[flagged]
FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules
301–310 of 598 posts
Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules
#302Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is sort of a democrat neolib explanation that's only possible if you ignore the corrupting effects of capitalism and the unending class struggle between workers and capital, regardless of party. The GOP isn't some weird guys who can't govern, but an incredibly powerful group that works almost exclusively for the capital owning class and uses social issues to empower that class. The GOP caters a bit to the worker…
>The only real fix is [...] socialism And that would be a first, because no one has tried "real socialism"(tm) before, right?
This time around it will work! You just wait and see!
Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules
#303I'm fully in support of net neutrality, but I'm somewhat surprised they're restoring it, as I have not really heard a peep about it since it was repealed in the first place. From my perspective, nothing about the internet changed since then (my experience did not upgrade or downgrade). People stopped talking about it, there weren't major protests, news about it even largely disappeared from the front page of HN (!).…
The proponents of net neutrality thought without it ISPs would just arbitrarily block data and require bribes from data providers to even serve up their data. In reality, no net neutrality would mean things like Netflix not counting as data on your mobile plan through some kind of sponsorship, or free basic internet like Wikipedia and news at a lower cost. I don't support legislation that bans something undertaken vo…
> and the last few years have proven that we don't need this legislation.
Given that large states like California and New York passed independent net neutrality laws and there were continuing legal battles in almost half of all US states I don't think you can draw many conclusions. ISP behavior very likely never changed because they knew they were just one decision away from having to comply. Sort of proven by this very decision we're commenting on.
Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules
#304This flip-flopping happens because there is no commonality to find. One of the only (effectively) two major political parties of the United States is completely uninterested in governing. They have no policy. They have no plan for governing; they don't like governing. Their only goal is the piecemeal selloff of government powers to the highest bidder, and they convince their stalwart followers of this by making sure…
This comment isn't directed at OP, it's directed at anyone reading this who might be tempted to get swept up in OP's stereotypes without thinking critically about them. I'm writing this as a left-leaning moderate who grew up among staunch conservatives and understands their philosophy very well. Conservatives sincerely believe that government bureaucracies are less efficient than a free market economy. That's not a c…
Republicans either want the suffering directly, or - what is most often the case - they want the system that guarantees that suffering will happen, and will refuse any alternative whatsoever out-of-hand.
My parents don't want trans people to suffer: they want trans people to find happiness through the impossible avenue of just not being trans anymore. My parents don't want illegal immigrants to be incarcerated or murdered by border authorities: they want illegal immigrants to find liberty through the impossible process that is just becoming a legal immigrant, or living peacefully in whichever failed country they were born. My parents don't want people with substance abuse disorders to live and die on the streets: they want people with substance abuse disorders to overcome them through the impossible avenue of simply curing their own addiction without any outside support, safety, or encouragement whatsoever.
I cannot convince them that any of this is the case. On the other hand, people like Tucker Carlson, Rush Limbaugh, and Glen Beck can convince them of just about anything. Why? Because right-wing talking heads have a foot in the door: belief. They abuse every belief that a conservative holds dear, and turn it into engagement. Critical thought has no air to breathe in a world made of belief.
It doesn't matter what people want. It matters what people do.
Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules
#305This flip-flopping happens because there is no commonality to find. One of the only (effectively) two major political parties of the United States is completely uninterested in governing. They have no policy. They have no plan for governing; they don't like governing. Their only goal is the piecemeal selloff of government powers to the highest bidder, and they convince their stalwart followers of this by making sure…
I have to disagree that the Republicans do not have a plan. They have a very clear and public plan: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_2025 Yes, they spend a lot of energy on obstructing the government from functioning, and creating a naked kleptocracy to use the government to funnel money into their own pockets. But they are also moving openly towards a fascist dictatorship with very specific ideas about how soci…
I'd argue that they planned:
1. Installing a conservative super-majority to the Supreme Court. [Criminalized abortion in half the US. Blocked student loan relief. Gutted voting rights. Environmental protections. Health mandates. Firearm restrictions.]
2. Indiscriminate obstruction. [Months of crucial Ukraine aid. Blocked voting rights bill. Immigration reform. Firearm safety. Tax relief.]
