Censored Internet Getting Closer and Closer>



This has nothing to do with the Tea Party, there is not one single quote from any Tea Party member in that article.
This whole net neutrality issue should be questioned , is there really a need for government to control everything? This comes down to being able to tax the internet as a utility, those on the left always question big corporations while at the same time trying to lay taxes on everything under the sun.

You are right about one thing, Get da monies
 
Censored internet is even closer to actually happening here in Aus, its a major fucking concern and something that your average person doesn't seem too worried about because it is being sold under the guise of protecting the children from internet predators and child pornographers...
 
It's happening everywhere. Weird, the whole world is becoming like China. Actually, the whole world will BE Chine in a few more decades.
 
Net neutrality is a trickier issue than it seems. We're all for "net neutrality" which in our minds means leave it the way it is. But that's not what Net Neutrality means. Net Neutrality means allowing the FCC to govern the Internet (and to decide what we have access to, presumably) whereas those against net neutrality do not want the government to regulate the Internet. Where the problem may arise is since companies have a profit motive, if they can control the Internet in a way to increase their profit (ie charging for access to certain packages of sites like cable) then they will.

This is gonna be like putting toothpaste back in the tube - both solutions suck but it looks like the days of a largely unregulated (by govt or large companies) internet are soon to be over. Here's what we can expect to see:

YZeFm.jpg


Good luck bros.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rogerrabbit
JakeStratham said:
It's like someone saying they're a good driver or great in the sack. Saying it doesn't make it so.
Click to expand...

Again - read up on something before making yourself look retarded. Fuck - can't believe I'm defending the Tea Party here but whatever.

Net Neutrality is Government regulation. Net Neutrality = FCC controlled internet. So if you are against government regulation it would only make sense to be against net neutrality. I wish they would just leave well enough alone but that's not gonna happen so either we'll have an FCC controlled Internet, or see image above.
 
Unarmed Gunman said:
Again - read up on something before making yourself look retarded. Fuck - can't believe I'm defending the Tea Party here but whatever.

Net Neutrality is Government regulation. Net Neutrality = FCC controlled internet. So if you are against government regulation it would only make sense to be against net neutrality. I wish they would just leave well enough alone but that's not gonna happen so either we'll have an FCC controlled Internet, or see image above.
Click to expand...

Perhaps I wasn't clear. Let me try again.

1. Net neutrality equals letting the federal government regulate the internet.

2. Libertarians are supposed to be against the federal government regulating things like the internet.

3. cardine asked why do libertarians support net neutrality.

4. I responded to cardine by implying many people call themselves libertarians without actually being a libertarian. They say it, but don't mean it. This seems to be supported by the fact that these so-called libertarians support net neutrality.

If you see a fallacy in my line of reasoning above, say so. Point it out to me. You're a smart guy, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, and assume I've missed something.
 
Unarmed Gunman said:
Net Neutrality means allowing the FCC to govern the Internet (and to decide what we have access to, presumably) whereas those against net neutrality do not want the government to regulate the Internet.
Click to expand...

From Wikipedia:

"Network neutrality (also net neutrality, Internet neutrality) is a principle proposed for user access networks participating in the Internet that advocates no restrictions by Internet Service Providers and governments on content, sites, platforms, on the kinds of equipment that may be attached, and no restrictions on the modes of communication allowed."http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_neutrality#cite_note-berners-lee-def-0http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_neutrality#cite_note-wu-def-1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_neutrality#cite_note-nn-for-google-users-2


Did I miss something here?
 
davidne said:
Did I miss something here?
Click to expand...
People construe no restrictions by ISPs to mean that ISPs cannot restrict what flows across their bandwidth, at what speed, and how to charge for it.

I am fine with paying ala carte for the internet as long as the government doesn't step in and create regulatory monopolies. The free market always delivers lower prices and innovations over time if there is competition.

Look at all of the options and price tiers in mobile phone service. Is anyone complaining that phone companies should not be able to offer premium packages for long distance and other features based on demand?

If the government treats the internet like a public utility, it is going to turn into the post office. And most of us in IM will be really handicapped with how we can do business.
 
I side with the tea party quite often (however do not share all their views) and feel that I'm closer to being a libertarian than anything else.

As others have said , Net Neutrality is asking the government to regulate something to make it 'free'. I have YET to see where the government has been put in control of something and made it any better.

Yes , we're likely to see large companies control a majority of the internet in terms of who owns the backbone ,ect. However as time goes on , small companies will ALWAYS look at ways to grab a piece of the internet pie. Competition is always important for any industry, and the internet is absolutely no different.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom