- 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 LIVE Vote • OFFICIAL RESULTS • Neutrality is Abolished
Posted on 12/14/17 at 4:23 pm to OweO
Posted on 12/14/17 at 4:23 pm to OweO
quote:
Okay, let's make sure we are on the same page. The NN rule prevented big communications companies like AT&T, Cox, Charter, etc from being able to favor websites by slowing down websites they don't want their customers to view and speeding up websites they prefer their customers to see right?
Now that they voted to repeal the NN rule, ISP how has the power to control what their customers are able to see right?
So when it comes to what these companies want their customers to see, do you think they are more likely to show information that makes those who support their best interest, look good?
Do you think this was a vote in the best interest of the people? This vote is in the best interest of the few. If I am wrong, then who all benefits from this?
All of this drivel has absolutely nothing to do with the part of your post I was responding to. You insinuated that the ruling today = big government, or, as you put it, "the government telling companies that they are allowed to restrict what services I can access, what websites I can visit, etc."
You, apparently, believe that the repeal of government regulation somehow equals more government. This is what I was talking about. People will go out of their way to justify their position on something such that it lines up with their held beliefs when, in fact, it doesnt.
It's fine to recognize that sometimes government regulation is a good thing. Most people have made a strong argument in this thread that regulation is necessary here, and I agree. But, to act as though what happened today is in conformity with a small government/free market approach is disingenuous.
1
Posted on 12/14/17 at 4:23 pm to hawgfaninc
quote:
sitting in front of a computer screen or smart device screen is detrimental to society. people should interact face to face and engage with the environment around them
Says the guy with 36000 more posts than me
Posted on 12/14/17 at 4:24 pm to LSU316
quote:
Everything I typed is true there old son.
What the bad look is people that come in here thinking they are tech savvy and know this problem inside and out....this isn't a tech problem this is a business and economic problem.
So maybe listen to the guy who's undergrad was in economics, instead of spouting off nonsense.
You came in here talking about how maybe repealing NN would be good because it could allow ISP's to more easily shut down illegal streaming or peer to peer service sites. Which they already have legal recourse to do when consumers are using those platforms for illegal content. Anyone with a nephew or kid has probably gotten those letters.
When faced with the lunacy of that logic you have moved on to falsely attributing the repeal of NN to somehow magically improving the competition of the underlying marketplaces and ending regulatory capture at the state level. When it does nothing of the sorts. When in fact Ajit Pai is merely evidence of additional regulatory capture at the federal level, who is simultaneously seeking to override state consumer protection laws with federal regulation so often regional natural monopoly ISP's can do innovative things like re-insert hidden fees, shift fee schedules without notice, and hide terms and conditions of your contracts.
This post was edited on 12/14/17 at 4:25 pm
Posted on 12/14/17 at 4:24 pm to hawgfaninc
This thread.
"You agree with repealing net neutrality? Then you are a fricking moron!"
"You disagree with repealing net neutrality? Then you are a fricking idiot!"
"You agree with repealing net neutrality? Then you are a fricking moron!"
"You disagree with repealing net neutrality? Then you are a fricking idiot!"
Posted on 12/14/17 at 4:25 pm to LSU316
quote:
ETA Consider this...in 20 year since we have NN, no wireless innovation has occurred, BUT by some stroke of luck 95% of the nation has access to fiber lines. The US Government via title II rules had this wonderful idea that every company should share the fiber lines....sound great right. Well the ISPs are still greasing the pockets of congressmen and the FCC alike so the states pass rules that basically restrict certain segments of every city that can only get internet service from a single internet provider even though physically and technically every house could get every providers data to their door. This allows the ISPs to be insulated from price increase and cements the government sponsored monoply at the highest level. After today though that won't be possible
Think about what you just said. Now think about the fact that the ISPs are FOR the repeal.
Now explain to me how that makes any sense...
Posted on 12/14/17 at 4:27 pm to Greace
quote:
Says the guy with 36000 more posts than me
bruh
the point I was making went so far over your head it nearly hit pluto
instead of jumping out of plane a few times last weekend I should have been here increasing my post count so your post count boom would mean more.
Posted on 12/14/17 at 4:29 pm to hawgfaninc
Oh I understand your point but im not one of those people. There are definitely people that have trouble eating food without having a phone in front of them. But who am I to tell those people how to live their lives?
This post was edited on 12/14/17 at 4:30 pm
Posted on 12/14/17 at 4:31 pm to slackster
quote:
Think about what you just said. Now think about the fact that the ISPs are FOR the repeal.