It's honestly difficult to pick the Greatest Hits, given how much damage they've done.
Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules
#306Earlier quoted context omitted.
> (faster if Trump gets another term). I didn't keep track and don't have a good list, but a guess is that Trump did push through a lot of regulatory changes. If the media would publish a well documented list ...!! From all I've seen, I like Trump, but apparently a lot of people don't. I wonder where am I going wrong. Why do some people not like him? A guess is the now old collection of video clips from the MSM (main…
Kindly read or listen to any long-form work by Sarah Kendzior. But I don't know if the statement you quoted is correct either. Trump isn't the politician who has people tracking their stock trades because they so consistently outperform the market (that would be legislators, including Democrats, who trade on insider information, but face no consequences because the arbiters of such judgment are... themselves). Unfort…
> Kindly read or listen to any long-form work by Sarah Kendzior.
This is the first I've heard of her. So, just did a Google search on her: She has written a lot of stories for the "news" on a lot of subjects. Maybe ~10% of the stories are about Trump.
There were some lists of story titles with URLs, but the URLs didn't point to the stories -- apparently were old and now broken.
Her stories on Trump I could find didn't seem like they were on important issues. Then I saw her story on the "Russia" issue. Sorry, I long ago concluded that Trump did nothing wrong and, instead, the whole Russia Gate issue was a cooked up, made up, pile of nonsense trying to get Trump.
Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules
#307Earlier quoted context omitted.
if you're just halfway serious, perhaps its time to seek some medical help
That’s a bit of an extreme comment “seeking medical help” but to be fair I’m only aware of the “to 1953” legislation and not the additional “to 1853” legislation.
Are you aware that Arizona recently reinstated an abortion ban from 1864?
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/09/us/arizona-abortion-ban.h...
Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules
#308This flip-flopping happens because there is no commonality to find. One of the only (effectively) two major political parties of the United States is completely uninterested in governing. They have no policy. They have no plan for governing; they don't like governing. Their only goal is the piecemeal selloff of government powers to the highest bidder, and they convince their stalwart followers of this by making sure…
[deleted]
Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules
#309Earlier quoted context omitted.
This comment isn't directed at OP, it's directed at anyone reading this who might be tempted to get swept up in OP's stereotypes without thinking critically about them. I'm writing this as a left-leaning moderate who grew up among staunch conservatives and understands their philosophy very well. Conservatives sincerely believe that government bureaucracies are less efficient than a free market economy. That's not a c…
Part of the reason liberals hate conservatives and vice versa is that they think the government is actually representing their opponents. The reality is that influence is severely concentrated on every "side," and things that average people believe are only used to justify actions that a truly influential coalition wants to take. Your disagreeable family relations are as powerless to get a new issue introduced as you…
On the contrary: most liberals (or anyone else who doesn't identify as a [neo]conservative) are painfully aware that the democratic party is failing to represent them. We just know that that failure is less damaging than what the Republican party is up to.
The Republican party is the party of unification and engagement. The Democratic party is the tent for everyone else. The presence of the former demands the existence of the latter.
Re: FCC votes to restore net neutrality rules
#310> Safeguard National Security – The Commission will have the ability to revoke the authorizations of foreign-owned entities who pose a threat to national security to operate broadband networks in the U.S. The Commission has previously exercised this authority under section 214 of the Communications Act to revoke the operating authorities of four Chinese state-owned carriers to provide voice services in the U.S. Any p…
> That seems rather vague. The timing is also rather interesting, given the forced divestiture of TikTok. This is just a press release. The actual decision is more than 400 pages long and will come out in the next few days. Here's the draft of the order released three weeks ago: https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-401676A1.pdf (Of course, parts of this will inevitably be vague as well.) The timing is almost c…
I'm not sure that's the order itself or just a very detailed "fact sheet" about the orde. It seems like it references the content of the order in great detail, allowing someone to figure it out, but I don't see the raw text of the rule there unless I just don't understand what FCC rules look like. I read a lot of FTC rules and court documents, but this the first time I'm looking for the full text of something the FCC voted on or was something close to it (like an earlier version of the exact document they voted on).