re: FCC Chairman Ajit Pai: Why He's Rejecting Net Neutrality

quote:

---

You seem to be missing the point. If the FCC had that authority, under the law is it is, without Title 2 classification, the republican proposal would have never existed. That it was proposed, indicates that the FCC does not have the authority.

---

Good lord you are fricking dense. The republican proposal was to give them the authority to enforce those rules as they would be federal law. How many times do I have to say that? That proposal, also stated outright they wouldn't have the authority to re-classify broadband as Title II. How are you not getting this? So, we achieve the "fairness" rules everyone wants withe the FCC being granted congressional authority to enforce the rules, all while preventing them from being able to re-classify broadband as title II. Everyone wins. So naturally the Dems hated it.

quote:

---

You're acting like the FCC should operate based not on the actual law, but under your delusions of what the law should be.

---

Okay. So, even though I've shown the process for how it was attempted to grant the FCC the authority to enforce such rules, all while avoiding Title 2 re-classification, I'm operating under a delusion? All I've done is state what literally happened.

quote:

---

Most people don't have the choice to just move to a different provider when their options are limited.

---

Total bullshite.

Someone posted a link yesterday in one of these NN threads from the 2010 census that showed 97% of households in the U.S. had access to two or MORE ISPs. And that was 7 years ago. There are 7 residential and 4 commercial ISP providers in Baton Rouge.

Your statement is wrong.

If you truly believe killing the government regulation known as net neutrality will cause ISPs to make exorbitant profits, then you're a complete idiot if you don't immediately buy as many shares of T, CMCSA, VZ or GOOGL as you can afford. Borrow money to buy those shares if you have to. Then just sit back and rake in the money.

quote:

---

Sounds like the free market taking care of itself. Which will continue to happen despite your fear mongering

---

There is no free market with ISPs

quote:

---

Once again why should illegal streaming be treated the same as legal content? How is the ISP not a co conspirator if they do not treat known illegal content differently?

---

For one American ISPs have no reach when a majority of streams are coming from a different country. They can block the ports but that becomes a whole different issue.

(no message)

quote:

---

You still think using cell data is a feasible fixed internet solution

---

You still don't understand the meaning of the word "competition".

Oh. And for a great many customers, cell data is absolutely fine.

It isn't for you.

quote:

---

For one American ISPs have no reach when a majority of streams are coming from a different country.

---

Still haven't answered.
So the us based illegal streaming. Why should they treat that the same? Are they not co conspirators?

quote:

---

There is no free market with ISPs

---

Repeating a falsehood for hundreds of pages doesn't make it not a falsehood

quote:

---

Still haven't answered. So the us based illegal streaming. Why should they treat that the same? Are they not co conspirators?

---

Most US based illegal services get shut down

quote:

---

It shows the consumer if not happy with the availability of certain content, will find other ways to obtain it.

---

"Hey, that dude broke in to Best Buy and stole 5 flat screens. It shows that if the consumer is unhappy with the options provided, he will find another way to obtain it!!!!"



Good lord man.

That fact that I have truthiness on my side makes what I say truthy.

Do you agree that large telecoms conspire through various government entities to control the ability of new competitors to enter the market for high speed internet service?