Ajit Pai and the FCC Want It to Be Legal for Comcast to Block BitTorrent

DigitalGriffin said:
Correct me if I'm wrong but the FCC regulates all communication agencies as communication is considered a vital form of information exchange. And this is considered vital to the well being of the country as a whole.

Weren't phone companies regulated for years by the FCC Mr genius? FCC didn't seem to screw them up.

Even when power companies we're regulated by the state and had state run supplies (like the Tennessee valley authority), electricity was reliable and relatively cheap.

Yet you would allow a monopoly company the right to dictate to you how and when you would get access to vital services?
Click to expand...
DigitalGriffin said:
Correct me if I'm wrong but the FCC regulates all communication agencies as communication is considered a vital form of information exchange. And this is considered vital to the well being of the country as a whole.

Weren't phone companies regulated for years by the FCC Mr genius? FCC didn't seem to screw them up.

Even when power companies we're regulated by the state and had state run supplies (like the Tennessee valley authority), electricity was reliable and relatively cheap.

Yet you would allow a monopoly company the right to dictate to you how and when you would get access to vital services?
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter how emotional you get over this. That is the problem with the youth of today. The ends always justifies the means, even at the cost of our system and our liberty.

Read your Constitution, unless you are not American, at which point I do not want to discuss this with you.

The Tenth Amendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Where in all of our constitution does the power to legislate ANYTHING belong to ANY agency that is purposed by the Executive branch? The FBI, THE FCC, THE FEC, you go down the list. These are all executive branch offices. They were designed to ENFORCE law that was legislated by our congress and not given the power to create law. Yet because it doesn't feel good or sound good or make you happy you not only desire to eradicate the very system of balance we have in place, you seek to destroy your own liberties in order to feel safe and secure.

It isn't about your internet connection damnit. It is about demanding a non-legislative committee of five people having the power of a congress without representing the people nor having been elected by the people.

Where in a consitutional republic do you not understand that as being UNLAWFUL! All Trump is doing as the executive leader is having them undo the unconstitutional non authorized legislation passed by the FCC under Obama.

Only congress reserves the right to legislate our internet, and if they do not reserve that power to themselves then the states individually have power over their own internet affairs per the tenth amendment.

The reason our nation is failing is because you and others have failed to learn our core principles and our foundation required republican based system of government.

And I am not talking about the republicans in the house. I am talking about the legal requirement of a republican government to be afforded by the congress. Read Article IV Section 4 of the Constitution: The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened), against domestic Violence.

and I safely assume you do know the difference in a republic and a democracy which we are NOT. And since we have blindly and sheepishly forced democracy into our system we are failing as a nation.

and read ... https://www.cnet.com/news/court-fcc-has-no-power-to-regulate-net-neutrality/

And please reply, if you choose, with something that is adult and educated, and researched, and re-searchable, and has validity, and does not attack me because you can't meet any of the above criteria. Can you do that?

I am preparing for a typical attack involving name calling and stereotyping at which point I am going to just knock the dust off my feet and leave.
 
Pai is a dumbass (well actually he just appears to be stupid, he knows full well what he is doing and who is lining his pockets). He seriously has the nerve to say that Americans don't need regulations to protect them from ISPs and all their money. Instead ISPs should be allowed to do whatever the hell they want and Americans can just protect themselves by complaining and using magic pixie dust or some shit. Because that's supposed to work lol.

I hope that the revolving door hits him on the ass on his way back to Verizon.

Tell you what Pai, you can have it your way and ISPs can not be regulated or treated as utilities just as soon as they all pay back every fucking cent of taxpayer money they have taken for infrastructure build-outs, maintenance, tax breaks, etc. Oh right, they can't fucking afford to do that lol. Sucks to be them. No more exclusivity contracts or use of utility easements either, fuck em. The ISPs can then decide if they can afford to operate on their own dimes, or should i say, if they can afford _not_ to be regulated for the same people that are making their livings possible to begin with.

Can we just un-confirm this paid for snake and get Tom Wheeler back???
 
tangoseal said:
It doesn't matter how emotional you get over this. That is yours and many other leftists problem. The ends always justifies the means, even at the cost of our system and our liberty.

