FCC Chairman Wants A More Nuanced Net Neutrality Solution

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
This guy sure is wishy-washy when it comes to taking a stance on net neutrality. I'm not saying it's because he was a former lobbyist for the cable industry...but he was a former lobbyist for the cable industry. :D

Huddled in an FCC conference room Monday with officials from major Web companies, including Google, Yahoo and Etsy, agency Chairman Tom Wheeler said he has preferred a more nuanced solution. That approach would deliver some of what Obama wants but also would address the concerns of the companies that provide Internet access to millions of Americans, such as Comcast, Time Warner Cable and AT&T.
Click to expand...
 
Isn't he one of the ol' beans from the cable companies?

I mean, isn't that like hiring mice to guard your cheese?
 
Nuanced...That means "sounds good on the surface but is actually full of loopholes" in politispeak right?
 
There is no such thing as "half" network neutrality, you either have it or you don't. Stop insulting our intelligence... ugh.
 
Ducman69 said:
There is no such thing as "half" network neutrality, you either have it or you don't. Stop insulting our intelligence... ugh.
Click to expand...

When I hear things like "nuanced" I immediately think of "voluntary" and that makes me think of words like "irrelevant".
 
WTF does "nuanced" mean?

Sounds like a fancy word for "we aren't going to fix a damned thing but make people think we did".
 
Nuance - a subtle difference in or shade of meaning, expression, or sound.

As an aside, I love the comment in that article from Tom Wheeler, "I am an independent agency". Can he possibly be anymore of a blowhard?
 
There's only one side to an argument - namely the one with money.
 
Honestly, Obama put this guy into his job knowing he was the head cable lobbyist. WTF.
 
Also check out stopthecap.com if you want to check out all the cable lobby fraud and gov't shills working together. It's a great site that talks about this stuff on a daily basis.
 
I would not have a problem if an isp wanted to provide another company's service (like netflix or hulu) at an acceptable speed (10Mbit) if the customer only wanted a cheap broadband package at like 1Mbit
 
Despite the naysayers, implementing net neutrality in any meaningful, and more importantly, legal way does require a nuanced solution. Unfortunately it's almost guaranteed that at least some consumers will continue to get screwed whatever the outcome.

Cheap, fast Internet service? What are we, some kind of developing or developed economy? It's sad that China has a more competitive market and they're communists. lol
 
pxc said:
Despite the naysayers, implementing net neutrality in any meaningful, and more importantly, legal way does require a nuanced solution. Unfortunately it's almost guaranteed that at least some consumers will continue to get screwed whatever the outcome.

Cheap, fast Internet service? What are we, some kind of developing or developed economy? It's sad that China has a more competitive market and they're communists. lol
Click to expand...

You are aware that China price fixes right? They have high import tariffs, price fix their Yuan and play other hardball tactics because they can.
 
ravx25 said:
You are aware that China price fixes right?
Click to expand...
Not in communications. Those are run largely by private companies and the large number of those companies is the reason rates are low. Sorry to burst your bubble, but the scheme the US has is most comparable to corrupt regimes like Mexico or Russia, where strategic payments to certain politicians leads to near monopolistic markets.
 
Kueller said:
Nuanced...That means "sounds good on the surface but is actually full of loopholes" in politispeak right?
Click to expand...

I think you are close, but personally I think he wants something that sounds pro-consumer but is actually anti-consumer.

Sort of how the writers of Obamacare "Nuanced" he individual mandate so it didn't appear to be a tax, knowing full well it was a tax, but transparency is meaningless and instead reaching the goal is all that matters, and the public be damned!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top