Obama Picks Net Neutrality Backer as FCC Chief

Eulogy said:
Somy VoIP traffic, tagged Citrix traffic and other mission-critical services that I rely on QoS to make sure my packet gets there faster than your torrent should suffer?
People have managed to sway me even farther from this NN crap.
Click to expand...

That makes no sense. If you are using mission-critical applications, you are then going to transmit them across a non-mission critical pathway? Mission critical implies dedicated infrastructure, mission critical uptimes, etc. to go along with them. In that case QoS doesn't mean anything. Besides, I don't torrent all that much, but my data shouldn't be any different than yours. End of story.
 
xveganx said:
Ok can we stop this bullshit please?

W1retap you need to learn to chill. Stop using inflammatory language, if you have a point make it, but do so honestly and with RESPECT.

I have gotten out of line on here too but it is a mistake. I understand that you are a super neo-con, but really can't you argue politics on a site that is designed for arguing politics?

this is not the place for this shit, and I am tired of reading it. I don't agree with you, you don't agree with me but frankly we shouldn't be talking about this shit anyway. Not every single thread has turn into an opportunity for you to lay out the days republican talking points.

I suggest we do as MaxPC does and discourage all political conversations. This is [H]ard forum not the nation.com or the NYpost.com, so lets all STFU about the political nonsense K?
Click to expand...

This is the kind of back-handed insult that a non-conservative makes and then expects reciprocation. This is a dialogue and no one is forcing you to read it. However, for the sake of argument, you really should understand political nomenclature before you start throwing around terminology you don't have a concept of. You can't just blanketly call conservatives neo-cons. That is wrong and irrational. Secondly, what you perceive as talking points is absurd and is indicative of non-conservatives who don't understand conservative ideology. Politics for good or for ill affects you whether you like it or not, but it's better to discuss things than rubber-stamp your irreconcilable differences and shut down. Either engage or don't, your call, but don't try to take the ball and go home.
 
xveganx said:
when did I call you names? I said lets ALL stfu which would include myself, and no you aren't having a debate. Everytime someone makes a point you don't have a good response to, your answer is to just call them a commie and tell them to GTFO. Frankly its borderline trolling.
Click to expand...
You called me a super neo-con, then told us all to shut the fuck up. Hypocrisy.

If you're tired of seeing politics on [H] and keep injecting yourself in these political topics, it sounds like a personal problem to me.
 
Methadras said:
This is the kind of back-handed insult that a non-conservative makes and then expects reciprocation. This is a dialogue and no one is forcing you to read it. However, for the sake of argument, you really should understand political nomenclature before you start throwing around terminology you don't have a concept of. You can't just blanketly call conservatives neo-cons. That is wrong and irrational. Secondly, what you perceive as talking points is absurd and is indicative of non-conservatives who don't understand conservative ideology. Politics for good or for ill affects you whether you like it or not, but it's better to discuss things than rubber-stamp your irreconcilable differences and shut down. Either engage or don't, your call, but don't try to take the ball and go home.
Click to expand...

I engage in plenty of political discussions, on sites tailored to such discussion. I am not going to get into the merits or faults of conservative ideology because that is missing the point. Also, I didn't call all conservatives neo-cons, I called W1retap a neo-con. Period.
I am fine with political discussion where appropriate, but frankly as someone who has been on this forum going on 5 years, I just dont think this is the place for it.
 
Then stop being a hypocrite.

I argued on the basis of the Constitution and it's directive of limited government in this thread. If that labels me a neo-con, I'll glady take whatever names you want to throw at me. It just shows you have no political barometer when gauging other people. I doubt you even know what conservatism is and how it relates to the founding of the United States.
 
Holy shit, is wiretap still calling people communist? Thats hilarious. Man, I don't know if you noticed, but the Cold Wars been over for quite some time. You're like one of the rednecks on a trailer park porch with a Budweiser in one hand and NASCAR magazine in the other....I think I said that in an earlier thread, by my God thats a funny mental image. lol.