Read your Constitution, unless you are not American, at which point I do not want to discuss this with you.

The Tenth Amendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Where in all of our constitution does the power to legislate ANYTHING belong to ANY agency that is purposed by the Executive branch? The FBI, THE FCC, THE FEC, you go down the list. These are all executive branch offices. They were designed to ENFORCE law that was legislated by our congress and not given the power to create law. Yet because it doesn't feel good or sound good or make you happy you not only desire to eradicate the very system of balance we have in place, you seek to destroy your own liberties in order to feel safe and secure.

It isn't about your internet connection damnit. It is about demanding a non-legislative committee of five people having the power of a congress without representing the people nor having been elected by the people.

Where in a consitutional republic do you not understand that as being UNLAWFUL! All Trump is doing as the executive leader is having them undo the unconstitutional non authorized legislation passed by the FCC under Obama.

Only congress reserves the right to legislate our internet, and if they do not reserve that power to themselves then the states individually have power over their own internet affairs per the tenth amendment.

The reason our nation is failing is because you and others have failed to learn our core principles and our foundation required republican based system of government.

And I am not talking about the republicans in the house. I am talking about the legal requirement of a republican government to be afforded by the congress. Read Article IV Section 4 of the Constitution: The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened), against domestic Violence.

and I safely assume you do know the difference in a republic and a democracy which we are NOT. And since we have blindly and sheepishly forced democracy into our system we are failing as a nation.

and read ... https://www.cnet.com/news/court-fcc-has-no-power-to-regulate-net-neutrality/
Click to expand...

Aww I quote the Constitution proving you wrong along with history and you get all pissy saying I don't know shit and calling me a leftest.

I'm a pretty damn hard core Republican. Although I'm more of a small government fiscal conservative Republican. I do believe in hands off business unless it takes advantage of the public in ways they can't counteract. (In other words predatory)
 
Rise up Americans. You have the power to make all of this nonsense go away, if you choose to get off your asses. Otherwise, suck it up.
 

You know that does make sense, but not sure I trust Congress any more than the FCC to do the right thing when it comes to technology and with this much money involved, probably less heh. I guess... at least it would be harder to corrupt a majority of congress than 5 people at the FCC being able to fuck everything up just because heh. So you're right but I'm not sure what the right answer is :/ Not sure I see Congress passing a bill treating ISPs as utilities :(.
 
DigitalGriffin said:
Aww I quote the Constitution proving you wrong along with history and you get all pissy saying I don't know shit and calling me a leftest.

I'm a pretty damn hard core Republican. Although I'm more of a small government fiscal conservative Republican. I do believe in hands off business unless it takes advantage of the public in ways they can't counteract. (In other words predatory)
Click to expand...

I edited my post before your response because I felt it was unfair to call you a leftist as I have no idea what you are. I literally removed it before your reply. Plus I don't want to be a hypocrite and stereotype you. Go read where I edited and the time stamp vs. your reply.

I never read where you quoted the Constitution. I just wished that people actually understood it and stopped assuming the way stuff should be because of emotion.

If you truly understood our founding principles, and I assume you do based on your assertion, then why do you see the foul in undoing regulations that were imposed on us without the process of the legislative branch? Are you suggesting that you do not support the law of the land?

edit** and I truly appreciate your response not being all vitriolic. Thanks really. I can see where your concern is however, if we are going to survive as intended, the law must be adhered to whether or not we like it. And if we do not like it then we the people reserve the right to have our representatives change it or else we are nothing but a tyranny with big screen tv's.
 
wolfofone said:
You know that does make sense, but not sure I trust Congress any more than the FCC to do the right thing when it comes to technology and with this much money involved, probably less heh. I guess... at least it would be harder to corrupt a majority of congress than 5 people at the FCC being able to fuck everything up just because heh. So you're right but I'm not sure what the right answer is :/ Not sure I see Congress passing a bill treating ISPs as utilities :(.
Click to expand...

Our congress is so corrupt that I fear that all of our fears on this very thread no matter our political backing or backgrounds is right. They are so unpredictable that we can actually with great precision predict how they are going to screw us over yet again. Talk about an oxymoron.

The biggest vessel of speech freedom is the internet. Why then are so many power hungry tyrant bastards, both government or corporate, trying their hardest to gain control over it? Control speech you control thought.

Regulate speech, regulate history, regulate thought and we are left with another .... history that repeats its self.

“The man who has no sense of history, is like a man who has no ears or eyes” - Hitler
 
Bigbacon said:
they won't block it, just charge you to be able to use it...like they will with everything else eventually.
Click to expand...


They might though, cause now you are talking about them getting paid off by big music and movie rights holders.
 
gusphase said:
Why is it now the FCC's job to regulate anticompetitive business practices? Wouldn't it be better to more strongly enforce antitrust laws across the spectrum rather than to pick on just the ISPs?
Click to expand...

Sure that would be the ideal solution but either way the FCC influence shouldn't be a problem. If the carriers are going to keep acting fairly why do they care about the FCC regulation or you or anyone?
 
vegeta535 said:
Be real. It is not there to download legal things. 95% of traffic going through torrents is copy righted stuff.
Click to expand...
It sets a precedent that the ISP's can deny whatever type of traffic they want. The threat of blocking and restricting it has already hindered the use of what is a pretty damn cool technology.
 
vegeta535 said:
Be real. It is not there to download legal things. 95% of traffic going through torrents is copy righted stuff.
Click to expand...

Must be a tasty foot you just put in your mouth. So that's 5% legit by your numbers, so we should just shut down BT because 95% of a perfectly useful internet system has been taken over by corruption. It was built for legal uses, it was coopted for illegal uses.

And I take back the nice words I had to say recently about Tai, he is an ass in the pocket of ISP's, just like those Furchgott-Roth fuckers!
 
tangoseal said:
It doesn't matter how emotional you get over this. That is the problem with the youth of today. The ends always justifies the means, even at the cost of our system and our liberty.

Read your Constitution, unless you are not American, at which point I do not want to discuss this with you.

The Tenth Amendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Where in all of our constitution does the power to legislate ANYTHING belong to ANY agency that is purposed by the Executive branch? The FBI, THE FCC, THE FEC, you go down the list. These are all executive branch offices. They were designed to ENFORCE law that was legislated by our congress and not given the power to create law. Yet because it doesn't feel good or sound good or make you happy you not only desire to eradicate the very system of balance we have in place, you seek to destroy your own liberties in order to feel safe and secure.

It isn't about your internet connection damnit. It is about demanding a non-legislative committee of five people having the power of a congress without representing the people nor having been elected by the people.

Where in a consitutional republic do you not understand that as being UNLAWFUL! All Trump is doing as the executive leader is having them undo the unconstitutional non authorized legislation passed by the FCC under Obama.

Only congress reserves the right to legislate our internet, and if they do not reserve that power to themselves then the states individually have power over their own internet affairs per the tenth amendment.

The reason our nation is failing is because you and others have failed to learn our core principles and our foundation required republican based system of government.

And I am not talking about the republicans in the house. I am talking about the legal requirement of a republican government to be afforded by the congress. Read Article IV Section 4 of the Constitution: The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened), against domestic Violence.

and I safely assume you do know the difference in a republic and a democracy which we are NOT. And since we have blindly and sheepishly forced democracy into our system we are failing as a nation.

and read ... https://www.cnet.com/news/court-fcc-has-no-power-to-regulate-net-neutrality/

And please reply, if you choose, with something that is adult and educated, and researched, and re-searchable, and has validity, and does not attack me because you can't meet any of the above criteria. Can you do that?

I am preparing for a typical attack involving name calling and stereotyping at which point I am going to just knock the dust off my feet and leave.
Click to expand...

Oh please. Stop this bullshit. States have no power to control ISPs. States are a big reason we got into this mess in the first place. When something effects the ENTIRE FUCKING COUNTRY (and, arguably, the entire bloody planet) its the duty of the Federal government to make sure it doesn't get out of the control. The United State is, by a large margin, THE WORST 1st world country when it comes to internet. Well some of the mess is understandable due to the sheer size of the country along with the way the population is spread, especially in middle America, it is still far beyond the point of being an unmitigated disaster. The ISPs have run relatively unregulated for decades, ever since there were ISPs, and look what happened. Local and state governments have utterly failed to curtail the problem and have only made it worse. You want to know where we would be without the FCC and DOJ prying into communications? Fucked beyond belief. Bell would never have been broken up so the entire country would be ruled under the thumb of a single company controlling all aspects of communication. States didn't have the power to stop AT&T at the time. AT&T Bell still holds the record of being the largest company in the history of the country. Federal anti-monopoly laws and the existence of the FCC have actually ended up giving states more power and leverage when dealing with mergers and the like. But without Federal intervention the most a single state can do to one of these mega ISPs is fine them, assuming they're actually breaking any state laws and haven't paid off the state's government.

By the way, the FCC was created by congress to handle matters dealing with communication. Congress oversees what they do and often demands that the FCC explain their actions and reasons behind them. The Constitution is a good baseline to follow, but don't pretend a few lines from hundreds of years ago can apply to every situation in the modern world. Laws and policies have to change with the times and there is no way you can seriously believe that congress and states alone are capable of dealing with every single conceivable issue that needs addressing constantly. Groups like the FTC, FCC, etc are needed to address specific matters that would likely never get looked at otherwise. Even if they do a piss poor job its better having them around then not.
 
tangoseal said:
And let me add to this...

Where the hell does the Constitution and the Bill of Rights give the FCC the power to legislate?

Based on that statement alone Net Neutrality needs to be eliminated and an appropriate measure needs to be decided upon and written and voted into law in our legally constructed and authrorized 535 member house of representatives.
Click to expand...

1) Interstate Commerce Clause gives it to the US Goverment.
2) US Congress passes and US President signs the Communications Act of 1934 creating the FCC and directing them to regulate communications and has passed numerous follow on acts doing the same.

FCC is perfectly within their powers given to them by both Congress and the President AND the US Courts have upheld that power.

AKA, all three branches of government say they can, so they can. Maybe you should go back to school and learn about the US Constitution and how governments works.

Next thing you'll do is fly off into windmills because a US DA didn't get a bill passed by congress and the president to indite a felon.
 
shansoft said:
Who put this guy in charge of FCC?

Who put the guy that put this guy in charge of FCC?

The trend is obvious....... (n)
Click to expand...

For most thinking people yes it is. Sadly some peoples minds are infested with propaganda, they choose to turn to sources like infowars and breitbart for information. So the outcome is pretty clear.
 
tangoseal - I get your argument, I really do. And in principle I agree. Executive orders and committees have been overstepping their bounds for a long time.

But at the same time, I still feel like Federal net neutrality is necessary because of the local government granted/encouraged monopolies of cable/ISP companies who, many of which are now also content creators, own the wires and have no real competition; along with a financial incentive to make THEIR content the "preferred" content. In an ideal world, I would prefer no regulation other than transparency. However, the cable/ISP market has never been open at the local/regional level, so throwing federal "open market" rules at local companies who are not in an open market simply won't work. Net neutrality from federal regs is the least intrusive way to "fix" the result of years of the existing network of state regs.

Its just a fucking mess, and its only getting worse, and I dunno htf to fix it.
 
Master_shake_ said:
This is exactly how this whole thing started.
the fcc was sued by verizon for telling them they couldn't block access to certain web services.
now 6 years later we've come3 full circle and the fcc says it's ok for them too.
and you people are arguing about politics.
this is not a left v right issue everyone is going to get fucked hard by this.
get over your affiliations and stop them.
Click to expand...

Is this now a common tactic to ignore people which made changes that produced the worst result?
https://www.theverge.com/2017/1/23/14338522/fcc-chairman-ajit-pai-donald-trump-appointment

It doesn't mater however what your political views are you will get screwed.

DigitalGriffin said:
Leave politics out of this. It detracts from this issue and it is a farce of the weak minded. Both sides lie and manipulate to achieve their objectives. Even one of my best friends in politics plays these games.
Click to expand...
If you left politics out of it then Tom Wheeler would still be in charge and guess what we would be talking about then , not the FCC certainly not in this manner..

Most of you people are to naive to realize that this is what capitalism can be about and the FCC also finds ways that no one can complain about it or hides their feedback on their website which is bandwidth limited

And now it is to late when you see reactions from the FCC they will IGNORE YOU.

You should start taking this seriously and begin organized opposition across America or else .....
 
Pieter3dnow said:

You should start taking this seriously and begin organized opposition across America or else .....
Click to expand...

It will have to wait until 2018 or 2020. Drumpfs minions have their hooks deep and they are rapidly advancing the corporatist agenda. Pai and his underlings will vote and it will split upon party lines just like with healthcare and the massive tax break for the rich that they are trying to ram through. It is all about politics and some of these Trump supporters will hopefully be driven back to reality when guberment lets the big ISP demons fuck with their interwebs.
 
Riptide_NVN said:
Comparing the amount of illegal traffic carried by the USPS to BitTorrent over the internet. This is a joke yes?
Click to expand...

I'm not comparing the amount, but the concept.

Bittorrent is simply a tool, as USPS is. The fact that people will missuse it isn't grounds for straight-up banning it for everybody.

SighTurtle said:
Relying on Congress to do anything to support Net Neutrality is a non-starter, telcos give too much money to politicians and the issue itself, does not show up on radar as a important issue worth swaying voters. Your best bet is through the FCC or the courts, relying on a Democrat president to facilitate the executive branch changes needed.

Part of the issue if I remember correctly, classifying traffic as all the same in NN helps ISPs avoid being harassed by rightholders attempting to block the spread of pirated content. Losing that defense also opens up avenues for ISPs to be forced or to enthusiastically (Comcast would sure love to do that huh?) suppress pirates and peer to peer sharing.

Now, I like the arguments about promoting market competition between telcos but frankly, that competition will not reappear, whether its government regulations or the simple fact that the market is no longer able to facilitate new competitors. Its futile to point at ideological defenses when the reality is that once NN is repealed, the door is open wide for telcos to start prioritizing unequal access to content.

Honestly, I dont even see the big deal in slapping the telcos with NN. Is requiring transparency, and making all content the "same" that big a deal for you to oppose? (NN DOES NOT mean disregarding data limits and restrictions, only that all content is regulated the same. If you get slowed down at a certain limit, ALL content gets slowed down. Perfectly valid, and NN does not disturb that, nor other measures to maintain traffic limits.) Anyone think they will magically fail with NN in place? Hell, why do you people keep supporting AT&T and Comcast? Bastards the whole lot of them. They can get fucked over by NN for all I care. (Won't they just transfer the costs down to the consumer? They do that already for no reason than profit! Which is fine, capitalism, except I dont give a shit about NN "preventing competition" lying bastards)
Click to expand...

This is something I do not understand.

How exactly so many people in the USA have no choice at all between ISP to choose from and, at the same time, anti-trust doesn't kick in? It boggles my mind that in Standard Oil anti-trust was so quick to act but it isn't in this different industry when it is mind-bogglingly worse. And I understand that it is worse because the whole market is colluding: the ISPs have split the country as per their better interests and they choose not to compete. They are an oligopoly, which in truth acts just as a monopoly would.

OEM said:
And what will they do about it? Where I live there are two options, my current ISP and satellite. And my ISP, as well as you, know that satellite isn't a viable option.
Click to expand...

Well, what they did in other countries: force competition. Here, for instance, if you are a de-facto monopoly in a given area the competition has access to your infrastructures after a few years (not for free, mind you, but at a fair price). So, you have a single company lying DSL (at least in my own place) but up to 10 (more, actually) being able to rent that DSL and offer you internet. When it comes to fiber, for instance, you have only 2 different installers (again, talking locally, not sure how many you have in the capital)... but because all connections are uncapped (except those for mobile, and even then we have uncapped connections) and most people sees no benefit from 20Mbps to 300Mbps they have to tier the prices perfectly. So, 20Mbps might cost you 35€ + VAT but 300Mbps is 50€ + VAT.


tangoseal said:
And I am not talking about the republicans in the house. I am talking about the legal requirement of a republican government to be afforded by the congress. Read Article IV Section 4 of the Constitution: The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened), against domestic Violence.

and I safely assume you do know the difference in a republic and a democracy which we are NOT. And since we have blindly and sheepishly forced democracy into our system we are failing as a nation.
Click to expand...

