- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Net neutrality devil's advocate
Posted on 7/13/17 at 2:08 pm to mindbreaker
Posted on 7/13/17 at 2:08 pm to mindbreaker
quote:
tell me again how competition is just going to "POP UP" when a company with nearly unlimited resources is having to fight every step of the way to get their network up.
I keep wondering that myself? Or even weirder, if it's not an issue of collusion between the few big players, why are each of them not available in all big cities?
Is there a city in America that you can choose between Cox, Comcast, Time-Warner, and Charter? if so...where is it? If not, why not?
Because of it was simply as easy as another company rolling in and offering better service, you'd think cable companies would look like this...right? One corner you'd have Comcast, the other Time-Warner...the other Cox, etc.
ETA: So some assclown downvoted my post, but no one provided a city that has access to all the major cable/internet providers. Which city is this?
And I'll ask again...if not even the largest markets in the nation have access to Comcast AND Time-Warner AND Cox AND Charter AND AT&T fiber...why? do these companies not like money? surely, like fast food restaurants, they'd want to go where the customers are and compete for every dollar available...right?
This post was edited on 7/13/17 at 2:52 pm
1
Posted on 7/13/17 at 2:41 pm to DrSteveBrule
Certain companies are attempting to privatize the internet.
Posted on 7/13/17 at 3:48 pm to GeauxTigerTM
quote:
Because of it was simply as easy as another company rolling in and offering better service, you'd think cable companies would look like this...right? One corner you'd have Comcast, the other Time-Warner...the other Cox, etc.
This.
It's almost mind blowing to think that there are people out there who believe that regulation is what is keeping new companies from starting. Or that these telecom companies will actually compete with each other. I guess you can make that argument if you just want to ignore mountains of evidence to the contrary.
I asked 3 times in yesterday's thread for someone to point out, specifically, what about the current regulatory framework harms the consumer, or will begin to harm the consumer if not changed. No one could give an answer.
Posted on 7/13/17 at 3:50 pm to JohnnyKilroy
quote:
asked 3 times in yesterday's thread for someone to point out, specifically, what about the current regulatory framework harms the consumer, or will begin to harm the consumer if not changed. No one could give an answer.
Regulation is bad, it hurts consumers and makes things bad. What don't you understand about that?
Posted on 7/13/17 at 4:34 pm to CCTider
quote:
CCTider
nailed it.
Posted on 7/13/17 at 4:51 pm to JohnnyKilroy
quote:
asked 3 times in yesterday's thread for someone to point out, specifically, what about the current regulatory framework harms the consumer, or will begin to harm the consumer if not changed. No one could give an answer.
Nothing.
It limits the ability for ISPs to make potential profit. Which, you know, is sort of legislating against the ISPs.
Posted on 7/14/17 at 9:40 am to fightin tigers
quote:
Nothing.
It limits the ability for ISPs to make potential profit. Which, you know, is sort of legislating against the ISPs.
There were multiple people in the previous thread who claimed NN will lead to harm to the consumer. I want to know how.
Posted on 4/26/24 at 10:15 am to DrSteveBrule
Net neutrality restored as FCC votes to regulate internet providers
quote:
The Federal Trade Commission on Thursday voted to restore “net neutrality” rules that prevent broadband internet providers such as Comcast and Verizon from favoring some sites and apps over others.
The move effectively reinstates a net neutrality order the commission first issued in 2015 during the Obama administration. In 2017, under then-President Donald Trump, the FCC repealed those rules.
How does everyone feel about this, now that we've had about 7 years without it?
Posted on 4/26/24 at 10:23 am to SUB
Feel the same way I did seven years ago. People are caught up in the pie in the sky theory of what net neutrality is and not really looking into what is trying to be done. Back 7 years ago, what was actually on the docket to be done would not achieve that "net neutrality" claim.
Likewise, when it went away, we didn't have the apocalyptic scenarios we were told the ISPs were going to do. The regulations they are wanting to implement, assuming they are the same as 7 years ago, are counter productive and like so many policies, hide behind some magnanimous name that gets people arguing over the theory of something instead of the actual policy.
