91–100 of 150 posts
"would need a bare majority in both the Senate and the House, as well as the president’s signature" "We don’t know how this is going to end...." They know very well how it will end. This is an effort to get ammo for the primaries.
Well any representative that votes No puts themselves fair and square in the parliament of whores.
> Reddit, Tumblr, Etsy and other sites have put up Red Alert banners as part of a day of action to drive petitions in support of the resolution. This is being seriously mismanaged, and that may actually cause long term harm to the chances of saving (or restoring) net neutrality. The big mistake being made is not explaining where the Congressional Review Act (CRA) approach fits into the bigger picture. There are sever…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Healthcare? Name me one country with free-market healthcare. I'll wait. Also, your friend chose to live in that house, along with all the regulations that came with it. Spare us the sob story. You clearly don't understand why NN was put in place. All the telcos were prioritizing content, taking advantage of their monopoly power. Starting a telco is serious work, and that isn't simply due to government regulation. Try…
Veterinary care. Cheap, quick, high quality...free market and unregulated
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> They should take a look at FOSTA if they want to know what government controlling the internet really looks like. Unfortunately, that's not a winning argument from a rhetorical perspective. Almost every single person in both the House and the Senate, of both parties, voted for FOSTA/SESTA. FOSTA and SESTA are truly abominable bills. They're arguably the most anti-gay bills passed at the federal level since DOMA in…
I made no mention of it 'not being as bad' as other bills. I stand by my statement. Net Neutrality is government regulating ISPs. ISPs are not the internet. And I think it could convert those in the anti camp. Some are against Net Neutrality because they see it as government control of the internet (it is not). They need to recognize that FOSTA is directly what they perceive Net Neutrality to be (at least in terms of…
As someone who's fairly active around both issues, trust me when I say that all this will do is solidify their opposition to net neutrality, and in the worst case, strengthen their support of FOSTA/SESTA.
No, it's not consistent. But it's also not a line of reasoning that will work with opponents of net neutrality. Politics isn't always cut and dry the way we might wish.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So you’d obviously want to ensure net neutrality then?
Net neutrality is literally constraint on how data passing through networks can be routed and shaped. It’s exactly “constraining the Internet”. It’s not “freedom” in any shape or matter. Freedom is never constraint on others. It’s a popular constraint, and people just happen to confuse and conflate “things I like/feel positivity about” and “freedom”. It’s controversial to say here but I don’t think it gets discussed…
That's arguing that opposition to putting a dam in a river to alter its natural course is a constraint, because it constrains the placement of dams.
> Net neutrality only really helps established players.
Good for them. For once they're on the right side of an argument.
> Unestablished unpopular players are not the ones getting throttled.
How is that an argument in favour of anyone getting throttled at the whim of the ISPs?
> The one who would be getting throttled is primarily Netflix, who literally uses over half of the bandwidth of the Internet.
Once again: good for them. On the provider side: if bandwidth is a scarcity, data plan prices should reflect that. No need to give them the power to ghettoise the Internet.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well any representative that votes No puts themselves fair and square in the parliament of whores.
[flagged]
Why are people here so pro-net neutrality? I don't have NN in Europe and I'm happy: because of it, I enjoy zero-rated services at a fair price.
What people are worried about is when the ISP's get to play kingmaker about which services will get deals and which will not. The cable TV providers are among the most hated companies in the US for a reason, and those are the only broadband ISP's available to most Americans.
Zero-rating as we fear it is just another way to let them impose arbitrary and capricious costs on their customers.
> Reddit, Tumblr, Etsy and other sites have put up Red Alert banners as part of a day of action to drive petitions in support of the resolution. I get the feeling that these sites are just 'preaching to the choir' (i.e. their customers already support these things, and most likely have let their 'representative' know). Is anyone doing anything to give the 50 senators who are against this a taste of what is to come? I…
Not to introduce flame bait but one of the reasons the NRA is powerful is the ability to quickly motivate their very vocal members.
Many gun owners are very good intentioned patriots, solid, hard-working Americans. However, the group is extremely diverse and intelligence follows the bell curve. Most don't understand how government works, refuse to fight the way the left fights (dirty) and allow themselves to become corrupted by the fight. Were it not like that, the movement would tear government to pieces and totally reform it. That may be about to happen anyways, but not through them. You have no idea what sleeping giants live out there.
Quite simply put, the NRA is often more a controlled opposition that the real power behind the movement and that guns stand in for freedom/liberty which is what it is all about. True citizens have real rights with teeth. The kind of teeth that despots fear.
> Reddit, Tumblr, Etsy and other sites have put up Red Alert banners as part of a day of action to drive petitions in support of the resolution. This is being seriously mismanaged, and that may actually cause long term harm to the chances of saving (or restoring) net neutrality. The big mistake being made is not explaining where the Congressional Review Act (CRA) approach fits into the bigger picture. There are sever…
How do you convince network giants like IBM, Intel, Cisco, Nokia, Qualcomm, Broadcom, Juniper, D-Link, among others, that net neutrality regulations are a bad idea? They currently support what Ajit Pai is doing. They have even have gone as far as crediting his repeals for greater investment into their network infrastructure.
Except maybe for a PR tidal wave so huge that anyone who opposes net neutrality is driven out of business, I don't see how you convince companies to go against their own interests.
I am firmly opposed to "Net Neutrality". Literally everything the government regulates becomes a mess and a boondoggle. Health care, housing, and pensions all the way down to city building codes (I have a friend who needs to replace her windows in San Francisco, and the city government has decreed that they can only use wooden frame windows because of the aesthetics, even though they are more than twice as expensive)…
I don't think the FDA has turned healthcare into a boondoggle, especially since incidents like Thalidomide have revealed why the pharma industry must follow a compliance framework for R&D. I don't think the USDA has turned agriculture or consumer food into a boondoggle. The Jungle is still a gripping read today, because the conditions of unregulated meatpacking factories were unbelievably grotesque, beyond the absolu…