- 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: FCC Chairman Ajit Pai: Why He's Rejecting Net Neutrality
Posted on 11/22/17 at 4:22 pm to Adam Banks
Posted on 11/22/17 at 4:22 pm to Adam Banks
So your logical fallacy is to ask me to defend statements I didn't make, reference, or allude to in any way?
2
Posted on 11/22/17 at 4:24 pm to GoCrazyAuburn
(no message)
This post was edited on 3/3/18 at 11:25 pm
Posted on 11/22/17 at 4:25 pm to Tigerdev
A cord cutter is not costing an ISP any more to stream games than the 80 year old grandma who just browses Facebook on a nightly basis
He's literally arguing against something he doesn't understand.
He's literally arguing against something he doesn't understand.
Posted on 11/22/17 at 4:26 pm to rocket31
quote:
A cord cutter is not costing an ISP any more to stream games than the 80 year old grandma who just browses Facebook on a nightly basis
So the cost of data transmission is the same no matter the amount or frequency?
Posted on 11/22/17 at 4:27 pm to stat19
why...because he wants his buddies at Verizon and the like to have an unfair advantage and control.
plain and simple, you cant have the above when the only rule is everyone is equal as it is now.
plain and simple, you cant have the above when the only rule is everyone is equal as it is now.
Posted on 11/22/17 at 4:28 pm to culsutiger
quote:
Pass the fricking thing and it will be problem solved. Reading some shite from 3 years ago doesn't do anything.
You seem to have a real issue grasping the difference.
You just asked to show you legislation to fix the problem and you'd support it. I gave you an example. You aren't supporting it.
quote:
Give me the legislative fix that preserves net neutrality while allowing for the reversal of the title 2 classification, and I'll happily support it.
Yea, I'm the one having issues here.
This post was edited on 11/22/17 at 4:29 pm
Posted on 11/22/17 at 4:28 pm to rocket31
quote:
A cord cutter is not costing an ISP any more to stream games than the 80 year old grandma who just browses Facebook on a nightly basis
He's literally arguing against something he doesn't understand.
Dude don't bother
They think data caps are a must
Posted on 11/22/17 at 4:29 pm to culsutiger
quote:
Reading some shite from 3 years ago doesn't do anything.
I dont think you grasp that the excessive regulations were as important or more important to bureaucrats and lawmakers as any throttling issue.
This post was edited on 11/22/17 at 4:40 pm
Posted on 11/22/17 at 4:31 pm to Golfer
1G of data in an urban setting is cheap due to the distance, 1 G of data in the country could mean maintaining miles of infrastructure, so in that setting, the price varies wildly.
if you're just referring to the amount of money spent on the electricity to run the devices and transmit the data it's really low. like less than a cent.
its all overhead and infastructure
if you're just referring to the amount of money spent on the electricity to run the devices and transmit the data it's really low. like less than a cent.
its all overhead and infastructure
Posted on 11/22/17 at 4:32 pm to rocket31
and in the US, at least, we the taxpayers already paid $200 BILLION towards those infrastructure costs as part of the government's deal to promote infrastructure expansion, urban and rural
Posted on 11/22/17 at 4:33 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
I dont think you grasp that the excessive regulations were as important or more important to bureaucrats and lawmakers as ant throttling issue.
The key to the whole thing is the title 2 classification. That is what the government wants. They want all the managerial authority that title 2 gives them. They could give two shits about fast lanes or throttling.
Posted on 11/22/17 at 4:34 pm to GoCrazyAuburn
(no message)
This post was edited on 3/3/18 at 11:26 pm
Posted on 11/22/17 at 4:35 pm to StraightCashHomey21
quote:
Dude don't bother
They think data caps are a must
we'd actually pay less if we had metered Internet at rates reasonably related to the actual cost.
these people are dumbasses though so im not surprised
Posted on 11/22/17 at 4:35 pm to culsutiger
quote:
Proposed legislation from 2014 is not proposed legislation today and it sure as hell isn't actual, enforceable law.
If you want me to support three year old dead legislation, I'm going to need to borrow your time machine.
Posted on 11/22/17 at 4:38 pm to culsutiger
quote:
Proposed legislation from 2014 is not proposed legislation today
It could be
youve asked for better ways, this is onePosted on 11/22/17 at 4:39 pm to GoCrazyAuburn
(no message)
This post was edited on 3/3/18 at 11:26 pm
Posted on 11/22/17 at 4:40 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
It could be youve asked for better ways, this is one
Its like he/she thinks that because it isn't currently on the floor that it won't happen or that we're okay that it isn't happening. I don't get it. I think legislation like that would be perfect and if it doesn't happen, I'll be furious.
That being said, that legislation has no bearing on weather or not I want ISPs regulated as Title 2.
Posted on 11/22/17 at 4:41 pm to culsutiger
quote:
Thanks for finally being honest about your republican net neutrality fix being a line of bullshite.
Wut
The governments interest is control, period. Make the go back and offer better legislation
Posted on 11/22/17 at 4:41 pm to culsutiger
quote:
Thanks for finally being honest about your republican net neutrality fix being a line of bullshite.
When did I say anything about them? They actually proposed legislation that was a good idea. They didn't want the Title 2 classification. That was the Dems 100%. So, nice try.
ETA: To your point though, are you agreeing now that the current solution is bullshite too?
This post was edited on 11/22/17 at 4:43 pm
Posted on 11/22/17 at 4:44 pm to GoCrazyAuburn
quote:
like he/she thinks that because it isn't currently on the floor that it won't happen or that we're okay that it isn't happening. I don't get it. I think legislation like that would be perfect and if it doesn't happen, I'll be furious.
That person is just outraged and wants to remain outraged on some silly political party bullshite.
Page 24 of 26
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News