Wrong. There isn't any practical different between democracy or republic. There simply isn't.

DigitalGriffin said:
Aww I quote the Constitution proving you wrong along with history and you get all pissy saying I don't know shit and calling me a leftest.

I'm a pretty damn hard core Republican. Although I'm more of a small government fiscal conservative Republican. I do believe in hands off business unless it takes advantage of the public in ways they can't counteract. (In other words predatory)
Click to expand...

And your ISPs are as predatory as they get. Well, many many industries are predatory as they are self-regulated and you simply abide by their TOS without choice. That isn't good.
 
prava said:
This is something I do not understand.

How exactly so many people in the USA have no choice at all between ISP to choose from and, at the same time, anti-trust doesn't kick in? It boggles my mind that in Standard Oil anti-trust was so quick to act but it isn't in this different industry when it is mind-bogglingly worse. And I understand that it is worse because the whole market is colluding: the ISPs have split the country as per their better interests and they choose not to compete. They are an oligopoly, which in truth acts just as a monopoly would.
Click to expand...
Sorry if I sound like a broken record (hey, you asked), this is "regulatory capture." It means that just because the laws exist to break up anti-competitive businesses, if those businesses are donating heavily to campaigns, then its in the politicians best interest to do thing in their favor. We have MASSIVE corruption in our government, in both our political parties. While Democrats and Republicans will still diverge on a few issues (like net neutrality), by and large they agree on more than they disagree on. Busting up monopolies / oligopolies hits too close to home for their donors interest, so that's largely off the table for both parties nowadays.
 
prava said:
Well, what they did in other countries: force competition. Here, for instance, if you are a de-facto monopoly in a given area the competition has access to your infrastructures after a few years (not for free, mind you, but at a fair price). So, you have a single company lying DSL (at least in my own place) but up to 10 (more, actually) being able to rent that DSL and offer you internet. When it comes to fiber, for instance, you have only 2 different installers (again, talking locally, not sure how many you have in the capital)... but because all connections are uncapped (except those for mobile, and even then we have uncapped connections) and most people sees no benefit from 20Mbps to 300Mbps they have to tier the prices perfectly. So, 20Mbps might cost you 35€ + VAT but 300Mbps is 50€ + VAT.
Click to expand...

Be real, this is America we’re talking about. That’ll NEVER happen. Whatever company is there will just continue to buy our whatever political person they need to buyout to avoid compition.

THATS the American way.
 
prava said:
Well, what they did in other countries: force competition. Here, for instance, if you are a de-facto monopoly in a given area the competition has access to your infrastructures after a few years
Wrong. There isn't any practical different between democracy or republic. There simply isn't.
Click to expand...

I used to think along similar lines. Its a bit more complicated with data. Let me explain. With power, you pay two charges. One to maintain delivery (power lines) and one for the actual power (which can come from any supplier) A Power company can be metered to make sure they are contributing their proper amount to the grid. With a phone company, you have a dedicated line to your house. But like power you get two charges. One for line maintenance, and one for the phone company to route your call.

With Cable companies (that vast majority of broad band) you don't have a dedicated line to your house. You have a shared line. That shared line has limited bandwidth, and that data comes from a distribution point. That distribution point typically is attached to fiber now. You could have a company run in their own fiber to the hub, or rent out that fiber. The later would have a pricing structure established by a three letter committee. (As it was for telephone and power)

Any way to your point, the ISPs have said they need government funding to lay infrastructure. Yet it's been proven over and over that ISP's have more than recovered their cost on infrastructure and most of it is obscenely profitable if you break down the numbers (compared to other industries)

https://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/CMCSA/financials

Its about $9 billion net on $80 Billion in sales. This is after they pay for all their taxes and expenses. This is a darn profitable industry. They also never take a net loss because they are a monopoly. Even during recession they are profitable.




