Net Neutrality Going down in Flames

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
The FCC’s 2-1 vote yesterday means that the repeal process for net neutrality is under way. While the chairman claims that this is not the end, as he will continue to take comments until the final vote some months from now, the opposition believes he has already made up his mind that Title II hampers internet freedoms and lowers investment in broadband networks. Protesters have pointed out, among myriad things, that dropping these rules would result in a loss of consumer protection policies that include filing complaints about an ISP’s "unjust" or "unreasonable" conduct.

The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) proposes eliminating the Title II classification and seeks comment on what, if anything, should replace the current net neutrality rules. But Chairman Ajit Pai is making no promises about reinstating the two-year-old net neutrality rules that forbid ISPs from blocking or throttling lawful Internet content or prioritizing content in exchange for payment. Pai's proposal argues that throttling websites and applications might somehow help Internet users. Throttling of websites and online services might help customers, The FCC plans to take comments on its plan until August 16 and then make a final decision sometime after that.
 
One more hideous SJW idea bites the dust. Can't wait for the nashing of teeth on Ars, Gizmodo, and other nutty left wing sites.

This place is far from a SJW hangout and net neutrality is overwhelmingly popular here. Who in their right mind would want to give ISPs more power to do whatever they want?
 
Last edited:
This place is far from a SJW hangout and net neutrality is overwhelming popular here. Who in their right mind would want to give ISPs more power to do whatever they want?

No shit. Its corporatism running rampant not some trans hippy xer looking for a safe space.

honestly the amount of stupidity in the rhetoric from both the alt-left and alt-right is terrifying.
 
One more hideous SJW idea bites the dust. Can't wait for the nashing of teeth on Ars, Gizmodo, and other nutty left wing sites.

Please enlighten us as to why Pai in charge of the FCC and destroying Net Neutrality is a good thing. This is one of those things that even the Trump supporters on this very forum should be pissed off about.
 
So mega companies worth billions against net neutrality are corporatist profit greedy companies. Mega companies worth billions for net neutrality are in it for consumer protection and altruism. Got it. Do no evil.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dbr1
like this
So mega companies worth billions against net neutrality are corporatist profit greedy companies. Mega companies worth billions for net neutrality are in it for consumer protection and altruism. Got it. Do no evil.

Again, idiocy. No one has said that, and I doubt that most people here think corporations have the publics interest in mind.

Regardless of your nonsense point, net neutrality is a good thing for the public and end consumer.
 
One more hideous SJW idea bites the dust. Can't wait for the nashing of teeth on Ars, Gizmodo, and other nutty left wing sites.
Is this some sort of weird sarcasm, because it doesn't make sense if taken at face value. I despise SJW stuff as much as anyone, but this isn't that. This is about what should be a common carrier determining the quality of service it provides based on what benefits itself, not the end user. Would you be okay if a phone company said that some calls will have higher quality than others based on whatever serves the phone company's interests best? I doubt it.
 
I for one am glad to see this die. Any time you take more power away from the government, its a good thing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dbr1
like this
One more hideous SJW idea bites the dust. Can't wait for the nashing of teeth on Ars, Gizmodo, and other nutty left wing sites.
lol there's always one guy like this, even on a tech forum. You have to wonder if guys like 5icko even work in IT. There's just no way he could and think like this right? I mean how bad for his company must his skillset be if this is represents his knowledgebase?
 
I for one am glad to see this die. Any time you take more power away from the government, its a good thing.

Not when you're giving that power to corporate monopolies who are going to going to screw over anyone and anything to make more money when left to their own desires. The implications of this are very far reaching and in time I'm guessing there's going to be a lot of public anger on this one as ISP shit all over everything to promote their favored traffic. It's inevitable.
 
Is this some sort of weird sarcasm, because it doesn't make sense if taken at face value. I despise SJW stuff as much as anyone, but this isn't that. This is about what should be a common carrier determining the quality of service it provides based on what benefits itself, not the end user. Would you be okay if a phone company said that some calls will have higher quality than others based on whatever serves the phone company's interests best? I doubt it.
What this is an example of is precisely why Net Neutrality failed. People voting against their own best interests. He obviously has no clue what NN is and is just repeating what his inner circle of bobble head friends think on the issue. Hating NN is currently fashionable in the alt-right world. There just werent enough sane people to counter guys like him from ruining it.
 
So mega companies worth billions against net neutrality are corporatist profit greedy companies. Mega companies worth billions for net neutrality are in it for consumer protection and altruism. Got it. Do no evil.
The difference is one of these happens to benefit the consumer. Does netflix want NN to protect you from evil corporate censorship? No, they just want it so they can continue to deliver high quality streaming services. But that happens to work out in your favor.
 
I for one am glad to see this die. Any time you take more power away from the government, its a good thing.

While yes limiting government interference in the free market is generally positive, there are areas where the government should step in to safegaurd public interest. The neutral access to content on the internet is imho one such thing. Limiting corporations ability to monopolize a market, thus strangling the free market system is another. Control of the military is a direct power that the government should absolutely have.

So to say that any time you take more power away from the government, its a good thing, is false. The idea that the world could run itself without government (and thus governmental power) is absolutely bat shit crazy.
 
So mega companies worth billions against net neutrality are corporatist profit greedy companies. Mega companies worth billions for net neutrality are in it for consumer protection and altruism. Got it. Do no evil.

