Page 1
Page 1
Started By
Message
locked post

Lulz, Dems to author Net Neutrality bill.

Posted on 3/4/19 at 10:05 pm
Posted by League Champs
Bayou Self
Member since Oct 2012
10340 posts
Posted on 3/4/19 at 10:05 pm
What will Libertarians and Republicans do now?

Because there is no way in hell the Dems are promoting anything under Trump, that it views as good for the voices on the right/conservatives.

It's the beginning of their attempts to control opposition voices. You can bet the farm on that!
Posted by hawgfaninc
https://youtu.be/torc9P4-k5A
Member since Nov 2011
54257 posts
Posted on 3/4/19 at 10:14 pm to
frick them
Posted by Fireman17
Mississippi
Member since Oct 2010
12137 posts
Posted on 3/4/19 at 10:14 pm to
Democrats are going give Trump 2020 they keep this up..
Posted by NYNolaguy1
Member since May 2011
21700 posts
Posted on 3/4/19 at 10:27 pm to
They should get some Republican support by also forcing govt to ensure free speech as well as internet traffic.
Posted by TeLeFaWx
Dallas, TX
Member since Aug 2011
29311 posts
Posted on 3/4/19 at 10:33 pm to
Is it to reclassify ISPs as common carriers and put it back under Title II? Because I think that’s a largely incoherent argument. All the things people that like NN rarely come up with the rationale for why Title II is necessary to accomplish their goals.
Posted by bmy
Nashville
Member since Oct 2007
48203 posts
Posted on 3/4/19 at 10:53 pm to
quote:


Is it to reclassify ISPs as common carriers and put it back under Title II? Because I think that’s a largely incoherent argument. All the things people that like NN rarely come up with the rationale for why Title II is necessary to accomplish their goals.


"Finally, telecommunications service is defined as ìthe offering of telecommunications for a fee directly to the public. . . regardless of the facilities used. ß153(46). The question here is whether cable-modem-service providers offe[r] . . . telecommunications for a fee directly to the public. If so, they are subject to Title II regulation as common carriers... After all is said and done, after all the regulatory cant has been translated, and the smoke of agency expertise blown away, it remains perfectly clear that someone who sells cable-modem service is offering telecommunica-tions." -- Scalia
This post was edited on 3/4/19 at 10:54 pm
Posted by texridder
The Woodlands, TX
Member since Oct 2017
14936 posts
Posted on 3/4/19 at 11:19 pm to
quote:

It's the beginning of their attempts to control opposition voices.
Paranoia much? What does that even mean in real life?
Posted by Mulat
Avalon Bch, FL
Member since Sep 2010
17517 posts
Posted on 3/4/19 at 11:22 pm to
It is their 4D Chess
Posted by bmy
Nashville
Member since Oct 2007
48203 posts
Posted on 3/5/19 at 7:11 am to
quote:

It is their 4D Chess



Makes sense. Like 99% of the unique comments submitted to FCC were pro-NN. It's a winning issue and forcing republicans to vote it down is the strategy I guess.
Posted by gthog61
Irving, TX
Member since Nov 2009
71001 posts
Posted on 3/5/19 at 7:12 am to
quote:

Makes sense. Like 99% of the unique comments submitted to FCC were pro-NN. It's a winning issue and forcing republicans to vote it down is the strategy I guess.




Posted by roadGator
Member since Feb 2009
154900 posts
Posted on 3/5/19 at 7:16 am to
Dmy, 99% of Americans couldn't tell you what NN means.

It's far from a winning issue.

The sheep from your side will just parrot whatever your overlords want without knowing a damn thing about it.


Drop your whataboutism below.
Posted by Volvagia
Fort Worth
Member since Mar 2006
52922 posts
Posted on 3/5/19 at 7:21 am to
quote:

Is it to reclassify ISPs as common carriers and put it back under Title II? Because I think that’s a largely incoherent argument. All the things people that like NN rarely come up with the rationale for why Title II is necessary to accomplish their goals.


That only happened because Comcast argued in court that the FTC had no jurisdiction on commenting on their practices because they were a utility provider.

FCC then used existing law under title 2 that would apply to them as a utility and stop the activity the FTC was targeting (misleading advertising and targeted throttling of data).

A bill would not have to put them back under title 2. That was just the legal framework that was already in place that became usable after Comcast’s shitty lawyering.
This post was edited on 3/5/19 at 7:22 am
Posted by oogabooga68
Member since Nov 2018
27194 posts
Posted on 3/5/19 at 7:33 am to
BMY is a racist idiot, ignore him and his Anti-fig brethren....
Posted by Joshjrn
Baton Rouge
Member since Dec 2008
31762 posts
Posted on 3/5/19 at 8:00 am to
quote:

What will Libertarians and Republicans do now?


Oppose it, one would assume.

Next?
Posted by FredBear
Georgia
Member since Aug 2017
17001 posts
Posted on 3/5/19 at 8:08 am to
quote:

Dmy, 99% of Americans couldn't tell you what NN means.



You are right and I am one of those. I have no idea what that means and I don't even understand what the net neutrality argument is about

I sure as hell won't be voting based on it.
Posted by piggilicious
Member since Jan 2011
37310 posts
Posted on 3/5/19 at 8:11 am to
Me either really but I’m pretty sure our internet should have been horrible by now from the hissy fitting going on at the time. And mine still works like a charm and my rates are fine, etc.
Posted by SDVTiger
Cabo San Lucas
Member since Nov 2011
94205 posts
Posted on 3/5/19 at 8:13 am to
What was the official death count from the last NN repeal

I want OMLandshark to show me his 10k a mnth bill
Posted by Upperdecker
St. George, LA
Member since Nov 2014
32792 posts
Posted on 3/5/19 at 8:21 am to
This isn’t about the public, this is about money in pockets and control of the internet. Look at the obvious sides here:

-Internet provider services (Cox, AT&T, Verizon, etc) are all controlled by Republican leadership
-Web-based services (Google, Netflix, Apple for ITunes, etc) are all controlled by Democrat leadership

It’s a clear and obvious power struggle that doesn’t appear to have significant effect on the public as long as the two parts of the services are warring. The issue becomes if both parts of the industry end up controlled by the same entity (vertical monopolizing, controlling all the steps of the process). Each side has to play nice with the other right now bc any semblance of control is minimal at best, and either side has enough money and resources to divorce the other. Google is trying to do Fiber so it can get rid of the provider services, and Cox etc can throttle the web services or remove them and start their own replacements
Posted by bmy
Nashville
Member since Oct 2007
48203 posts
Posted on 3/5/19 at 8:50 am to
quote:

Dmy, 99% of Americans couldn't tell you what NN means.


Pretty much no way this is true. The pornhub anti-NN ads alone probably reached half of the country
Posted by Lsujacket66
Member since Dec 2010
5051 posts
Posted on 3/5/19 at 9:08 am to
Make it stop! Too many have already died
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram