Let me get this straight: nothing is broken right now, and therefore legislation to stop it from being broken in the future is... bad? Is that seriously what he's suggesting?
[deleted]
Plain and simple: Net neutrality is hypocrisy
11–20 of 28 posts
Re: Plain and simple: Net neutrality is hypocrisy
#12Let me get this straight: nothing is broken right now, and therefore legislation to stop it from being broken in the future is... bad? Is that seriously what he's suggesting?
Reminds me of the 2006 Bush Energy Policies.
Re: Plain and simple: Net neutrality is hypocrisy
#13I don't get his arguments ... it just seemed like one big REGULATION IS EVIL rant/FUD. Did I miss anything ?
Nope, you did not miss anything. There is not a single argument in the whole piece. But hey, what do you expect from a Republican? Hey, just got down voted by a Republican. That's a special honor. Keep it coming.
I don't think we should make this about elephant corporatist shills vs. donkey corporatist shills.
Re: Plain and simple: Net neutrality is hypocrisy
#14I don't get his arguments ... it just seemed like one big REGULATION IS EVIL rant/FUD. Did I miss anything ?
Let's put it a way a programmer would understand. Regulation is like generalization. Not enough of it is bad. Too much of it is also bad. What is the problem we're having that's in need of fixing? If you can't answer that question with concrete examples of problems we are having right now, that would be fixed by adding expensive lawyers and regulators, then it is an imaginary problem. Regulation is not necessary. Reg…
When faced with a prompt: "Input a number from 1 to 5", a tester asks "What if I put in 6?". One possible answer might be: "The program crashes."
In this situation, there is no problem with the program right now, only at some hypothetical point in the future when someone actually enters an invalid value.
Re: Plain and simple: Net neutrality is hypocrisy
#15Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think net neutrality legislation means what you think it means. government regulation with regards to ISP's is broken, thus stifling the competition that would ensure far more robust net neutrality than any legislated version. you don't stop monopolies from abusing their powers by legislating that they play fair. you take away the governmental protections that allow them to have a monopoly and let the market…
> you take away the governmental protections that allow them to have a monopoly and let the market consume them when they refuse to change their shitty business practices. How is that supposed to work? Have you ever heard of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_monopoly
no examples exist. the wikipedia example is terrible. epidemics were caused by something that had never existed up until that point? (water network) and because profit margins were too low? so you're going to tell me that a lack of running water caused widespread DEATH AND PESTILENCE and people still were going "nah, I think I'll wait for those water bills to drop some more"?
Re: Plain and simple: Net neutrality is hypocrisy
#16Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nope, you did not miss anything. There is not a single argument in the whole piece. But hey, what do you expect from a Republican? Hey, just got down voted by a Republican. That's a special honor. Keep it coming.
I don't think we should make this about elephant corporatist shills vs. donkey corporatist shills.
This comment is too smart for me (and added a new word to my english vocabulary). Care to elaborate on what you mean?
Re: Plain and simple: Net neutrality is hypocrisy
#17I don't get his arguments ... it just seemed like one big REGULATION IS EVIL rant/FUD. Did I miss anything ?
Let's put it a way a programmer would understand. Regulation is like generalization. Not enough of it is bad. Too much of it is also bad. What is the problem we're having that's in need of fixing? If you can't answer that question with concrete examples of problems we are having right now, that would be fixed by adding expensive lawyers and regulators, then it is an imaginary problem. Regulation is not necessary. Reg…
regulation is like optimization ... can be the root of all evil if done prematurely... or necessary to do useful work.
(I would add - the problem that exists right now is companies like Comcast want to start taxing companies like Netflix and Google)
Re: Plain and simple: Net neutrality is hypocrisy
#18The thing is, in most locations broadband is a monopoly.
Show me the competition, innovation, and capital investment in the last mile, and I'll consider your argument that regulation will stifle innovation, competition, and capital investment.
Netflix is a good example... show me that even with all your advantages and investment in view on demand, you were able to deliver a customer experience as good as Netflix, and I'll consider your argument that you should help determine what services to offer and how to charge for them.
Re: Plain and simple: Net neutrality is hypocrisy
#19I know this is ad hominem, but Robert McDowell is one of many corporate lobbyists appointed by Bush to undermine a federal agency.
It's not ad hominem; it's good to know sources, especially with an opinion piece like this.
It certainly is ad hominem.
- attacking an opponent's character rather than answering his argument. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ad+hominem
It's also hard to see how it is relevant.
Re: Plain and simple: Net neutrality is hypocrisy
#20Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think we should make this about elephant corporatist shills vs. donkey corporatist shills.
This comment is too smart for me (and added a new word to my english vocabulary). Care to elaborate on what you mean?
After most elected Republicans and Democrats voted for EESA in 2008 (against the wishes of their constituents by 100:1 or more) and after Bush's PATRIOT Act and Obama's decision to renew it, it should be apparent that the major political parties are functionally identical and not interested in their voters.
Dividing people along party lines distracts from the issues while changing nothing. The issue here is net neutrality.