- 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: Federal Communications Commission set to reverse net neutrality rules
Posted on 12/14/17 at 10:59 am to StraightCashHomey21
Posted on 12/14/17 at 10:59 am to StraightCashHomey21
quote:Oh I know. I'm just saying that the bill people will be seeing could lead to some interesting conversations
Porn hub has already come out against the FCC getting rid of NN.
0
Posted on 12/14/17 at 10:59 am to cokebottleag
quote:
??? Free as in, the complementary wifi you access at Starbucks? Do you think that's free?
Free to me, yes. And that's what I care about. Would they take it away if prices rose that high? Probably. But they never would rise anywhere near that so I'm not interested in discussing fear mongering, hyperbolic statements.
quote:
Yes, I agree. It would be called "paying only for the sites you want to access"
Cool. Well let's worry about that when I'm not paying $35 a month for unrestricted high speed internet. No reason to create a solution for a hypothetical problem that doesn't exist when the current system works just fine, thank you.
This post was edited on 12/14/17 at 11:03 am
Posted on 12/14/17 at 11:00 am to cokebottleag
For those that don't understand, think of the bandwidth you get as water from you local utility company.
You want to be charged for the amount of water you get/use and not for how it's used.
If this is rolled back then the utility company can come in and prioritize water use. They can prioritize water used for cooking over water used for bathing and change different prices for each if not cutting off your access all together.
You want to be charged for the amount of water you get/use and not for how it's used.
If this is rolled back then the utility company can come in and prioritize water use. They can prioritize water used for cooking over water used for bathing and change different prices for each if not cutting off your access all together.
Posted on 12/14/17 at 11:00 am to StraightCashHomey21
quote:
his point went clear over your head
Considering that's the most used argument on TD "what if you couldn't access your favorite conservative websites".
It's always doom and gloom with you people.
Posted on 12/14/17 at 11:00 am to stat19
quote:
Government controlled anything is anything but clued-in.
So because the govt gave the telecom companies the internet you think its a free market.
Posted on 12/14/17 at 11:01 am to cokebottleag
quote:
Yes, I agree. It would be called "paying only for the sites you want to access"
There are over 1 billion websites. How can you possibly break that down?
If I want Netflix, ESPN, and Amazon that should cost me what? 1 penny?
Posted on 12/14/17 at 11:01 am to boogiewoogie1978
I wonder how long it will take the globalist mega corps Comcast, Verizon, and AT&T to shutdown 4chan/Infowars/Drudge and the other alt-right hubs after they're given total unrestricted control of internet traffic
Posted on 12/14/17 at 11:02 am to Aristo
What do you think ISPs are less likely to censor than Google and Co.?
At least I can get around Google censoring something.
At least I can get around Google censoring something.
Posted on 12/14/17 at 11:04 am to GoCrazyAuburn
YUUUPPP
Posted on 12/14/17 at 11:04 am to CorporateTiger
quote:
my god another person who doesn't know the difference between content and the gateway to content.
quote:
You realize that Google can remove something for Google search results, but you can still access it directly, right?
Or use a minimal amount of effort to use one of countless other search engines. If an ISP simply blocks a website, it is orders of magnitude harder to get around
Anytime something even resembling what you guys are talking about has been done by an ISP they have had so much backlash that they stopped it.
On the other hand, Facebook, Google, Twitter, et al are doing what I am saying on a daily basis and not a peep comes out about it.
Look, nobody "likes" the ISPs and it's because of that that anytime one of them would try to do this it would backfire on them.
I'm just not seeing why a law needs to be passed to stop things that are fixing themselves.
Please explain. I'd be willing to listen.
Posted on 12/14/17 at 11:06 am to CorporateTiger
Why would they censor anything?
Posted on 12/14/17 at 11:06 am to Tigerlaff
quote:
The internet is not classified as a utility.
It absolutely should be.
quote:
Where is the Cable Neutrality protest to stop Comcast and Cox from gouging you?
I think thats precisely the reason people are up in arms over this.
Internet/cable companies already run roughshod over their customers because they know that the customers have no where else to turn to.
NN will simply cement the collusion already in place between cable companies.
I
at anyone who thinks of the internet as a free market.Posted on 12/14/17 at 11:07 am to Aristo
Why would Google censor conservative websites? I mean they currently do, so the question is redundant.
Posted on 12/14/17 at 11:10 am to CorporateTiger
quote:
Why would Google censor conservative websites? I mean they currently do, so the question is redundant.
Is your answer they are just going to do it?
Which conservative websites are censored by Google? Obviously not TD.
Posted on 12/14/17 at 11:11 am to SLafourche07
quote:
Anytime something even resembling what you guys are talking about has been done by an ISP they have had so much backlash that they stopped it.
But let’s give them the power do that.... because.
quote:
On the other hand, Facebook, Google, Twitter, et al are doing what I am saying on a daily basis and not a peep comes out about it
I dislike the double standard, but that’s like looking at a disproportionate number of workplace injuries happening to men and deciding the way to fix it is to just kill a bunch of women.
Posted on 12/14/17 at 11:11 am to boogiewoogie1978
quote:
How so? Explain to me how it is so much cheaper and faster in other countries and yet ours has to double because it's open?
Because their governments followed the same pattern as the Texas deregulation of the power industry.
quote:
Starting around 2000, the government required BT to allow other broadband providers to use its lines to deliver service. That's known as "local loop unbundling" -- other providers could lease the loops of copper that runs from the telephone company office to homes and back and set up their own servers and routers in BT facilities.
BT dragged its feet and very few firms stepped up to compete with the telephone giant. "The prices were too high," Black says. "There were huge barriers to entry. The processes were long and drawn out."
When Black was named Telecommunications Adjudicator in 2004, he fought on two fronts to break the BT logjam. First, he used his own experience as a former employee of the telecom giant to push for change from the inside. When that wasn't enough, he used the bully pulpit provided by his government post to embarrass BT in public. He publicized the company's failure to meet goals. Reporters loved the story of the government regulator holding the giant firm's feet to the fire.
"Embarrassment works, you know?" he laughs.
When Black started work, only 12,000 British homes had multiple broadband providers. By the time he stepped down in 2008, about 5 million did, and today the number's closer to 6 million. "That's about a 500-fold increase in less than ten years," he says.
Posted on 12/14/17 at 11:13 am to stat19
quote:
Government controlled anything is anything but clued-in.
You're championing unlimited control by local governments.
Posted on 12/14/17 at 11:14 am to GoCrazyAuburn
quote:
So, we will see how the market rewards/penalizes the company that does something stupid.
What market? Monopolies don’t get penalized.
Posted on 12/14/17 at 11:15 am to CorporateTiger
quote:
quote:
Anytime something even resembling what you guys are talking about has been done by an ISP they have had so much backlash that they stopped it.
But let’s give them the power do that.... because.
The government needs to pass a law so that they can be in charge of an issue that is currently resolving itself...because.
quote:
quote:
On the other hand, Facebook, Google, Twitter, et al are doing what I am saying on a daily basis and not a peep comes out about it
I dislike the double standard, but that’s like looking at a disproportionate number of workplace injuries happening to men and deciding the way to fix it is to just kill a bunch of women.
Damn. You nailed that one.
Posted on 12/14/17 at 11:16 am to SLafourche07
quote:
The government needs to pass a law so that they can be in charge of an issue that is currently resolving itself...because.
This is pretty much one of those "because my party told me I should support it and I better listen to daddy" situations.
Page 4 of 14
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News