Prava said:
And your ISPs are as predatory as they get.
Click to expand...
Oh I completely agree. If you follow their pricing trend they have consistently outpaced inflation with no alternative available. Not only that but they sign exclusivity contracts which makes competition impossible. Then they turn around and sue the government when it tries to offer competition through their own infrastructure. This is a completely misplaced argument as the government has supplied power to under served regions of the United States since the Great Depression. There's zero excuse why they can't now.
 
This logic can be used to ban guns next, most bitttorrent/gun activity is so and so. Nevermind that it's a tool and has legitimate uses, the authorities know best and the fat check has spoken.

Today bittorrent, tomorrow guns.
 
Last edited:
Mut1ny said:
Because BitTorrent can't be used for legit things. I use it all the time to download shit legally.

Also, can we get an investigation going on this guy or something? Why is he being allowed to do any of this? It's clear there are outside influences in play here.

This is CLEARLY about the ISP's and money and not about the American people or their benefit.

I just don't get it, seems so screwy like I'm in some Bizarro land.
Click to expand...

Comcast built, owns and maintains their network. Why should the government have the authority to tell them what they can and cant do?

The problem is the lack of competition, which would push back against these practices. Dont like comcast? Go to the competitor. However, due to more government regulation it is nearly impossible to build a network to compete with them.

This is an age old problem. The government creates a problem and we expect them to fix it and it creates even more problems.
 
docmal said:
Comcast built, owns and maintains their network. Why should the government have the authority to tell them what they can and cant do?

The problem is the lack of competition, which would push back against these practices. Dont like comcast? Go to the competitor. However, due to more government regulation it is nearly impossible to build a network to compete with them.

This is an age old problem. The government creates a problem and we expect them to fix it and it creates even more problems.
Click to expand...
Actually the tax payer helped to pay for that network. In addition to the fact that we pay for it as consumers, so in this case the government absolutely should be giving them certain restrictions.

I do agree that government helped cause the mess though, partly via all their shady little agreements that let these localized happen in the first place.
 
While I agree with much of your argument, I dont believe in using unelected bureacrats to regulate anything. The FCC has been politicized and will change its tune with every new administration. Giving them the power to regulate also gives them the power to deregulate. If you want stability and lasting reform you need to pass law.

During the Obama admin congress punted to the FCC on net neutrality. Now the FCC is on record saying that they will take a light touch to regulation. The FCC should make recommendations to congress where law can be passed.

We need to pressure our congress to step up and make a common sense regulatory platform to lay out what can and cant be done on the internet. Something that protects business and innovation and also protects consumers. Something that is stable across elections.
 
docmal said:
While I agree with much of your argument, I dont believe in using unelected bureacrats to regulate anything. The FCC has been politicized and will change its tune with every new administration. Giving them the power to regulate also gives them the power to deregulate. If you want stability and lasting reform you need to pass law.

During the Obama admin congress punted to the FCC on net neutrality. Now the FCC is on record saying that they will take a light touch to regulation. The FCC should make recommendations to congress where law can be passed.

We need to pressure our congress to step up and make a common sense regulatory platform to lay out what can and cant be done on the internet. Something that protects business and innovation and also protects consumers. Something that is stable across elections.
Click to expand...

While that is a great idea, Congress sits on their hands because most of them are as technically adept as my left shoe.

Then when regulating industry how do you deal with pricing changes?
 
DigitalGriffin said:
While that is a great idea, Congress sits on their hands because most of them are as technically adept as my left shoe.

Then when regulating industry how do you deal with pricing changes?
Click to expand...

I think there are some core, underlying business practices which are completely unaffiliated with net neutrality which could use some regulation. I posted about it earlier in this thread.

Basically, lynch mobbing Ajit isn't really accomplishing anything, but it sure demonstrates how disconnected people are.
 
velusip said:
I think there are some core, underlying business practices which are completely unaffiliated with net neutrality which could use some regulation. I posted about it earlier in this thread.

Basically, lynch mobbing Ajit isn't really accomplishing anything, but it sure demonstrates how disconnected people are.
Click to expand...

it may not accomplish anything but it needs to happen none the less.
 
