that was largely created through government and taxpayer money, handed off to the private sector to milk dry as alllll theirs.
Huh....SPEECH IS AN ACTION...verbally, in art, etc, etc, etc, .....speech is express a multitude of ways...NO? Don't answer.
Thanks for that LONG fulfilling response. Anything else? I haven't got much time. Those 1 to 5 word replies and statements are extremely time consuming.
No you don't....... You own a server?
In a competition based market there will always be some entity that will offer you a better solution - or a better service that suit your needs (weather it is whatever you do)....
Corporations who even want to get into this business will be destroyed - I don't even see it as a viable risk - and that is what it is - a risk...
And involve little thought.
If you think cable and internet providers work in a free market situation, I've got a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to sell you.
It doesn't work that way at all.
Sure you can. There are any number of ways around local blocking and if you don't like what your ISP is doing, you can find another ISP. There are plenty around.
The government is not the only entity capable of surpressing free speech. Corperations have the ability to that too, albeit indirectly.
Because the Constitution doesn't guarantee a right to free speech across the board, it only guarantees that the government cannot stop you. You have no right to use another person's platform for your speech. There's this really bizarre idea that the 1st Amendment guarantees that no one, anywhere, for any reason, can stop you from saying whatever you want to say. It's ludicrous and entirely false.
Have some realistic expectations.
Good thing your problems with it now have stemmed from direct state involvement.
If a large number of people started dumping Verizon en masse and send a message for there part in this ruling, I think that would keep them & any of these ISP's from ever thinking on charging extra for content. I can live without there internet for a while, can they live without my dollar? The problem is you have morons that dont have a life & spend most of there time wasting away on the computer with porn, facebook, sports ect. for these E-zombies taking away there addiction would be like trying to keep a drug addict away from there drug so unfortunatly I doubt something like that would ever happen, people are mindless, I mean how did we get Obama anyway?
The average Joe isn't going to setup a VPN tunnel or anything else for that matter. Find another isp? So people can choose between 3 different companies that will all screw you. This is the whole trick with "choice" and "competition". If the entire market is dominated by large corporations its just a facade.Sure you can. There are any number of ways around local blocking and if you don't like what your ISP is doing, you can find another ISP. There are plenty around. I'm not saying that they should do it, I'm saying that it is a service they offer and you, as a consumer, decide if you want to pay for the service as they offer it or not. There is no right whatsoever to have an internet connection.
Where do you get the idea that you actually have a right to connect to the internet at all? It's a service. It's provided by companies. You either pay for that service or you do not. Now I agree with you, I'd much rather have a free and open internet but I don't pretend that I have a right to have it that way, or at all. I'm just being realistic. It's a free market. Let those who want to filter do so and I know who not to pay any money to.
So people can choose between 3 different companies that will all screw you,
Because of state intervention, sure.
Please don't start with this nonsense that if the government vanished it would fix all our problems and the private sector would self regulate. Learn U.S. history from the mid to late 1800's and learn everything you need to know about it.
Please don't start with this nonsense that if the government was just bigger it would fix all our problems. Learn U.S. history from the mid to late 1800's and learn everything you need to know about it
Not bigger, better. The reason the private sector wants to kill the government is so that they exercise absolute control with nothing to stop them. You really think that is preferable?
Except nothing helps a big corporation more than new regulations and laws that eliminate competition. And no, companies do not want to be the state.
So we have a choice. We can strive for good government and good private sector, OR we can strive for no government and bad private sector because you're worried about bad government and bad private sector.
But the government is not good, it is the government. Governments have killed hundreds of millions of people at the very least on purpose. And your false dichotomy is of course false.
You subscribe to the notion that government cannot be good.