• 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!

F.C.C. Announces Plan to Repeal Net Neutrality

Cardinal said:
Really. Walk us through that.
Click to expand...

The chairman of the FCC has explained it multiple times. In addition small market ISP's have expensive compliance reporting to now deal with and they have to field multiple unsolvable complaints because they are currently required to provide a minimum level of speed even to customers that they cannot get those speed levels to because trees and buildings block their reception.
 
Groogrux said:
Internet price-control is a Constitutional right? :lamo
Click to expand...

Freedom of opportunity is the most important freedom of all. All other rights, speech, religion, equal protection; they are all extensions of empowering individuals to act within a larger potential space.

Restricting this will have huge costs for individuals and small businesses. Literally all this does is open the floodgates for ISPs to unnecessarily harm consumers so that they can extract more income from them. We have absolutely nothing to gain by repealing net neutrality.

We're going to change the way this network operates. I know the technology, this is a phenomenally bad idea. From an engineering standpoint, it's wholly unethical. This will give corporate media giants even more ability to brainwash people. Right wingers should be scared ****less about this; oh wait, that's right, they don't care about media bias in their "favor".
 
RAMOSS said:
You are having some misinformation. It will have nothing to do with the internet service provider choices you have. It strictly has to do with the ISP's giving priority over their own content at the expense of what you really want.
Click to expand...

You are completely wrong. Perhaps you believe the million fake internet bots. That is what the people who can afford a million fake internet bots want so welcome to being pwned by Comcast. They appreciate your support of their market dominance.
 
backpacker said:
You are absolutely wrong. Maintaining Title II status for ISP's resulted in over $3B less infrastructure investment in broadband as soon as it was implemented.
Click to expand...

Provide links with proof please. Note that it must be causation type proof. Not correlation since correlation =/= causation.

Another thing to consider...why would so many ISP's be against NN if it would just consolidate their businesses by making it harder for new ISP's to come about?
 
Verax said:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/21/technology/fcc-net-neutrality.html



Absolutely nauseating. It looks like this is going to be it. I have this morbid curiosity of how this will play out. If they repeal NN and then begin exploiting their position people are going to freak the **** out.
Click to expand...

This is a good thing, get Govt out of it.

Technology will solve the speed problems. We are within a couple of years of all internet will be basically coming through cell towers, with every person having dozens of providers to choose from.

With the decentralized power and competition the internet will be freer, cheaper and better than anyone can imagine.

Without Govt NN type of regulations we would have had cell phones at least 20 years earlier and the tech would have been that much more advanced.

All theses regs do is protect the big dinosaur monopolies. It's usually the big corporate gatekeepers who use these regs to create monopolies.
 
backpacker said:
You are absolutely wrong. Maintaining Title II status for ISP's resulted in over $3B less infrastructure investment in broadband as soon as it was implemented.
Click to expand...

Post hoc ergo propter hoc.

$3B less infrastructure investment occurred... but net neutrality didn't cause it. Infrastructure rollouts were just completing as expected.
 
backpacker said:
It is the explicit statement of the FCC. Sorry if I exceeded your 144 character information capacity.
Click to expand...

Ajit Pai is a telcom propagandist. He came to the government from Verizon. The man is full of ****.

So, you want to tell me the government is telling the full truth and nothing but the truth? A telcom lobbyist turned administrator doesn't have the interests of telcoms at heart?
 
Casca XV said:
This is a good thing, get Govt out of it.

Technology will solve the speed problems. We are within a couple of years of all internet will be basically coming through cell towers, with every person having dozens of providers to choose from.

With the decentralized power and competition the internet will be freer, cheaper and better than anyone can imagine.

Without Govt NN type of regulations we would have had cell phones at least 20 years earlier and the tech would have been that much more advanced.

All theses regs do is protect the big dinosaur monopolies. It's usually the big corporate gatekeepers who use these regs to create monopolies.
Click to expand...

Why then is it the big corporate gatekeepers are the ones lobbying hardest and spending the most money pushing for the end of Net Neutrality?

For those 'conservatives' who believe in states rights, you might think about the fact that the proposed new regulations would ban states from passing their own versions of net neutrality.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom