- 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: Sky Screamers Rejoice! Senate votes to repeal the repeal of Net Neutrality
Posted on 5/17/18 at 12:05 pm to RogerTheShrubber
Posted on 5/17/18 at 12:05 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
Youre advocating patching the existing model. That does nothing to increase competition at all.
I am advocating for patching the existing model in the short term at the national level with NN while reforming at the state and local level to increase competition via infrastructure reforms over the long term. Once the long term reforms destroy the monopolies, then the short term reform can be phased out.
0
Posted on 5/17/18 at 12:05 pm to kingbob
quote:
It's fixing both problems at the same time.
Temporary problems.........with an entirely NEW and worse problem.
Posted on 5/17/18 at 12:05 pm to CptBengal
quote:
so you dont think facebook or tweitter should censor?
Facebook can do whatever it wants. It's one actor in a giant marketplace full of competition. I personally don't use Facebook or Twitter because 1 I don't like their ideals or management and 2 most people on them are retarded.
Facebook can censor its own content within its own platform all it wants. It cannot censor the entire internet because of the principals of net neutrality.
I don't think Facebook should be able to pay your monopoly ISP to ban your access to all other social media sites and content leaving you unable to access any competitors and this ending a free market and leaving you with 0 recourse.
Posted on 5/17/18 at 12:05 pm to ShortyRob
quote:
Temporary problems.........with an entirely NEW and worse problem
Which is? Please be specific.
Posted on 5/17/18 at 12:05 pm to kingbob
quote:
People want alternatives. ISP's tend to have really really bad customer service. By preventing them from discriminating by content AND eliminating their monopolization of the infrastructure, you open the door to new ISP's that can either built improved infrastructure, offer a better price, or offer a better service without the consumer losing the ability to use that open internet market in the meantime.
JUST REMOVE THE MONOPOLY.
BTW, have you ever wondered why Google, Twitter, Facebook all love the idea of NN?
seriously. Do you think they're altruistic?
Posted on 5/17/18 at 12:05 pm to Breesus
quote:It's like a corporation never owned printing or broadcast facilities
I need to explain to you why the free and open exchange of ideas without governmental or corporate censorship is important?
Posted on 5/17/18 at 12:06 pm to CptBengal
quote:
JUST REMOVE THE MONOPOLY.
That's easier said than done, and takes a very long time to do so in a sustainable manner that doesn't result with all of those broken shards simply coming back together (see the break up of the Bells and Standard Oil)
Posted on 5/17/18 at 12:06 pm to ShortyRob
quote:While saying "You just don't understand technology!".
They also can't grasp even the concept that today =/= forever.
Posted on 5/17/18 at 12:06 pm to Breesus
quote:
It cannot censor the entire internet because of the principals of net neutrality.
Google can essentially. You said you "researched" these topics. I'm sure then you understand the public commons argument used against ma bell for the utilities right?
Posted on 5/17/18 at 12:07 pm to CptBengal
quote:
Google, yes fricking Google, thought about it, tried it...and backed out
Because of governmental regional monopolies combined with prohibitive physical infrastructure costs barrier to entry. Neither of which has anything at all to do with the principals of net neutrality.
This post was edited on 5/17/18 at 12:08 pm
Posted on 5/17/18 at 12:08 pm to kingbob
quote:
And you can't grasp that the "alternatives" are actually owned by the same companies as the services they are allegedly competing with even though those services don't really perform the same functions or fulfill the same niches. It's akin to saying bicycles compete with cars
They do. Hell, I often commute by bike because it's faster than the streets clogged with cars.Posted on 5/17/18 at 12:08 pm to Taxing Authority
quote:
It's like a corporation never owned printing or broadcast facilities
Once again, the same companies that own the ISP's, the competing services to the ISP's, the cable television transmission, the broadcast television stations, the cable tv stations, the radio stations, the newspapers, the search engines, the record studios, the movie studios, etc are once again THE SAME PARENT COMPANIES!!!
How do you not get this?
Posted on 5/17/18 at 12:08 pm to kingbob
quote:
a sustainable manner that doesn't result with all of those broken shards simply coming back together (see the break up of the Bells and Standard Oil)
define "sustainable manner". Seriously, I know you just used some jargon. So please define it.
the bells and standard oil pieces are in direct competition actually. nevermind the fact that one is a global market and the other is a regulated telecom.
Posted on 5/17/18 at 12:08 pm to kingbob
quote:
We actually do have price controls for products like produce. See the Agricultural Adjustment Act.
Nope.Posted on 5/17/18 at 12:09 pm to Taxing Authority
quote:
They do. Hell, I often commute by bike because it's faster than the streets clogged with cars.
You missed the rest of the post.
It's like arguing that bicycles compete with cars, if the only sellers of bicycles were Ford, Chrystler, and GM.
Posted on 5/17/18 at 12:09 pm to Taxing Authority
I'm still waiting for someone...........ANYONE to tell me why it is soooooo important that the govt prevent differential content speeds/access/whatever.
The best I got was some idiotic response about "free and open exchange of ideas" which has nothing to do with the question.
I'm going to say it. The base premise that this is a good thing long term is.............FALSE
The best I got was some idiotic response about "free and open exchange of ideas" which has nothing to do with the question.
I'm going to say it. The base premise that this is a good thing long term is.............FALSE
Posted on 5/17/18 at 12:10 pm to Taxing Authority
Are you seriously denying that the federal government doesn't have price controls for agricultural commodities via subsidies and quotas? That's a fact, like f*&%king gravity.
Posted on 5/17/18 at 12:10 pm to CptBengal
quote:
Google, yes fricking Google, thought about it, tried it...and backed out
????
Google Fiber is growing.
Posted on 5/17/18 at 12:11 pm to ShortyRob
quote:
I'm going to say it. The base premise that this is a good thing long term is.............FALSE
I'd argue thats the cable TV model. Where you have to pay for shite you dont want.
What if all I want is hulu. I dont want to pay for netflix to have equal access.
Posted on 5/17/18 at 12:11 pm to kingbob
quote:That's irrelevatnt. Wanting someting isn't demand. I want $10,000,000. That doesn't make it materialize. It sure as hell doesn't cause someone to rush to give it to me.
People want alternatives.
To create demand "people" have to be willing to pay for it at profitable levels.
The "demand" for NN indicates people are unwilling to pay the service. Not that there is latent economic demand for service.
You 180-degrees out on this.
This post was edited on 5/17/18 at 12:12 pm
Page 22 of 34
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News