R.I.P. The Internet will die today
- Thread starter dmnEPC
- Start date
well it is the same organization that does not allow swearing on TV. Im sure it will all work out just great. And the best part.... The tech community fucking bought into this shit hook, line, and sinker. Dont worry. They have your best interest at heart.
EDIT: I love this part
That phrase "lawful content" is more than a little concerning.
So later down the road, if I use bad language on the interwebs, I'll get a ticket in the mail?
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dz4HEEiJuGo[/ame]
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dz4HEEiJuGo[/ame]
Edit: My bad, I thought it didn't pass. it's still fucked up how they appointed Wheeler as the chairmen.
(O_o)
H̨̼̩͐̑͆̀̚&
I'm not saying the government is sponsored by mega corporations or anything, BUT... this is a screenshot from the live session:
Source: http://live.theverge.com/fcc-title-ii-net-neutrality-live-blog/
I can't tell if this is real or not anymore... I think we've all had a good run....
I believe that idiot is Ajit Pai, former legal counsel for Verizon.
tl;dr : a corporate puppet in favor of fast laneing the internet.
I wasn't sold by Washington.
I was sold by the two options on the table.
While the 3rd imaginary, ideal option would be great. It wasn't on the table. And never will be.
Your fear-mongering of needing a license for a blog can and will happen regardless of how the internet is classified. Because ultimately any licensing requirements come from your local jurisdiction.
And your fear of censorship? It has, does and will happen. They don't need to re-classify the internet for that. Have you read any of the latest legislation? SOPA, Patriot Act, etc? Anything and everything can be classified in a secret court as being for national security. They ALREADY have the power.
I'm glad my sites won't be throttled. I can't pay $xx,xxx per month to ISPs who are already making out like bandits. The downsides suck though. It would have been better to leave things as they were from the beginning.
I don't disagree with your post. Point of clarification. I did not mention licensing in any of my posts. So that means I couldn't be fear mongering on that point
Last but not least. Throttling was a smoke screen. Your sites where never gonna be throttled. This point was used to manipulate (sell) net neutrality to the tech crowd.
Edit: are you being or have you ever had your sites throttled? What makes you think that would change if we don't get regulation?
Sorry, I read blue cayote's post and mixed it up with yours.
Care to share a link to back up your claim re:throtelling? I'm open to changing my mind if you can show me something that I consider credible and logical/reasonable.
In reply to your edit: It seems logical to me that if you allow ISPs to throttle websites in order to shake them down for money, they will do it. They are for the most part, monopolies.
Is your own personal experience not credible enough? In 20 years I have never known of a single site to be throttled
EDIT: That does not mean throttling has not happened. ISP's have been throttling users for years. Net Neutrality wont change that. I have nothing to back this up, but I would guess end user throttleing will become much more of an issue in the coming years. But that is a separate issue.
When did I say it happens? ISPs didn't used to be able to throttle traffic legally because of net neutrality rules that were recently struct down. I agree, it probably happened anyway.
I think any reasonable person will agree that if it was legal for ISPs to throttle traffic and then charge websites to un-throttle them, it would probably happen a HELL of a lot more often. It is my understanding that stricking down net neutrality, as happened, made this legal.
This new legislation, while littered with some issues of goverment censorship, re-instates net neutrality principals.
Therefore, having net neutrality rules will help avoid this at the ISP level. Private companies are a lot more active than government, even if they have less power. Government can ALWAYS censor, with or WITHOUT net neutrality.
So there are more pluses to net neutrality than negatives.
Tim Berners-Lee explained this. You'd have to give me a pretty damn credible source for me to change my mind on it.
Or articulate a very reasonable argument. But your current one of: it has happened and will happen a billion times more often and it is the end of the Internets OMG, sounds like pure noise without any coherence.
There have been reports by thousands that they were throttling Netflix at the very least. It would make sense for cable companies to do so as well - it's competition. That's the whole point of NN, to get rid of that bullshit
I had noticed a shittier connection to Netflix myself in the last 1.5 yrs but not really sure if it was from throttling or not since I never measured it.
But no they won't likely throttle our small business sites unless we ever bother them in some way.
I have no doubt there could be hidden agendas in the new legislation but if you could be more specific on what exactly is in there that's scary let me know. Otherwise I'm glad that they won't throttle Netflix, HBO Go, torrents, etc.
Ummm, unlawful content is already censored:
So your position seems to be we should allow ISPs to freely do as they please, extort who ever they want with their monopoly power so we won't have government censorship of unlawful content which you acknowledged we already have?
The cognitive dissonance in that statement gives me a headache.
Not convincing to say the least.
I can't tell you what is so scary. And neither can anyone else. The vote was based on a 300+ page report was kept secret from the public. Why they need to keep these things secret? Don't know that either. But the government does not keep things secret for no reason.
BTW "Torrents" likely won't be considered "lawful content" so that will likely be blocked, and or throttled. It doesn't bother you that they cracked your SSL so they could figure out it was netflix content to throttle? Again a separate issue.
Let me ask one question. Please name any 1 single piece of regulation that benefits the common man? No matter what is in that report, I can assure you it was written by special interest groups. And they have no interest in protecting your freedoms.
BTW. The president wrote a hand written thank you note to everyone at Reddit for helping to get this deal done
This is patently false. Look at the wiki leaks documents. Plenty of those are inane bullshit that has no reason to be kept secret.
You'd be the first to accuse the government of putting too many things, including things that should be public as secret.
But now that it fits your argument to say otherwise... it is otherwise?
Common.
Ummm.... torrenters have been throttled for a long ass time. What are you talking about? Do you even internets bro?
You keep saying, with this change, we'll get things we already have. Scary. Do you seriously not see how easy it is to take down your arguments?
Yeap, but a recurring theme.
You mention shit that isn't to the point to appeal to peoples emotions because your emotions were activated.
Great rhetoric.
Terrible dialectics.
If you want to convince those of us who think, you gotta do better than that.
Freedom of speach. The fifth amendment. All legislation related to the installation of sewege.
You keep doing it.
You say shit that is true. But has nothing to do with the topic at hand.
It is like when people defend the patriot act by saying:
"But child safety is important"
Duh. Of course it is. But it has NOTHING to do with the Patriot act.
Just like your arguments have nothing to do with the topic at hand.
They are just lame pandering to the lowest common denominator within your group.
BTW. The president wrote a hand written thank you note to everyone at Reddit for helping to get this deal done
OMG, OBAMA. OBAMA BE BAD. BAD PEOPLE LIKE BAD THINGS. HE LIKES SOMETHING. MUST BE BAD. ME SMART.
Am I finally getting it?
I don't mean to fall into the fallacy fallacy, but you aren't doing very well defending your position.
