- 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
Marco Rubio on Net Neutrality: ‘This Is a Solution in Search of a Problem’
Posted on 7/12/17 at 6:06 pm
Posted on 7/12/17 at 6:06 pm
quote:
When asked whether he supports a larger or smaller role in the federal government regulating the internet, Rubio replied, “No, I don’t want the government regulating the internet.”
“What problem are they trying to fix?” he continued. “What is government regulation going to do to fix the Internet?”
“This is a solution in search of a problem. That’s what it is. There’s no problem here,” Rubio stated.
“I believe in a free Internet. I believe in a free Internet that is not regulated by government,” he reaffirmed.
LINK
Although this article is a year old Marco still stands by his comments on NN. Keep government away from everything especially a self stabilizing platform (not a public utility) such as the internet. Isn't it curious that all the leftists and liberals who try to shut down free expression except for what they narrowly define as acceptable all want NN? Ponder on that...
15
Posted on 7/12/17 at 6:08 pm to OleWarSkuleAlum
They don't want to fix squat
They want to control it all
They want to control it all
Posted on 7/12/17 at 6:16 pm to OleWarSkuleAlum
Marco finally gets something right.
Posted on 7/12/17 at 6:20 pm to OleWarSkuleAlum
Imagine liking Marco Rubio.
Posted on 7/12/17 at 7:10 pm to HailToTheChiz
(no message)
Posted on 7/12/17 at 7:11 pm to HailToTheChiz
quote:
They don't want to fix squat
They want to control it all
Of course the government has been overreaching for years. It's a good thing we have people like Marco fighting for us.
Posted on 7/12/17 at 7:14 pm to OleWarSkuleAlum
Obama supported net neutrality so this board will be against it. One of those times when they literally have no clue what they hate just that obama supported it so it's bad. I already have received 10X the solicitor calls since my damn info got sold. Y'all would absolutely hate not having net neutrality.
Posted on 7/12/17 at 7:15 pm to olddawg26
quote:
Obama supported net neutrality so this board will be against it. One of those times when they literally have no clue what they hate just that obama supported it so it's bad. I already have received 10X the solicitor calls since my damn info got sold. Y'all would absolutely hate not having net neutrality.
But think of the poor, struggling ISP's and all the money they are losing out on by not being able to legally extort internet companies and consumers that use them!
Posted on 7/12/17 at 7:19 pm to OleWarSkuleAlum
anyone against net neutrality simply doesnt understand it. they simply dont know what it is.
i fricking hate the government too, but the internet CANNOT be controlled by a small handful of private companies. it will destroy the internet as we know it, and that is not hyperbole.
i fricking hate the government too, but the internet CANNOT be controlled by a small handful of private companies. it will destroy the internet as we know it, and that is not hyperbole.
Posted on 7/12/17 at 7:20 pm to MastrShake
quote:
anyone against net neutrality simply doesnt understand it.
Yup
Posted on 7/12/17 at 7:49 pm to OleWarSkuleAlum
It's more complicated than Rubio is making it. I am as libertarian as the next guy, but I think there is a need to regulate the Comcasts, AT&T's and Verizons of the world. Ever wondered why Comcast caps your internet data to 300GB a month? Ever wondered why Comcast was caught lying back in 2008 about throttling certain protocols like Bit Torrent? Ever wonder why nothing ever happened to them for all their underhanded network throttling bullshite they have pulled?
Indeed, the big ISP's (more appropriately called Multiple-Systems Operators or MSO's) are a cartel. You want to talk about collusion? Well here's your collusion. These MSO's literally conspire with one another about pricing and exclusive geographical domains. For example, Comcast makes a deal with Cox and Charter that Comcast owns such-in-such area of the country and no other (cable provider) can move in. Comcast then lobbies Congress (federal and state) to pass laws giving them exclusive control over entire geographical areas. If you're a startup and you want to move in on Comcast or Cox or AT&T territory, too bad. Companies have tried in the past and been shut down through lawsuits.
Hell, Comcast even sues city governments for proposing municipal fiber to the home projects. Comcast and AT&T both "colluded" and sued the city of Nashville to stop Google's fiber-to-the-home initiative. What are Comcast and AT&T scared of? Yeah, they're scared of competition. Cartels don't like people moving in on their turf with a better drug that sells for less.
Comcast and the other MSO's have also sued local city governments for trying to start their own (government subsidized) fiber-optic networks. In some areas, you can get symmetrical 1 gigabit connections for about $40 a month thanks to tax-payer funded networks (which were voted on by the local residents). That's about the same price you would pay in most other first world countries where the Internet is not owned by cartels. Gigabit internet speeds has been the norm in Asia (South Korea, Japan) for over a decade as well as in some European countries. But here in the states, we got people on dial-up in 2017.
Bottom line: If ISP's were not natural monopolies, then there would be no need for regulation. The Comcasts of the world (who cap your data and throttle your Netflix) would go out of business and the "dumb pipe" common carrier providers would thrive. Sadly, in most areas you're stuck with your Comcast or your Cox and you have no choice but to bend over and take a fat one up the arse.
Indeed, the big ISP's (more appropriately called Multiple-Systems Operators or MSO's) are a cartel. You want to talk about collusion? Well here's your collusion. These MSO's literally conspire with one another about pricing and exclusive geographical domains. For example, Comcast makes a deal with Cox and Charter that Comcast owns such-in-such area of the country and no other (cable provider) can move in. Comcast then lobbies Congress (federal and state) to pass laws giving them exclusive control over entire geographical areas. If you're a startup and you want to move in on Comcast or Cox or AT&T territory, too bad. Companies have tried in the past and been shut down through lawsuits.
Hell, Comcast even sues city governments for proposing municipal fiber to the home projects. Comcast and AT&T both "colluded" and sued the city of Nashville to stop Google's fiber-to-the-home initiative. What are Comcast and AT&T scared of? Yeah, they're scared of competition. Cartels don't like people moving in on their turf with a better drug that sells for less.
Comcast and the other MSO's have also sued local city governments for trying to start their own (government subsidized) fiber-optic networks. In some areas, you can get symmetrical 1 gigabit connections for about $40 a month thanks to tax-payer funded networks (which were voted on by the local residents). That's about the same price you would pay in most other first world countries where the Internet is not owned by cartels. Gigabit internet speeds has been the norm in Asia (South Korea, Japan) for over a decade as well as in some European countries. But here in the states, we got people on dial-up in 2017.
Bottom line: If ISP's were not natural monopolies, then there would be no need for regulation. The Comcasts of the world (who cap your data and throttle your Netflix) would go out of business and the "dumb pipe" common carrier providers would thrive. Sadly, in most areas you're stuck with your Comcast or your Cox and you have no choice but to bend over and take a fat one up the arse.
Posted on 7/12/17 at 7:52 pm to OleWarSkuleAlum
There is nothing better than effete liberal people that pride themselves of being progressive wanting to regulate the internet based on laws written in 1934. 
Posted on 7/12/17 at 7:54 pm to MastrShake
quote:
fricking hate the government too, but the internet CANNOT be controlled by a small handful of private companies
you think ending profitability increases market participation by new entrants? 
Posted on 7/12/17 at 7:55 pm to Foy
quote:
Imagine liking Marco Rubio.
Now imagine he's white.
This post was edited on 7/12/17 at 7:59 pm
Posted on 7/12/17 at 7:56 pm to OleWarSkuleAlum
quote:
Of course the government has been overreaching for years. It's a good thing we have people like Marco fighting for us.
No. Keeping companies from bending us over is ok with me
Posted on 7/12/17 at 7:56 pm to AUstar
Sounds like you hate free markets. Why do you want to control speech through the government so badly?
Posted on 7/12/17 at 7:57 pm to AUstar
Good post. Muh regulation crowd misses the forest for the trees here.
Either break up the natural monopolies or add net neutrality laws.
Either break up the natural monopolies or add net neutrality laws.
This post was edited on 7/12/17 at 7:58 pm
Posted on 7/12/17 at 7:59 pm to OleWarSkuleAlum
Marco is 100% right on this one.
Posted on 7/12/17 at 8:04 pm to Ebbandflow
quote:You think the FCC will do that?
Keeping companies from bending us over is ok with me
Who do you think owns the commission?
Posted on 7/12/17 at 8:05 pm to OleWarSkuleAlum
It's greed. Plain and simple.
Page 1 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News