Guess what? People are disagreeing with you and you're screaming "COMMUNIST" and "GET OUT OF MY COUNTRY" just like you do in every thread (mostly ones involving Obama), but you seem to forget: This is a free country and people can disagree with you all they want and still be an American. Nice try though.

Anyway, the issue of NN is a pretty easy one to me. On one side we have the "possibility" that the Government is so evil and satanic and blah blah blah and will run the Internet into the ground. The "possiblity" they will meaninglessly destroy something just for shits and giggles.

And on the other side we have something that is not a possibility, but something very real and current: Greed. ISPs are greedy. There isn't an ISP out there whos going to be the white knight and let ou do whatever the hell you want with your connection. Sure, they could start doing it to get a massive amount of customers, but they'll just lock up on you like every other ISP would. Then you'll jump to the next ISP who claims to be a white knight, find out shit sucks, jump to another, and have a whole pile of broken contracts sitting on your table. And thats even IF, IIFFF you're a person in an area that has multiple ISPs. Guess what? Most places aren't like that, most areas have a single ISP, and if no one slaps them on the hand for being an asshole, guess what? They'll continue to be an asshole and deep fuck every person they have under them for every penny they're worth.

Both ISPs and the Government are greedy. I'm not saying otherwise. But the fact is, The government doesn't really benfit from an evil diabolic NN plan compaired to just a free internet, and every ISP in the US would rather stab you in the back and take your money then be your heroic "white knight".

Shit sucks. Go Net Neutrality.

(In before wiretap either replies to my post bit by bit or ignores the point all together. Either way I'm getting called a communist. :D )
 
He is also in favor of "media ownership rules that encourage diversity" what that means and we'll take radio for example because its easy to explain. They go to large media conglomerates for instance Clear Channel and they say whoa you own to many stations we're going to break you up and your going to sell your stations to "diverse people" basically any one besides white males. The best part of the deal is they subsidize these diverse owners because they are diverse. That would then allow the govt to setup rules as to what the new owner can put on his/her station, by saying you follow these guidelines or we cut off your subsidy. Effectively allowing the FCC commissioner appointed by the president to control what is broadcast on radio stations.

This can be applied to any media outlet under license from the FCC.

Also a Neo-conservative doesn't really mean anything in particular it was a term created for certain members of the Bush admin that were advocating the iraq war. Its main purpose was to draw similarities between nazis, neo-nazis, and the conservatives. Most people saw through this except for a few obviously.

Devin
 
w1retap said:
Then stop being a hypocrite.

I argued on the basis of the Constitution and it's directive of limited government in this thread. If that labels me a neo-con, I'll glady take whatever names you want to throw at me. It just shows you have no political barometer when gauging other people. I doubt you even know what conservatism is and how it relates to the founding of the United States.
Click to expand...

Do you even know what conservatism is? Do you even understand how the ideology came to be and whats true founding principles are? If you've read the "conservative mind" you would know that Edmond Burke is one of the most prominent names referenced in the book. If you knew Edmond Burke you would know that he opposed any form of small "d" democracy in its truest form. He believed in an elite ruling class. That is true conservatism, the establishment of a wealthy, powerful ruling class that holds power over all other commoners. It is no surprise then, that under the bush administration we saw the largest gap in wealth between the upper class, and lower class since before the great depression.
 
CHAoS_NiNJA said:
Holy shit, is wiretap still calling people communist? Thats hilarious. Man, I don't know if you noticed, but the Cold Wars been over for quite some time. You're like one of the rednecks on a trailer park porch with a Budweiser in one hand and NASCAR magazine in the other....I think I said that in an earlier thread, by my God thats a funny mental image. lol.

Guess what? People are disagreeing with you and you're screaming "COMMUNIST" and "GET OUT OF MY COUNTRY" just like you do in every thread (mostly ones involving Obama), but you seem to forget: This is a free country and people can disagree with you all they want and still be an American. Nice try though.

Anyway, the issue of NN is a pretty easy one to me. On one side we have the "possibility" that the Government is so evil and satanic and blah blah blah and will run the Internet into the ground. The "possiblity" they will meaninglessly destroy something just for shits and giggles.

And on the other side we have something that is not a possibility, but something very real and current: Greed. ISPs are greedy. There isn't an ISP out there whos going to be the white knight and let ou do whatever the hell you want with your connection. Sure, they could start doing it to get a massive amount of customers, but they'll just lock up on you like every other ISP would. Then you'll jump to the next ISP who claims to be a white knight, find out shit sucks, jump to another, and have a whole pile of broken contracts sitting on your table. And thats even IF, IIFFF you're a person in an area that has multiple ISPs. Guess what? Most places aren't like that, most areas have a single ISP, and if no one slaps them on the hand for being an asshole, guess what? They'll continue to be an asshole and deep fuck every person they have under them for every penny they're worth.

Both ISPs and the Government are greedy. I'm not saying otherwise. But the fact is, The government doesn't really benfit from an evil diabolic NN plan compaired to just a free internet, and every ISP in the US would rather stab you in the back and take your money then be your heroic "white knight".

Shit sucks. Go Net Neutrality.

(In before wiretap either replies to my post bit by bit or ignores the point all together. Either way I'm getting called a communist. :D )
Click to expand...
Ideology lives on.
 
xveganx said:
Do you even know what conservatism is? Do you even understand how the ideology came to be and whats true founding principles are? If you've read the "conservative mind" you would know that Edmond Burke is one of the most prominent names referenced in the book. If you knew Edmond Burke you would know that he opposed any form of small "d" democracy in its truest form. He believed in an elite ruling class. That is true conservatism, the establishment of a wealthy, powerful ruling class that holds power over all other commoners. It is no surprise then, that under the bush administration we saw the largest gap in wealth between the upper class, and lower class since before the great depression.
Click to expand...
I'm well aware of the terminology and how it relates to the founding principles of this country through limited government. I'm also well aware that the founding fathers put emphasis on our country being called a republic and not a democracy. Through conservatism, one does not rely on government for their needs. They believe in individual liberty and the free market to bring prosperity. A person is given life and liberty and must peruse their own happiness.
 
xveganx said:
It is no surprise then, that under the bush administration we saw the largest gap in wealth between the upper class, and lower class since before the great depression.
Click to expand...
Extra emphasis on this...

Are you saying we need to eliminate the gap and/or bring the gap together? How? By bringing down the top and/or raising up the bottom? How is that accomplished? Holy shit, you just brought up a tenant of the Marxist ideology from the Communist Manifesto. Redistribution of wealth. From each according to his ability - to each according to his need. Go ahead, spread around the wealth. Don't tell me I don't understand your political ideology. It's written plain as day all over every idea you try to extrapolate from your clouded mind.
 
w1retap said:
Extra emphasis on this...

Are you saying we need to eliminate the gap and/or bring the gap together? How? By bringing down the top and/or raising up the bottom? How is that accomplished? Holy shit, you just brought up a tenant of the Marxist ideology from the Communist Manifesto. Redistribution of wealth. From each according to his ability - to each according to his need. Go ahead, spread around the wealth. Don't tell me I don't understand your political ideology. It's written plain as day all over every idea you try to extrapolate from your clouded mind.
Click to expand...


Why do I never see you say a single thing about corporate welfare? I have yet to see you say one thing about subsidized roads and parking lots for Wal-mart, or the no bid contracts given to Haliburton/KBR by the Bush Administration. I see whine and bitch all day about downwards distribution of wealth, what is your stance on upwards distribution of wealth? Where is your outrage on that?
 
Btw, is it really that impossible for you to make a point without the word commie, or marxist? I mean really dude, its not necessary.
 
xveganx said:
Why do I never see you say a single thing about corporate welfare? I have yet to see you say one thing about subsidized roads and parking lots for Wal-mart, or the no bid contracts given to Haliburton/KBR by the Bush Administration. I see whine and bitch all day about downwards distribution of wealth, what is your stance on upwards distribution of wealth? Where is your outrage on that?
Click to expand...
I don't support bailouts and no bid contracts. I've said it many times before. I did not support the Bush administration doing it, I didn't support the Clinton administration doing it, and I don't support the Obama & future administrations doing it. I actually just mentioned no-bid contracts being BS in another thread today.

Again, why are you still arguing in the politics thread after whining about it?
 
xveganx said:
Btw, is it really that impossible for you to make a point without the word commie, or marxist? I mean really dude, its not necessary.
Click to expand...
It is necessary, because I'm going to call these ideas by their proper terms and why they were coined. I don't sugar coat anything out of political correctness.. sorry.
 
oh wait, the no bid contracts I actually mentioned in this thread too.. LOL. You obviously were asleep on that one. :p
 
Cool, w1retap didn't bother to reply (because I'm obviously not worthy) and is continuing to drop the "Commie bomb" in every post he makes.

God, I love prodictable people.
 
CHAoS_NiNJA said:
Cool, w1retap didn't bother to reply (because I'm obviously not worthy) and is continuing to drop the "Commie bomb" in every post he makes.

God, I love prodictable people.
Click to expand...
You're welcome. Like I said, the ideology lives on. It isn't a dated issue from just one era. When someone possesses and advocates ideology right out of the teachings of Karl Marx, I'll point it out and label that person with their belief system.
 
xveganx said:
Why do I never see you say a single thing about corporate welfare? I have yet to see you say one thing about subsidized roads and parking lots for Wal-mart, or the no bid contracts given to Haliburton/KBR by the Bush Administration. I see whine and bitch all day about downwards distribution of wealth, what is your stance on upwards distribution of wealth? Where is your outrage on that?
Click to expand...

Do you even understand what you are saying? Talk about talking points. First of all Corporate Welfare wouldn't exist if the corporate tax rate wasn't so high. Secondly, who else besides Haliburton/KBR has the capacity to do the work that they do on such a large scale? Do you even know what they do? The completely diverse scope of who they are as a corporation and how they get it done? The whole no bid contract canard has been beat to death and ends up being nothing.
 
w1retap said:
I don't support bailouts and no bid contracts. I've said it many times before. I did not support the Bush administration doing it, I didn't support the Clinton administration doing it, and I don't support the Obama & future administrations doing it. I actually just mentioned no-bid contracts being BS in another thread today.

Again, why are you still arguing in the politics thread after whining about it?
Click to expand...


Because you make inflammatory accusatory statements that are impossible not to respond to. We could have a respectful conversation about ideology but it seems you would rather start a flame war.
 
Methadras said:
Do you even understand what you are saying? Talk about talking points. First of all Corporate Welfare wouldn't exist if the corporate tax rate wasn't so high. Secondly, who else besides Haliburton/KBR has the capacity to do the work that they do on such a large scale? Do you even know what they do? The completely diverse scope of who they are as a corporation and how they get it done? The whole no bid contract canard has been beat to death and ends up being nothing.
Click to expand...
He felt like changing topics because he realized he was called out on wanting to eliminate wealth gaps so we're all one big collectivist society.
 
Methadras said:
Do you even understand what you are saying? Talk about talking points. First of all Corporate Welfare wouldn't exist if the corporate tax rate wasn't so high. Secondly, who else besides Haliburton/KBR has the capacity to do the work that they do on such a large scale? Do you even know what they do? The completely diverse scope of who they are as a corporation and how they get it done? The whole no bid contract canard has been beat to death and ends up being nothing.
Click to expand...

You've got to be kidding me, KBR allowed polluted water to be given to our troops, and killed a soldier because of faulty electrical wiring. That is not even the beginning of all the terrible crap that came as a result of those contracts. Stop watching Fox, you might learn something.
 
xveganx said:
I engage in plenty of political discussions, on sites tailored to such discussion. I am not going to get into the merits or faults of conservative ideology because that is missing the point. Also, I didn't call all conservatives neo-cons, I called W1retap a neo-con. Period.
I am fine with political discussion where appropriate, but frankly as someone who has been on this forum going on 5 years, I just dont think this is the place for it.
Click to expand...