Likewise, when it went away, we didn't have the apocalyptic scenarios we were told the ISPs were going to do. The regulations they are wanting to implement, assuming they are the same as 7 years ago, are counter productive and like so many policies, hide behind some magnanimous name that gets people arguing over the theory of something instead of the actual policy.
Posted on 4/26/24 at 10:45 am to fightin tigers
quote:
Because Reddit said it is evil.
I love it when folks on the one hand say net neutrality bad and there is no problem, then try in the same breath to say that their candidate is being misaligned because of big bad media/isp/data brokers censoring or manipulating the message to the masses which is also bad.
There can't be a problem and no problem simultaneously.
Posted on 4/26/24 at 10:51 am to NYNolaguy1
quote:
I love it when folks on the one hand say net neutrality bad and there is no problem, then try in the same breath to say that their candidate is being misaligned because of big bad media/isp/data brokers censoring or manipulating the message to the masses which is also bad.
There can't be a problem and no problem simultaneously.
This was a problem when "net neutrality" was in place as well. So, the problem isn't the existence of this net neutrality law, as it doesn't actually accomplish anything it actually claims to accomplish.
Posted on 4/26/24 at 11:33 am to GoCrazyAuburn
quote:
So, the problem isn't the existence of this net neutrality law, as it doesn't actually accomplish anything it actually claims to accomplish.
So who is making money, i.e. winning, with net neutrality?
Posted on 4/26/24 at 11:44 am to SUB
quote:
So who is making money, i.e. winning, with net neutrality?
the law or the concept?
Posted on 4/26/24 at 11:46 am to SUB
quote:
How does everyone feel about this, now that we've had about 7 years without it?
I'm philosophically pro net neutrality, but I like my free Max subscription and don't want it to go away as a result of this. Has anyone noticed any of the behaviors that there were concerns about if Net Neutrality went away? I remember at the time Netflix and cable ISPs seemed to be in a stealth throttling war, but I haven't seen any complaints like that in a long while.
Posted on 4/26/24 at 11:49 am to SUB
Imagine thinking it’s the ISPs who control what data is or is not allowed.
Posted on 4/26/24 at 12:38 pm to Centinel
Or how the laws proposed back then/I guess coming back now, would do anything to open up competition of access to different ISP's, when it is not the ISP's that control who you have access to 
Posted on 4/26/24 at 2:06 pm to DrSteveBrule
The government wants to regulate the internet so they can ban what they don't like instead of just asking their best friends at Meta/Google/Apple etc.
That's all NN is about.
That's all NN is about.
Posted on 4/26/24 at 2:10 pm to SlapahoeTribe
quote:
Hum... why don't we have TV neutrality? Why do I have to buy packages? Why can't I just tune to a specific channel and contract with that channel directly like I do with Netflix? Why does the cable company get to charge those channels for "fast lanes" (paired with the good packages)?
Back in early 2000’s there was an ala carte bill that was obviously voted down in congress l, because congress is corrupt and owned by lobbyists.
Posted on 4/26/24 at 2:10 pm to DrSteveBrule
All I know is the worst thing a woman can feel for you is neutrality. It is better to be hated by them than them being neutral. That means they are invested in you.
This post was edited on 4/26/24 at 2:11 pm
Posted on 4/26/24 at 3:49 pm to DrSteveBrule
Good god. The net neutrality dumbasses are back.
It’s very simple: do you want a huge new government bureaucracy to regulate the fricking internet? To solve a problem that doesn’t exist?
Political philosophy is definitely involved here.
If someone does something shitty and anti-competitive, the mechanism already exists to punish them through the FTC.
Gullible fricks
It’s very simple: do you want a huge new government bureaucracy to regulate the fricking internet? To solve a problem that doesn’t exist?
Political philosophy is definitely involved here.
If someone does something shitty and anti-competitive, the mechanism already exists to punish them through the FTC.
Gullible fricks
Page 12 of 13
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News