Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is a step towards censorship of political critics online. Another part of the proposal is to offer free high speed internet to those who can't afford it,...translation-increase cost for paying customers so internet providers can afford to give it to others for free. Nothing is free because someone has to pay.
Lol, did you really state, in a serious fashion, that Internet Providers couldn't afford something? Have you looked at the Income Statements for those Monopolies?! Yes, they are monopolies because they have been able to carve up this country into geographic regions where one cable company dominates.
It's sad that someone would rather be a shill for a monopoly than possibly agree with a President on the opposite side of the aisle.
Lol, did you really state, in a serious fashion, that Internet Providers couldn't afford something? Have you looked at the Income Statements for those Monopolies?! Yes, they are monopolies because they have been able to carve up this country into geographic regions where one cable company dominates.
It's sad that someone would rather be a shill for a monopoly than possibly agree with a President on the opposite side of the aisle.
What does it mean "providers can't afford". They could afford to triple the current internet speed to millions with little added expense. But sadly they may have to cut the bonuses to their top executives, (which I find shocking). These folks (the top exec) are hard workers, who made the right decisions (to rip off their customers). Following the latest Obama initiative, their bonus may be limited to $2.3M...
Sad, sad day for America.
Currently, anyone can get a website on the internet and, with few exceptions, address any issues and express any opinions. We call this freedom. How can government be anything but a limit on these freedoms? Rules and regulations don't expand freedom; they throttle it.
The internet is anything but broken. It needs no fixing of any kind except eliminating the ability of the government to shut down websites, record emails, etc.
The anointed ruler would love to silence those who oppose him. Since he took office he has worked ceaselessly to restrict freedom. He supports everything from gun control to secret arrest and indefinite imprisonment. He supports the right of the government to simply kill people. No rational individual trusts him.
Currently, anyone can get a website on the internet and, with few exceptions, address any issues and express any opinions. We call this freedom. How can government be anything but a limit on these freedoms? Rules and regulations don't expand freedom; they throttle it.
The internet is anything but broken. It needs no fixing of any kind except eliminating the ability of the government to shut down websites, record emails, etc.
The anointed ruler would love to silence those who oppose him. Since he took office he has worked ceaselessly to restrict freedom. He supports everything from gun control to secret arrest and indefinite imprisonment. He supports the right of the government to simply kill people. No rational individual trusts him.
You clearly need to read up on Net Neutrality, because it's evident that you don't understand the issue at hand.
Currently, anyone can get a website on the internet and, with few exceptions, address any issues and express any opinions. We call this freedom. How can government be anything but a limit on these freedoms? Rules and regulations don't expand freedom; they throttle it.
The internet is anything but broken. It needs no fixing of any kind except eliminating the ability of the government to shut down websites, record emails, etc.
The anointed ruler would love to silence those who oppose him. Since he took office he has worked ceaselessly to restrict freedom. He supports everything from gun control to secret arrest and indefinite imprisonment. He supports the right of the government to simply kill people. No rational individual trusts him.
Please do some research on Net Neutrality before attempting to speak/write about it
For crying out loud. Net neutrality is RIGHT. Don't worry about who is or isn't supporting it. Regulated Internet-- the opposite of Net neutrality-- only benefits mega-rich corporations and literally buries free expression.
Ask anyone you know with an IT technical background to explain why the Internet must stay neutral. This issue shouldn't be thrown in the usual partisan, fear-mongering, political spin cycle.
Net neutrality sounds like a very good thing. We want the internet to stay open to delivering all kinds of content and be open to all who use it. We don't want censorships or big companies to be able to take away our freedom. Why is this even up for discussion? Did someone just create a bill to take away our freedom of speech just to see if we'll fall for it? Down with censorship!
Let's state this very simply from the people who can't be bothered with educating themselves.
Net Neutrality is NOT about the government regulating the internet. I repeat, Net Neutrality IS NOT about the government regulating the internet. If you still believe it is, please go bang your head firmly against a wall until this concept seeps in.
Net Neutrality IS about the limiting powerful corporations' ability to regulate the internet. Net Neutrality IS about making sure that Comcast or Time Warner or Verizon or any of the other internet providers can't control what you do and see on the internet.
It is, but some folks have a knee jerk reaction whenever Obama's name is invoked. They'll always find some way to criticize. He could find the cure for cancer, and they would accuse him of an evil plot to put oncologists out of business.
Not knee jerk. Relying on experience. If Obama is for it, you can bet that it's a horrible idea. Just look at his track record.
For the record, getting government involved is NEVER a good idea. If they get their hands on it, it will be a disaster. Past history shows this time and again. And seriously, is anyone "suffering" because of the way it's being run by the free market now?
Not knee jerk. Relying on experience. If Obama is for it, you can bet that it's a horrible idea. Just look at his track record.
For the record, getting government involved is NEVER a good idea. If they get their hands on it, it will be a disaster. Past history shows this time and again. And seriously, is anyone "suffering" because of the way it's being run by the free market now?
Yep. Knee jerk.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
