re: Net Neutrality -- What You Need To Know

quote:

---

So where does having a corporate gatekeeper that decides which products and services you have access to

---

wut?

you mean like television?

Do you pay bills, conduct business, or communicate with people through your television?

BTW, no one is arguing that the current model for television is a good thing. In fact, the television model is what many point to when we say that eliminating net neutrality is a terrible idea.

quote:

---

Yeah, like television. The internet is nothing like television, but the ISPs want it to be.

If you would stop laughing, maybe you would realize that you might finally be grasping the concept.

---

And the current TV model is a terrible one for consumers.

quote:

---

Do you pay bills, conduct business, or communicate with people through your television?

---

nope, but that isn't what he said

i get the N/N argument and i'm not 100% opposed to it, but these discussions are basically impossible b/c the N/N proponents basically have reduced the argument to this: you can choose between (1) Net Neutrality or (2) worst possible case scenario for EVERYONE. there is no middle ground or shades of grey

quote:

---

BTW, no one is arguing that the current model for television is a good thing.

---

i didn't, either. i just argued that "corporate gatekeepers" (whatever that is) are already (and have for a long time) determined what content/services consumers have access to

again, that's just an example of using these scary terms to describe a scenario to scare people, while ignoring how that is quite common. these discussions are not built on honest discussions. they have devolved into the black/white paradigm i listed above

quote:

---

you've obviously never listened to No Agenda.

---

And from the few minutes I've heard, it seems to be terribly mistitled.

quote:

---

There are subtleties that require you actually listen rather than assume you know what they're saying. In that instance, they were picking apart that videoclip.

---

They are picking apart a clip that was obviously "dumbed down" for the masses. Why do you object when I pick apart No Agenda?

quote:

---

And the current TV model is a terrible one for consumers.

---

it's a lot better than what it replaced

The reason for that is that we know the entities behind the fight to eliminate net neutrality.

quote:

---

these discussions are basically impossible b/c the N/N proponents basically have reduced the argument to this: you can choose between (1) Net Neutrality or (2) worst possible case scenario for EVERYONE. there is no middle ground or shades of grey

---

That's because there is no middle ground. Either every packet is treated neutrally, or they aren't.

quote:

---

i just argued that "corporate gatekeepers" (whatever that is) are already (and have for a long time) determined what content/services consumers have access to

---

Again, stop laughing and maybe you will understand why the internet has been so vitally important for the last two decades. Precisely because it does not work like television.

quote:

---

again, that's just an example of using these scary terms to describe a scenario to scare people, while ignoring how that is quite common.

---

Yeah, it is quite common for our information to be filtered. And it is an extremely scary thought that our only source of unfiltered information might also become filtered.

quote:

---

these discussions are not built on honest discussions. they have devolved into the black/white paradigm i listed above

---

But if you were honest with yourself, and if you really put some thought into it, you would realize that it really is a black/white topic.

quote:

---

That's because there is no middle ground.

---

yes, there is. for example, the model where poor people get cheaper, less open internet. that is rarely discussed

quote:

---

Either every packet is treated neutrally, or they aren't.

---

we are talking about the effects and company policies that emerge

quote:

---

stop laughing and maybe you will understand why the internet has been so vitally important for the last two decades. Precisely because it does not work like television.

---

again, you're shifting the argument. comparing how tv and the internet have been implemented is irrelevant

i was responding to an argument that companies have never done...basically what they've been doing for decades. it was a stupid and borderline dishonest argument. that's all it was meant to address. there are other models that restrict content the same. there is no singular content-delivery service

quote:

---

And it is an extremely scary thought that our only source of unfiltered information might also become filtered.

---

i doubt it will become filtered, as much as the filterless internet will just cost more. in theory, this is only an argument about cost

quote:

---

But if you were honest with yourself, and if you really put some thought into it, you would realize that it really is a black/white topic.

---

if power users pay more, middle users make choices based on cost/tiers, and poor people get more access to cheap internet, that can easily be argued to be a success.