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.
I say dont touch the internet period. We all know we like porn and shopping and information not filtered. ... Freedom.. once they try anything sneaky they will hear about it. Why because giving us ALL freedom and taking it away will actually make us revolt.
It is the conservatives and republicans who are advocating for the fed NOT to mess with the internet under the guise of "prohibiting censorship", when infact it opens up the feds to regulate (and censor) the internet however they feel fit.
Many of the people here who support the FCC and net neutrality are the same ones who typically put alot of faith in the government to do no wrong.
I mean, has it ever really been an issue that an ISP has censored things people have tried to do? This is just another instance of the FCC pulling a power grab on an entire segment of society, the virtual world, that we don't need them pulling on.
Net Neutrality is nothing more than the feds prohibitting and regulating ISPs, which once done, will give the FCC jurisdiction of the Internet as a whole... something they have been drooling at the mouths for awhile about.
They are in a wolves suit right now. Don't open the door.
Do you think these guys may have a bit of an idea about how this Internet thing works?
Quote:
I mean, has it ever really been an issue that an ISP has censored things people have tried to do?
Sure. Cox tried their best to throttle BitTorrent users. Now, I'm not particularly enamored of BitTorrent, but it's sure as all out not an ISP's job to decide what traffic their customers should be allowed to get.
Quote:
This is just another instance of the FCC pulling a power grab on an entire segment of society, the virtual world, that we don't need them pulling on.
You think the carriers want to self-regulate? That's - incredibly naive. They'd freakin' love to sell tiered access. They'd love auctioning off priority traffic even more.
Quote:
Net Neutrality is nothing more than the feds prohibitting and regulating ISPs, which once done, will give the FCC jurisdiction of the Internet as a whole... something they have been drooling at the mouths for awhile about.
As I said above, two possible viewpoints. You chose - poorly. I think I'll agree with the CEO of Google, if you don't mind.
Quote:
They are in a wolves suit right now. Don't open the door.
What McInsane? Stifle innovation?? That's the very thing net neutrality protects you idiot! Though I wouldn't expect you to get that since you still haven't figured out how to turn ON a computer.
Beck you kinda take pity on; he has been in character since auditioning for Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four screen adaptation, but ostensibly didn't get the rejection letter a number of years ago...
These two should write a book entitled: Douche-bag as a lifestyle
There are two sides to every story.....the problem with your link is that it only states one side. The author is in favor of it and basically explains that those that oppose it, just don't what they're talking about.....that's not the other side of the story.
BTW, you really discredit your self when you show you can't state your opinion without it being insulting....there's really no reason for that. You only wrote a few sentences and even with that, they're all sarcastic and insulting. Before people even look at your link, you're just letting them know that you're biased.
I am so glad this dinosaur didn't win the election!
McCain introduces bill to block Net neutrality | Raw Story (http://rawstory.com/2009/10/mccain-net-neutrality/ - broken link)
Quote:
Republican strategy is to paint Net neutrality as government 'control' of Internet
Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) introduced a bill in the Senate on Thursday that would effectively allow Internet service providers to slow down or block Internet content or applications of their choosing.
The move came the same day as the federal government decided to move forward on an official Net neutrality policy that would prevent ISPs from making those types of decisions.
I am so glad this dinosaur didn't win the election!
McCain introduces bill to block Net neutrality | Raw Story (http://rawstory.com/2009/10/mccain-net-neutrality/ - broken link)
There's really two sides here and everyone is talking about only one side. The sources that are in favor of it (like Amazon, Yahoo, You Tube, etc.) have everything to gain by it.....this is from the link you supplied:
The FCC's new rules would prevent ISPs, for example, from blocking or slowing bandwidth-hogging Web traffic such as streaming video or other applications that put a strain on their networks or from charging different rates to users.
Here's a quote from Verizon's CEO Ivan Seidenberg (the link to it follows the quote):
Seidenberg, speaking at the Supercomm trade show in Chicago, said that new regulations should be applied to telecom companies and Internet firms like Google equally, or else wireless and wireline operators would face unpalatable risks. "If we can't earn a return on the investment we make in broadband, our progress will be delayed," he said. Seidenberg also said that leaving Internet companies out while regulating telecom companies amounted to "analog ideas in a digital age."
Verizon, AT&T and Comcast have everything to lose from it....that's the jobs & innovation their talking about (the link to the quote follows below it):
-- "As the FCC's Broadband Task Force said recently, it could take $350 billion to build next-generation broadband across America, and most of that money will have to come from the private sector and companies like Comcast. We continue to hope that any rules adopted by the commission will not harm the investment and innovation that has made the Internet what it is today and that will make it even greater tomorrow." -- Statement from David Cohen, executive vice president at Comcast
The Internet neutrality that was always the intention and a necessity from the begining, was when we had 14.4 dial-up connections and no streaming videos from Internet sites like YouTube.
There's really two sides here and everyone is talking about only one side. The sources that are in favor of it (like Amazon, Yahoo, You Tube, etc.) have everything to gain by it.....this is from the link you supplied:
The FCC's new rules would prevent ISPs, for example, from blocking or slowing bandwidth-hogging Web traffic such as streaming video or other applications that put a strain on their networks or from charging different rates to users.
Here's a quote from Verizon's CEO Ivan Seidenberg (the link to it follows the quote):
Seidenberg, speaking at the Supercomm trade show in Chicago, said that new regulations should be applied to telecom companies and Internet firms like Google equally, or else wireless and wireline operators would face unpalatable risks. "If we can't earn a return on the investment we make in broadband, our progress will be delayed," he said. Seidenberg also said that leaving Internet companies out while regulating telecom companies amounted to "analog ideas in a digital age."
Verizon, AT&T and Comcast have everything to lose from it....that's the jobs & innovation their talking about (the link to the quote follows below it):
-- "As the FCC's Broadband Task Force said recently, it could take $350 billion to build next-generation broadband across America, and most of that money will have to come from the private sector and companies like Comcast. We continue to hope that any rules adopted by the commission will not harm the investment and innovation that has made the Internet what it is today and that will make it even greater tomorrow." -- Statement from David Cohen, executive vice president at Comcast
The Internet neutrality that was always the intention and a necessity from the begining, was when we had 14.4 dial-up connections and no streaming videos from Internet sites like YouTube.
Unfortunately you are trying to use common sense arguments with people that have no sense at all. Once again this is being twisted to fit peoples agenda.
Network neutrality (also net neutrality, Internet neutrality) is a principle proposed for residential broadband networks and potentially for all networks. A neutral broadband network is one that is free of restrictions on content, sites, or platforms, on the kinds of equipment that may be attached, and on the modes of communication allowed, as well as one where communication is not unreasonably degraded by other communication streams.
I am so glad this dinosaur didn't win the election!
McCain introduces bill to block Net neutrality | Raw Story (http://rawstory.com/2009/10/mccain-net-neutrality/ - broken link)
When biggest beneficiaries from blocking net neutrality are your major contributors, why not? At that point it simply doesn't matter what internet is (much less even a superficial understanding of net neutrality).
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.
If you're an Internet user, there are two possible viewpoints on NN:
