- 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: It's glorious watching reddit, libs, and cucks melt over NN repeal
Posted on 12/14/17 at 3:47 pm to GeorgeTheGreek
Posted on 12/14/17 at 3:47 pm to GeorgeTheGreek
I like how so much of the reasoning people give for being anti-NN has more to do with Obama, melts, and lib tearz than any substantive benefits of repealing NN.
Posted on 12/14/17 at 3:54 pm to CorporateTiger
quote:
I like how so much of the reasoning people give for being anti-NN has more to do with Obama, melts, and lib tearz than any substantive benefits of repealing NN.
less government involvement and a win for capitalism are substantive benefits
even if the NN repeal goes bad, it may make people do stuff in the real world that don't involve the internet. the horror
Posted on 12/14/17 at 3:54 pm to CorporateTiger
quote:
like how so much of the reasoning people give for being anti-NN has more to do with Obama, melts, and lib tearz
I agree That is the sad state of our political discourse.
quote:
any substantive benefits of repealing NN.
I favor markets not using 1930s regs s on 21st century tech. I think this fear that these ISPs will just arbitrarily block sites is fear mongering. There is no good business reasons to piss Off customers. And if they did start blocking sites we can always revisit NN in the future it’s not like what’s passed now is permanent and can never be changed and maybe we could tailor regs rather than 1 size fits all
I see no problem with fast lanes. How is it substantively different from day pay channels when cable was introduced? Also if certain sites like Netflix use more bandwidth then treating all traffic as neutral is benefiting content providers ie big corporations.
This post was edited on 12/14/17 at 3:56 pm
Posted on 12/14/17 at 4:35 pm to CorporateTiger
quote:
I like how so much of the reasoning people give for being anti-NN has more to do with Obama, melts, and lib tearz than any substantive benefits of repealing NN.
This. I’m as MAGA as they come, and I have yet to hear an argument against net neutrality that was different than these:
1) Remove government from the internet
2) Stick it to Obama
3) Watch the melt
4) Well, we’ve lived without it before
None of those are merits. We need SOME government regulation. Currently, if you don’t like your internet/cable provider, you can’t do dick about it. But at least you can cancel cable and stream. (Although, they jacked up my internet cost to $70 per month for doing that. Oh goodie. I could get it for $20 per month if I bundled it with $100 worth of channels I don’t want.)
Now, I understand you’ll call it “fearmongering”, but why would the cable companies allow this now? They will either slow it down or make it expensive. It’s just common sense.
It’s not capitalism. It’s corporatism disguised as capitalism.
My hope is that Google Fiber starts making progress and dominating these blackmailing assholes.
This post was edited on 12/14/17 at 4:38 pm
Popular
Back to top
![logo](https://images.tigerdroppings.com/images/layout/TDIcon.jpg)