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.
False! This has nothing to do with so-called, "net neutrality," which has nothing to do with keeping the Internet free and open, but instead is all about government control.
Managed to nail it with several incorrect statements that betray your misunderstanding of the topic in two short sentences. Well done!
The President made no "mistake." He was right to end this scam that was sold to the American people by Barack Obama as the "savior" of the Internet.
The scam you are referring to is how th internet has operated since it began, the Obama era rules only formalized what was long standing policy. The OP is making a very good point, how long before the ISP's are being pressured to drop requests forhis sites into a blackhole?
Last edited by thecoalman; 08-08-2018 at 04:39 AM..
This is best explanation that I have come up with for net neutrality. Let's suppose your ISP was a water company. Under NN they could charge you by the volume of water, they could charge based on the water pressure or they could charge you based on combination of the two. They could also offer you hundreds of different plans for different volumes and pressures with or without limitations. There is no requirement for them to offer different plans so if your ISP did not offer them it's simply because they chose not to.
Let's suppose video content services were a Maytag washer. If you wanted to use a Maytag washer you would be required to purchase a plan that could handle the volume and pressure required to operate this appliance. If the Maytag washer sucks because it only operates at low volumes and pressures purchasing a better plan isn't going to magically make it work it better. If GE offers a better washer that does operate at higher volumes and pressures as long as the plan you have purchased from your ISP supports it you can take advantage of that.
What the ISP would not be able to do is lower the pressure/volume of water being consumed by your Maytag washer in favor of the GE model nor would GE be able to pay the ISP to favor their washer The ISP could even sell you their own washer if they wanted but it could not be favored over the Maytag and GE models. In other words whatever pressure or volume you are paying for will be equally available all three washers.
The US government created the internet. We owned it. Sadly, not anymore. The free market solution doesn’t work for everything, for the same reason communism does not work. Human nature. Greed, specifically.
But sometimes we all work together. It used to be called American exceptionalism.
In every economic theory that is the one variable that is always left out. Human nature.
The post office runs just fine, Public education is based on the individual districts, for every bad high school in the news, there is some public high school in New York city sending 90% of their graduating class to college.
2 problems with the healthcare site argument.
1. The site was built by people, not the "government", the people screwed up, all of which were website designers and should have been capable of doing their job.
2. The website works fine now, negating your argument entirely.
I dont think you know how ISPs or the NSA works based on that paragraph, LOL
ISPs store data. if the NSA wants your info, they can get it.
"The post office runs just fine," a lot of it is contracted out.
This is best explanation that I have come up with for net neutrality. Let's suppose your ISP was a water company. Under NN they could charge you by the volume of water, they could charge based on the water pressure or they could charge you based on combination of the two. They could also offer you hundreds of different plans for different volumes and pressures with or without limitations. There is no requirement for them to offer different plans so if your ISP did not offer them it's simply because they chose not to.
Let's suppose video content services were a Maytag washer. If you wanted to use a Maytag washer you would be required to purchase a plan that could handle the volume and pressure required to operate this appliance. If the Maytag washer sucks because it only operates at low volumes and pressures purchasing a better plan isn't going to magically make it work it better. If GE offers a better washer that does operate at higher volumes and pressures as long as the plan you have purchased from your ISP supports it you can take advantage of that.
What the ISP would not be able to do is lower the pressure/volume of water being consumed by your Maytag washer in favor of the GE model nor would GE be able to pay the ISP to favor their washer The ISP could even sell you their own washer if they wanted but it could not be favored over the Maytag and GE models. In other words whatever pressure or volume you are paying for will be equally available all three washers.
Too complicated.
Net Neutrality is as if there were a Maytag store, and just down the road, a Whirlpool Store. Let's say that you have to take the highway (the internet) to get to one of those stores to buy your washer. If the highway company suddenly had interest in Maytag, without Net Neutrality, they could put up a toll-booth to exit to the Whirlpool store, but no toll to exit to Maytag, thus exerting economic control over which products you are able to consume.
In the Alex Jones case: Youtube as a private (publicly owned, but private because it is not government) company can decide to remove his videos, that is their choice. But Alex Jones can host them elsewhere, or host them himself. With Net Neutrality, that right is protected, so all the ignorant bigots of the world who support him can get their red meat, as they should be allowed and protected to do. Without Net Neutrality, Comcast, Spectrum and/or other ISP's (many of whom are the only option in a given area) can decide to throttle ANY site who hosts Alex Jones' material to such a slow speed that it is not accessible. This restricts people's ability to consume his vitriol on a wholesale level, which is not OK (even though I hate it, it's protected).
NN is not the government picking who can get what. It's the exact opposite. It is the government insuring that it doesn't happen. If you go back to the Maytag example, the government's role is not to decide whether you can go to Maytag or Whirlpool. Their role is (ONLY) to make sure that nobody puts up any toll-booths, so you get to decide based on who offers the better products and services.
(I just made that one up. I think it's actually a pretty good metaphor, no?)
False! This has nothing to do with so-called, "net neutrality," which has nothing to do with keeping the Internet free and open, but instead is all about government control.
I don't see how you can be against Net Neutrality and still support Alex Jones being on youtube, sounds like you're choosing both sides in an argument. I don't see a problem with companies banning someone for obvious reasons but to allow them to pick and choose winners is another story,
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.