RayderR6 said:
Must be a tasty foot you just put in your mouth. So that's 5% legit by your numbers, so we should just shut down BT because 95% of a perfectly useful internet system has been taken over by corruption. It was built for legal uses, it was coopted for illegal uses.

And I take back the nice words I had to say recently about Tai, he is an ass in the pocket of ISP's, just like those Furchgott-Roth fuckers!
Click to expand...
Don't get me wrong. I am not for shutting it down but be real what bit torrent is lol.
 
OEM said:
Be real, this is America we’re talking about. That’ll NEVER happen. Whatever company is there will just continue to buy our whatever political person they need to buyout to avoid compition.

THATS the American way.
Click to expand...

You will not like this but who is paying for their "services" you are , you have put those megalomaniacs into a position that they abuse with your money. If politicians are bought of with your money , explain to me why you have the feeling you are powerless in all of this.

Without your money without your votes corporations and politicians would be no where.
 
tangoseal said:
Or to the literally hundreds of suicides that mysteriously had double gun shots to the head or self drowned in thier cars off bridges whom said anything negative about her highness Hitlery. Hrmm like DNC leak Seth Rich ... ruled a robbery but notjing was taken and he had a precision military style double tap to the brain cage.

But that just triggered someone on here. Im outta the convo now.
Click to expand...

Wow..........
 
trparky said:
And who needs the government? Everyone wants to run to the government when something like this happens. Oh help me government, please help me! HA! The only thing that the government has done is fuck things up, the less government we have the better. These are the same people who couldn't find their asses with both hands tied behind their backs.

Nothing works quite like having an angry mob outside Comcast's headquarters.
Click to expand...

I'd take government heading off a scenario where you need an angry mob to get something done, it is almost 2018 after all.

The rules seemed pretty good to me. "Don't be a dick or we will shove this flashlight up your ass and take a peek."
 
So I could pay to get faster connections to content I actually want or continue to have the poor clog up an already over utilized resource? I think I will choose option one please.
 
Pieter3dnow said:
You will not like this but who is paying for their "services" you are , you have put those megalomaniacs into a position that they abuse with your money. If politicians are bought of with your money , explain to me why you have the feeling you are powerless in all of this.

Without your money without your votes corporations and politicians would be no where.
Click to expand...
So let me see if I follow your argument. Say I'm in a regional monopoly, so my options are Comcast, or dial-up. So I pay Comcast for internet, because I want basic access. Then Comcast uses some of that money to pay lobbyists to get congress to repeal stuff like Net Neutrality or pass anything that favors them specifically. My local congressman doesn't give a shit, he's bought, I didn't vote for him, and his opposition wasn't any better.

So, you're arguing because I paid Comcast for faster than dial-up, this is all on me and you don't understand why people feel powerless?
 
MavericK said:
LOL @ the fucking shills in here defending this crap.

The only ones who are going to benefit from this are corporations. Everyone else is getting screwed dry.
Click to expand...
Because big Govt is batting a 1k with the American public right now.
 
docmal said:
Comcast built, owns and maintains their network. Why should the government have the authority to tell them what they can and cant do?

The problem is the lack of competition, which would push back against these practices. Dont like comcast? Go to the competitor. However, due to more government regulation it is nearly impossible to build a network to compete with them.

This is an age old problem. The government creates a problem and we expect them to fix it and it creates even more problems.
Click to expand...

But, what if, via misinformation and outright lies, a cable company used the citizens against their local government to get a monopoly? You have to remember that a lot of these local monopolies were created (especially cable) when TV watching was a big thing, and getting far more than 3-5 channels was amazing. If you tell people that their local government wants to make it where they either can't get more TV, or have to pay "high prices" for said channels, the average American would complain.

Fast forward a few years, and the people complain that they don't have other choices, so they ask their local government to make it possible. Incumbent ISP sues, state government steps in and either allows the municipality's ordinance to continue; to which the company/companies take it to a higher court citing FCC rules (as what recently happened in Nashville); or they create a law solidifying those monopolies.

It isn't always a simple "government created these monopolies" scenario.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top