What exactly should be done then? What is the third option?
 
What this is an example of is precisely why Net Neutrality failed. People voting against their own best interests. He obviously has no clue what NN is and is just repeating what his inner circle of bobble head friends think on the issue. Hating NN is currently fashionable in the alt-right world. There just werent enough sane people to counter guys like him from ruining it.

Exactly, right wing folks reflexively lash out at anything government often without thinking it through. No net neutrality means that you're giving a handful of very powerful and rich corporations to control their network traffic in the most self-serving manner.
 
You got a lot of bites on this one. Linking it to SJW was a bit left field but it seems to have added just the right amount of zest.

Good bait, well trolled. 9/10

The troll was destroyed within less than 10 posts, I'd say it was a failure TBH.
 
Ah yes evil corporations.... the proverbial boogey man.

Not exactly. I have nothing against corporations, I work for a mega bank and have been happy overall. But I know full well when you let corporations do whatever they want to make a buck, that's EXACTLY what they'll do. That's just human nature and it's obvious at times it screws people over just for profit reasons. And often those profits only go to a handful of folks.
 
Net neutrality is a great thing.

All data is equal and to assume otherwise is you being retarded.
 
The troll was destroyed within less than 10 posts, I'd say it was a failure TBH.
The point of a troll is to piss people off, not win arguments. I'd say that, if this was a troll, it was a pretty good one. Better than most, anyway.
 
The point of a troll is to piss people off, not win arguments. I'd say that, if this was a troll, it was a pretty good one. Better than most, anyway.

Maybe? I think people use the Troll card to often, I get more of a 'wtf are you on about mate' vibe from the responses than 'grrr angry!'
 
, there are areas where the government should step in to safegaurd public interest.
The idea that the world could run itself without government (and thus governmental power) is absolutely bat shit crazy.

Wow, how many millions of people have died all because their savior governments have done things in their best interest?
I'm not talking anarchy, don't even go there.
 
Wow, how many millions of people have died all because their savior governments have done things in their best interest?
I'm not talking anarchy, don't even go there.

Please, enlighten us as to how Pai in charge of the FCC and destroying Net Neutrality is a good thing? We'd love to hear your reasoning.
 
Wow, how many millions of people have died all because their savior governments have done things in their best interest?
I'm not talking anarchy, don't even go there.

I am reading what you wrote, 'any time' that is a large blanket statement that say that ANY TIME you take government power away it is a good thing. that is anarchy, you are talking it even if you do not understand what you said.

So now your blaming natural human fallacy on governments? Or is it that governments just do it worse? i do not understand your point.
 
Ah yes evil corporations.... the proverbial boogey man.
Wanting to charge a company extra for using more data which is already paid for is what they want.


Netflix eBay Amazon Google already paid their ISP for data and Comcast att or whoever paid their ISP for theirs.

Intentionally slowing down data because you want protection money is extortion.
 
Wow, how many millions of people have died all because their savior governments have done things in their best interest?
I'm not talking anarchy, don't even go there.

You talking in broad absolutes and that's not what this. This is a very specific issue regarding a very specific behavior. Do ISPs have the right to control how they handle their traffic based on WHAT that traffic is? In a nutshell that's all we're talking about here.
 
Not exactly. I have nothing against corporations, I work for a mega bank and have been happy overall. But I know full well when you let corporations do whatever they want to make a buck, that's EXACTLY what they'll do. That's just human nature and it's obvious at times it screws people over just for profit reasons. And often those profits only go to a handful of folks.

Except, the government does not need to make money. They take money by force if you refuse to pay. Great business model.
The thing is, more government regulations allows larger companies to engage in crony capitalism.
 
So, because you want your streaming service to be faster, you would allow the federal government to take control of it?
That is crazy!...
I realize there are issues with companies doing sketchy things, but turning over control of a market to the federal government is not the way to fix it.
 
I am reading what you wrote, 'any time' that is a large blanket statement that say that ANY TIME you take government power away it is a good thing. that is anarchy, you are talking it even if you do not understand what you said.

So now your blaming natural human fallacy on governments? Or is it that governments just do it worse? i do not understand your point.

Every sin of government is bought up by these folks but they NEVER say anything about net neutrality or what it is and why it's evil. It is a disservice to everyone.
 
So, because you want your streaming service to be faster, you would allow the federal government to take control of it?
That is crazy!...
I realize there are issues with companies doing sketchy things, but turning over control of a market to the federal government is not the way to fix it.

This is gold. Do you even understand the implications of the loss of net neutrality?

For one thing ISPs have already shown that they want content producers to pay them to allow end consumers to access the content. This puts more power at the hand of big government and big corporations, not less. Those that can pay will have their content shoved right to your door, those that can't will be burried.

How would you like only CNN or Fox for your news because they can pay the most?

It is quite clear that you do not understand the risks and government.
 
This is gold. Do you even understand the implications of the loss of net neutrality?

For one thing ISPs have already shown that they want content producers to pay them to allow end consumers to access the content. This puts more power at the hand of big government and big corporations, not less. Those that can pay will have their content shoved right to your door, those that can't will be burried.

How would you like only CNN or Fox for your news because they can pay the most?

It is quite clear that you do not understand the risks and government.

Its the Ttile II regulation i have a problem with. Its reach is way to big.
 
Back
Top