• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Live feed to the FCC vote on Net Neutrality.

Interesting.

FYI, the C-Span feed is far more stable than the FCC feed.

Hmm.....the private sector option is working better than the public one.....
 
So there you go.

The internet is now a public utility.
 
Liberals can not be trusted with our freedoms...


Obama is a disaster
 
Well it was good while it lasted. :shrug:

The internet certainly isn't going to end but you can reasonably expect sites like this one to become highly regulated if they collect any revenue from web traffic or subscriptions.
 
Time will tell, however the goal here was to prevent content providers from creating unequal access to content producers, which was likely to happen. Sites like Netflix, Facebook, etc will have just as much access to the internet as everyone else.

If Comcast and other providers had their way, they would charge more for certain people to distribute their content than others. This would effectively capitalize the Internet instead of creating a free and equal internet.

Both sides of the argument have their ups and downs, but I'm siding with this decision. Internet should not be a right accessible to those with the most money. I don't trust content providers, Comcast has proven time and time again how willing they are to **** with their customers just because they can. I don't trust the FCC either. So it comes down to the lesser of evils here.
 
ISP providers are, themselves, a regulatory body because they can control who and what goes over their connections. This action by the FCC (assuming our idiot Congress doesn't overrule it) limits their control and helps new companies and ideas to have equal footing with the communication giants.

The fact that ISP's are so vehemently opposed to this decision should say it all.
 
The internet certainly isn't going to end but you can reasonably expect sites like this one to become highly regulated if they collect any revenue from web traffic or subscriptions.

exactly.... sadly this site will be changin'...like so many others
 
The internet certainly isn't going to end but you can reasonably expect sites like this one to become highly regulated if they collect any revenue from web traffic or subscriptions.

Everyone scrub your posts. Big brother is now regulating the internet!

:2razz:
 
Time will tell, however the goal here was to prevent content providers from creating unequal access to content producers, which was likely to happen. Sites like Netflix, Facebook, etc will have just as much access to the internet as everyone else.

If Comcast and other providers had their way, they would charge more for certain people to distribute their content than others. This would effectively capitalize the Internet instead of creating a free and equal internet.

Both sides of the argument have their ups and downs, but I'm siding with this decision. Internet should not be a right accessible to those with the most money. I don't trust content providers, Comcast has proven time and time again how willing they are to **** with their customers just because they can. I don't trust the FCC either. So it comes down to the lesser of evils here.

time just told us its going to be ruined.. and you will charged differently by content now.. it will up wildly in what you will pay in taxes and fees along with tons of content dissappearing..

tell me again how it got improved?

much like healthcare it was better befor Obama..and this is a raping of our freedoms
 
I think the saddest thing is that in this day and age where it is becoming more of a concern of how to move info using Wifi, and companies appearing to answer that question, they may not have a spot with these new rules. Small companies will not prosper in this new environment.
 
For me the fact that access to the Internet is throttled, prohibits growth of emerging tech, but also costs us a lot of money. The United States doesn't even rank in the top 20 in Internet speed. The real question is why does the idea of regulated Internet spook people off? When the current providers already provide ****ty service at a premium price.
 
time just told us its going to be ruined.. and you will charged differently by content now.. it will up wildly in what you will pay in taxes and fees along with tons of content dissappearing..

tell me again how it got improved?

much like healthcare it was better befor Obama..and this is a raping of our freedoms

Again, this decision is not a political or partisan decision. The fact that the biggest proponents of this decision like Ted Cruz receive insane campaign contributions from Comcast should say something. It is, was, and always will be able money. Unregulated access to the internet benefits everyone.
 
Time will tell, however the goal here was to prevent content providers from creating unequal access to content producers, which was likely to happen. Sites like Netflix, Facebook, etc will have just as much access to the internet as everyone else.

If Comcast and other providers had their way, they would charge more for certain people to distribute their content than others. This would effectively capitalize the Internet instead of creating a free and equal internet.

Both sides of the argument have their ups and downs, but I'm siding with this decision. Internet should not be a right accessible to those with the most money. I don't trust content providers, Comcast has proven time and time again how willing they are to **** with their customers just because they can. I don't trust the FCC either. So it comes down to the lesser of evils here.

According to which authoritarian head case?
 
Again, this decision is not a political or partisan decision. The fact that the biggest proponents of this decision like Ted Cruz receive insane campaign contributions from Comcast should say something. It is, was, and always will be able money. Unregulated access to the internet benefits everyone.


its not regulated today... this is a witch hunt to take our freedoms..
 
How long should I hold onto some of the comments in this thread predicting regulation of this site before I can bring them back up and show them to the chicken littles?
 
time just told us its going to be ruined.. and you will charged differently by content now.. it will up wildly in what you will pay in taxes and fees along with tons of content dissappearing..

tell me again how it got improved?

much like healthcare it was better befor Obama..and this is a raping of our freedoms

Actually being charged differently by content will be specifically prohibited. Thanks for playing.
 
ISP providers are, themselves, a regulatory body because they can control who and what goes over their connections. This action by the FCC (assuming our idiot Congress doesn't overrule it) limits their control and helps new companies and ideas to have equal footing with the communication giants.

The fact that ISP's are so vehemently opposed to this decision should say it all.

Because all corporations are evil and all government is good?

We don't even know what got voted on today except that it is a huge piece of regulation of an industry that has absolutely exploded over the past two decades primarily because it was free and relatively unregulated. We also know that the reason given for the "need" to regulate it was, specifically, that freedom which had allowed it to expand.

Why is it that liberals hate freedom so much?
 
Actually being charged differently by content will be specifically prohibited. Thanks for playing.

sure... its called symantics.. and not getting what you want ...
 
Because all corporations are evil and all government is good?

We don't even know what got voted on today except that it is a huge piece of regulation of an industry that has absolutely exploded over the past two decades primarily because it was free and relatively unregulated. We also know that the reason given for the "need" to regulate it was, specifically, that freedom which had allowed it to expand.

Why is it that liberals hate freedom so much?


becasue they feel they are the overlords and we need to all be "equal peons"...
 
Back
Top Bottom