Trust me. I've been here a lot longer and this place was and I'd like to think is still a hotbed of heated discussions. I don't know if some of the old threads/flame wars are still around, but there were people on here that knew their stuff and could easily make watertight arguments.
 
xveganx said:
Because you make inflammatory accusatory statements that are impossible not to respond to. We could have a respectful conversation about ideology but it seems you would rather start a flame war.
Click to expand...
Hey, you're the one who stepped into this topic. Either quit whining, or bring forth some topics of discussion. Or just continue whining about how politics are stupid on [H], then tell us all to shut the fuck up again, call us some more names and then whine how we are the ones doing the flaming. I'm eating some of the venison jerkey right now from the deer I shot. Lecture us on animals too. I'm interested now.
 
w1retap said:
He felt like changing topics because he realized he was called out on wanting to eliminate wealth gaps so we're all one big collectivist society.
Click to expand...

Wow, that was not what I said, but its no surprise you would twist someones words. I ddid not say I wanted to eliminate ALL wealth gaps. I just do not think its healthy to have such a LARGE gap in wealth. I am not opposed to people making money honestly, I am opposed to people making mounds of wealth of the backs of others, while taking all the credit. I think the person who works the hardest should get paid the most. I know that is a crazy idea.
 
xveganx said:
Wow, that was not what I said, but its no surprise you would twist someones words. I ddid not say I wanted to eliminate ALL wealth gaps. I just do not think its healthy to have such a LARGE gap in wealth. I am not opposed to people making money honestly, I am opposed to people making mounds of wealth of the backs of others, while taking all the credit. I think the person who works the hardest should get paid the most. I know that is a crazy idea.
Click to expand...
ahaha, yeah, only gaps that meet your criteria. Yes.. that's an acceptable standard. People can only make a certain amount of money, and poor people aren't allowed to be that poor. Tell me, do you know what a collectivist society advocates? Are you even listening to your own self, or are you just throwing out popular catch phrases from blogs that you read? I mean, this is getting really comical. You're basically saying you want a collectivist society, but you want individualism as well. Sorry, those are two contradictory philosophies that do not coincide with one another.
 
w1retap said:
You're welcome. Like I said, the ideology lives on. It isn't a dated issue from just one era. When someone possesses and advocates ideology right out of the teachings of Karl Marx, I'll point it out and label that person with their belief system.
Click to expand...

lol, oh God you make me laugh, please don't ever leave.
 
xveganx said:
Do you even know what conservatism is? Do you even understand how the ideology came to be and whats true founding principles are? If you've read the "conservative mind" you would know that Edmond Burke is one of the most prominent names referenced in the book. If you knew Edmond Burke you would know that he opposed any form of small "d" democracy in its truest form. He believed in an elite ruling class. That is true conservatism, the establishment of a wealthy, powerful ruling class that holds power over all other commoners. It is no surprise then, that under the bush administration we saw the largest gap in wealth between the upper class, and lower class since before the great depression.
Click to expand...

No offense. You aren't a conservative and throwing down Edmond Burke as a definition of conservativism is just wrong. You have no clue about conservative ideology, what drives it, how the ideology was derived. Furthermore, let's go ahead and just take your argument that there is this great divide between rich and poor. Okay, so what? There has always been rich and there has always been poor. No one system or theory of thinking has been able to change this fact. Conservativism is about individualism and self-reliance. That you as a citizen of this great country or for that matter any great country (because applying conservative values can be applied anywhere) are the master of your own destiny. If you aspire to great wealth you will be afforded the ability make your own way to that wealth. At the same time, there is nothing stopping you from miring yourself into abject poverty, but in that poverty you invariably find yourself going to a source for assistance, the government and once government has it's hooks into you, it's like the mafia. Once you're in, they don't want you to ever get out. Conversely, if you are aspiring to wealth or finally attain it, you are essentially free of government intrusion to a great degree. Oh you still have to deal with things like regulations, taxes, etc. etc. but if you can hurdle those obstacles and still attain your personal level of comfort then it's a win for you and for this country. One less person that is indebted to a life (hopefully) of poverty and one less person who is a drain on everyone else.

Conservativism is about successes. Small one and big ones. The beauty of those successes is they are built on top of each other. One always better than the next. What does the other ideology offer? What value does it confer to you as an individual where victimohood isn't a part of the lexicon? Do a comparison and contrast against those that ascribe to your ideological set vs. the ones that subscribe to mine and so the distinct differences between them. Want to be your own individual? Want to stop being a victim and blaming people and institutions for the ills of the world and deal with your own issues and seek your own way in life to make yourself a better person? Trust me, the grass is greener here. On your side, the grass is dead and you are blaming the gardener for not taking care of it.
 
xveganx said:
He clearly has never actually read the Communist Manifesto, but I agree he is entertaining.
Click to expand...
I've read it, and understand it. From the way you reply, I can't tell if you've read it (probably haven't), but you definitely don't understand it, because you equate collectivism with individualism.
 
xveganx said:
You've got to be kidding me, KBR allowed polluted water to be given to our troops, and killed a soldier because of faulty electrical wiring. That is not even the beginning of all the terrible crap that came as a result of those contracts. Stop watching Fox, you might learn something.
Click to expand...

Again, this is the typical talking point crap you accuse people of ascribing too. Hey, while your at it, why don't you just trot out from your bucket of rote generic anti-conservative criticisms against whatever is said e.g., you listen to rush, hannity, watch fox, you're a racist, bigot, homophobe, judgmental, redneck, illiterate, etc. etc. Just get it over with already because watching you dribbling it out is tiresome. You've obviously never seen shitty business practices that any company can engage in, but now you want to tie no-bid contracts to how KBR "allowed" (as if it was on purpose) polluted water to be given to our troops and a soldier was electrocuted due to faulty wiring? You know how many people die in this country from faulty wiring? Way more than one soldier. However, can you refute what I've said or are you just going to beat your head on the wall of the talking points you don't want people to adhere too?
 
As a disclaimer I own Das Kapital, Mao's Little Red Book, any number of versions of The Communist Manifesto, Socialism by Ludwig Von Mises, and tons more. I have a fairly big library of political ideological theory and philosophy.
 
w1retap said:
Yes, I know. When you think about it, people living in America advocating the opposite of the US Constitutional value system is quite comedic.
Click to expand...

Indeed. I can't wait for our flag to get a new splash of red, maybe a couple of working tools crossed to replace those silly stars.

It will be good times, comrade. :)
 
Methadras said:
As a disclaimer I own Das Kapital, Mao's Little Red Book, any number of versions of The Communist Manifesto, Socialism by Ludwig Von Mises, and tons more. I have a fairly big library of political ideological theory and philosophy.
Click to expand...



I wouldn't doubt it. Although your responses have a tone of inflammatory language ( mine can too) you at least make intelligent, well thought out arguments. I disagree with them, but respect them. I wish I could say the same about good ol' w1retap, but it just aint so.
 
xveganx said:
I wouldn't doubt it. Although your responses have a tone of inflammatory language ( mine can too) you at least make intelligent, well thought out arguments. I disagree with them, but respect them. I wish I could say the same about good ol' w1retap, but it just aint so.
Click to expand...

I don't mean to be inflammatory, however I may be somewhat aggressive in replying to the things I see as trying to undercut real dialogue, so I become annoyed in reading them and consequently curt in sweeping them aside to get to the meat. The question I'll ask you is a simple one, but one that I can answer if asked me. What is it exactly that you disagree with me about in terms of my ideology? And why do you believe in the ideology you subscribe to? You don't have to answer that now. Just think about it and let me know.
 
Methadras said:
That makes no sense. If you are using mission-critical applications, you are then going to transmit them across a non-mission critical pathway? Mission critical implies dedicated infrastructure, mission critical uptimes, etc. to go along with them. In that case QoS doesn't mean anything. Besides, I don't torrent all that much, but my data shouldn't be any different than yours. End of story.
Click to expand...
We DO have dedicated circuits everywhere. On our most critical circuits, they're point to point. However, a lot of the others still have to transverse the internet (yup, same one as you bud), in which from what's been said, my QoS will be disregarded. QoS means everything, even on our PtP circuits. You obviously don't have much of a clue how it works or what it's supposed to do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top