Now explain to me how that makes any sense...
I think everyone agrees that ISPs have the most to gain from the ruling today IN THE SHORT TERM.
Those that are against NN believe that it will increase competition and innovation down the road.
Posted on 12/14/17 at 4:33 pm to UpToPar
quote:
Those that are against NN believe that it will increase competition and innovation down the road.
Which again, as was explained to you, is completely unfounded.
NN doesn't magically make the barriers to entry for ISP's lower, or materialize well positioned competitors in a marketplace, or remove regulatory capture at the state level. All it does is give these gatekeepers tools to make the market ON the internet much less fair and competitive for their own gain.
This post was edited on 12/14/17 at 4:35 pm
Posted on 12/14/17 at 4:34 pm to slackster
quote:
Think about what you just said. Now think about the fact that the ISPs are FOR the repeal.
Now explain to me how that makes any sense...
People on this issue have a hard time looking long term.
Posted on 12/14/17 at 4:35 pm to Greace
quote:
Says the guy with 36000 more posts than me
Ahhhhh shite.. the "you have a lot of post" guy.. This is a an active message board and it's that way because people post on it.. That's not a legit put down..
Posted on 12/14/17 at 4:35 pm to UpToPar
quote:
It's fine to recognize that sometimes government regulation is a good thing. Most people have made a strong argument in this thread that regulation is necessary here, and I agree. But, to act as though what happened today is in conformity with a small government/free market approach is disingenuous.
A) Don't argue with OweO, it's futile.
B) You have to look at the entire impact of the repeal. Sure, this repeal is less regulation on ISPs, but it has far reaching impacts on the internet as a whole. An argument can be made that the overall market has been stifled by this ruling.
Posted on 12/14/17 at 4:36 pm to bonhoeffer45
quote:
Which again, as was explained to you, is completely unfounded.
An opinion either way is unfounded. All we can do is guess at this point.
quote:
NN doesn't magically make the barriers to entry for ISP's lower, or materialize well positioned competitors in a marketplace, or remove regulatory capture at the state level. All it does is give these gatekeepers tools to make the market ON the internet much less fair and competitive for their own gain.
If the technology advances enough, then some of the barriers to market entry can be lowered enough to increase competition.
Posted on 12/14/17 at 4:36 pm to OweO
quote:
Ahhhhh shite.. the "you have a lot of post" guy.. This is a an active message board and it's that way because people post on it.. That's not a legit put down..
Exactly what I would expect a guy with 57,000 posts to say
Posted on 12/14/17 at 4:37 pm to LSU316
quote:
People on this issue have a hard time looking long term.
Maybe because the short term downsides are so acutely bad and the long term upside isn’t even guaranteed
Posted on 12/14/17 at 4:38 pm to slackster
quote:
B) You have to look at the entire impact of the repeal. Sure, this repeal is less regulation on ISPs, but it has far reaching impacts on the internet as a whole. An argument can be made that the overall market has been stifled by this ruling.
In the short term, sure.
But those that truly believe in a free market believe that the market will eventually correct itself through technological innovation and competition.
Posted on 12/14/17 at 4:39 pm to OweO
Please look to my next post 
Posted on 12/14/17 at 4:39 pm to weedGOKU666
quote:
Maybe because the short term downsides are so acutely bad
According to reddit posts and reddit flyers.
Posted on 12/14/17 at 4:40 pm to UpToPar
quote:
If the technology advances enough, then some of the barriers to market entry can be lowered enough to increase competition.
Ok, but that literally has nothing to do with net neutrality.
If your argument is simply that maybe some yet to be identified future technology, at some yet to be identified point in the future, will be able to disrupt the natural monopolies and state regulatory capture to inject enough competition to turn this market space into a text book perfectly competitive market, so therefore in the present we should abolish NN? That is just absolutely absurd. And makes no sense whatsoever.
Maybe CRISPR will ultimately lead to enough small genetic improvements of the species that first degree murder will eventually be a thing of the past, so lets abolish laws against murder in the present? Makes zero sense.
Posted on 12/14/17 at 4:40 pm to LSU316
quote:
quote:
Think about what you just said. Now think about the fact that the TechGiants are AGAINST the repeal.
Now explain to me how that makes any sense...
People on this issue have a hard time looking long term.
yes they do.
you're arguing for a side that is known to lie, steal, and censor.
Page 27 of 32
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News