Started By
Message

re: Sky Screamers Rejoice! Senate votes to repeal the repeal of Net Neutrality

Posted on 5/17/18 at 10:22 am to
Posted by RogerTheShrubber
Juneau, AK
Member since Jan 2009
299683 posts
Posted on 5/17/18 at 10:22 am to
quote:

but adamantly against using Title II to make it happen.


Bingo.

Start from scratch instead of using archaic regulations.
Posted by RogerTheShrubber
Juneau, AK
Member since Jan 2009
299683 posts
Posted on 5/17/18 at 10:23 am to
quote:

The whole functionality of the internet is based on open equal access


Create a separate regulatory system for broadband.

Are you a fan of using Title II?
Posted by bmy
Nashville
Member since Oct 2007
48203 posts
Posted on 5/17/18 at 10:24 am to
quote:


Your desires are irrelevant to economics. What you WANT isn't a reason for policy. If it were, there would be nicer cars in my driveway right the frick now.


Sure. But the desires of ~200 million people can, does, and should shape economic policy. Its part of our social contract.
This post was edited on 5/17/18 at 10:25 am
Posted by Breesus
Unplug
Member since Jan 2010
69549 posts
Posted on 5/17/18 at 10:24 am to
quote:

If, in 1998, a person on the internet couldn't conceptualize for you how he would, "from scratch" take on WalMart, that would definitely mean we should have considered it impossible




How are these comparable?
Posted by TheOcean
#honeyfriedchicken
Member since Aug 2004
45953 posts
Posted on 5/17/18 at 10:24 am to
Boomers are so out of touch when it comes to NN.

Also, Shorty is missing a few brain cells.
Posted by RogerTheShrubber
Juneau, AK
Member since Jan 2009
299683 posts
Posted on 5/17/18 at 10:25 am to

quote:


Sure. But the desires of ~200 million people can and should shape economic policy.


Just nationalize the industry.
Posted by kingbob
Sorrento, LA
Member since Nov 2010
70483 posts
Posted on 5/17/18 at 10:26 am to
quote:

Create a separate regulatory system for broadband.


That sounds reasonable

quote:

Are you a fan of using Title II?


No, but I don't see a better option right this moment. What I would do is use title II in the short term while a new classification is debated and created.
Posted by Breesus
Unplug
Member since Jan 2010
69549 posts
Posted on 5/17/18 at 10:26 am to
quote:

To remove that cornerstone is to remove what makes the internet valuable and useful to all mankind.


this is exactly why many companies want that cornerstone removed.
Posted by bmy
Nashville
Member since Oct 2007
48203 posts
Posted on 5/17/18 at 10:26 am to
quote:


I was imply asking "so" to what you posted.

IE, so what? Define why it's bad


It's bad because net neutrality principles are good. Removing a good thing = bad.
Posted by ShortyRob
Member since Oct 2008
82116 posts
Posted on 5/17/18 at 10:26 am to
quote:


The whole functionality of the internet is based on open equal access.
Not really.

Hell, that's demonstrably not true even today.

quote:

It allows anyone anywhere to have access to everyone everywhere. It allows people to start businesses in their mother's basement that can do sales in Nigeria, India, and Taiwan at will. It allows a blog post in Beirut to trigger a revolution.


I'm aware of this.

quote:

Free, open, and equal access is the cornerstone of "the internet". To remove that cornerstone is to remove what makes the internet valuable and useful to all mankind.

Romanticism. Well, actually, Romanticism along with fear.

Markets are a son of a bitch over time.

If you're asking me, "will there be ANY unevenness to the application of the market", then I most assuredly will tell you yes.

If you're asking me "will NOTHING negative occur that you are predicting", my answer will be no.

But that's the argument EVERY TIME when talking about economics and markets long term.

It is ALWAYS between the "but granny will melt" and the "shite will play out and we'll be fine" crowd.

I haven't seen a single discussion in any net neutrality there that with a mere few word changes couldn't have easily taken place in 1910, 1930, 1950, 1970, 1990.......
Posted by Breesus
Unplug
Member since Jan 2010
69549 posts
Posted on 5/17/18 at 10:27 am to
quote:


Create a separate regulatory system for broadband.


Has anyone here said they are against this? Other than ShortyRob who believes there is never a reason for government regulation in any aspect and the free market will always win no matter what the situation.
This post was edited on 5/17/18 at 10:28 am
Posted by ShortyRob
Member since Oct 2008
82116 posts
Posted on 5/17/18 at 10:27 am to
quote:


It's bad because net neutrality principles are good.
Meh

Posted by RogerTheShrubber
Juneau, AK
Member since Jan 2009
299683 posts
Posted on 5/17/18 at 10:27 am to

quote:

Has anyone here said they are against this?


Absolutely.
Posted by RogerTheShrubber
Juneau, AK
Member since Jan 2009
299683 posts
Posted on 5/17/18 at 10:28 am to
quote:

No, but I don't see a better option right this moment.


WTF????
Posted by ShortyRob
Member since Oct 2008
82116 posts
Posted on 5/17/18 at 10:28 am to
quote:


Sure. But the desires of ~200 million people can, does, and should shape economic policy.
Well yes, it does.

Which is why we get a lot of really stupid economic policy.

Posted by americanrealism
Smoking an 8th in the multiverse
Member since Nov 2012
1515 posts
Posted on 5/17/18 at 10:28 am to
Wait, there are really people who want Xfinity and Uverse to be able to sell you internet like this?:



I mean, there are dudes out there who enjoy getting kicked in the balls so I guess anything is possible.
Posted by bmy
Nashville
Member since Oct 2007
48203 posts
Posted on 5/17/18 at 10:28 am to
quote:


Create a separate regulatory system for broadband.

Are you a fan of using Title II?


P4p politicians would never let this pass. Too many republicans getting their campaign efforts paid for by ISPs.

But youre right about what needs to happen. Its a no brainer.
Posted by RogerTheShrubber
Juneau, AK
Member since Jan 2009
299683 posts
Posted on 5/17/18 at 10:29 am to
quote:

Too many republicans getting their campaign efforts paid for by ISPs.


Canned partisan response.
Posted by GoCrazyAuburn
Member since Feb 2010
41075 posts
Posted on 5/17/18 at 10:29 am to
quote:

So his claim that the democrats blocked republicans from passing legislation protecting net neutrality principles is false?


It isn't. The FCC tried to implement open internet rules in 2010 and 2014, both were struck down because they did not have the authority to regulate broadband. The republican proposal granted the FCC authority to regulate broadband, but forbid it from classifying it as a common carrier utility. The FCC would then be able to achieve the goals of NN while avoiding Title 2. Clean. Simple.
Posted by ShortyRob
Member since Oct 2008
82116 posts
Posted on 5/17/18 at 10:29 am to
quote:

Other than ShortyRob who believes there is never a reason for government regulation in any aspect
Can we restrict this to shite I've actually said please?

Oh, and you asked if I was real. I took the time to answer.
Jump to page
Page First 11 12 13 14 15 ... 34
Jump to page
first pageprev pagePage 13 of 34Next pagelast page

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