Net Neutrality

[The Conservative]

We tried that. The same companies that bribed the FCC to dump net neutrality bribed state legislatures to literally criminalize municipal WAN.

Everybody who supports this is on the exact opposite side of competition. This is the opposite thereof.

You still haven't answered the primary question, if mega-companies such as Comcast, Google, Amazon, etc are for net Neutrality, shouldn't that pose a major red flag to you in what it's real purpose is?

Comcast is not for net neutrality.

Google wavers back and forth, depending upon what benefits them at the time.

Amazon is for net neutrality because they know Comcast and other cable ISPs are going to throttle their streaming services lest they pay up big time.

Everything comes down to the profit motive. Cable companies control the broadband in this country. They bribed your state legislatures to criminalize the push for municipal broadband services more than ten years ago so they have monopolies now. They also have shitty on demand television services that cannot really compete with Netflix or Amazon streaming services. The cable package is a fucking waste of money, which is why most people just purchase the broadband internet and then get Netflix. Cable companies want to end net neutrality because it means they can throttle and essentially shut down competition. Competition they allow won't really be competition at all, since the cable company will get a cut out of that business in exchange for allowing their broadband customers to view the content.

It's a giant steaming pile of burning horse shit.

So why be for something that will directly affect us?

[Speaker to Animals]

Don't need Muni-WAN - just need rights to run fiber through Muni conduits...

LOL!

Maybe you should go ask Comcast and AT&T if you can have access to that.

That was my earlier questions - are the conduits muni or commercially owned?

It's a gray area. The lines are running across private property (easements) and the commons. But the cable companies have essentially lobbied for laws that lock those lines down for themselves. They maintain the lines and control them.

It's really not very different from the power utility in that respect. You might as well ask whether you can setup your own alternate power grid alongside the current one that the monopolistic utility maintains..

The only way you can realistically compete is to setup a wide area wifi service.

[Speaker to Animals]

You still haven't answered the primary question, if mega-companies such as Comcast, Google, Amazon, etc are for net Neutrality, shouldn't that pose a major red flag to you in what it's real purpose is?

Comcast is not for net neutrality.

Google wavers back and forth, depending upon what benefits them at the time.

Amazon is for net neutrality because they know Comcast and other cable ISPs are going to throttle their streaming services lest they pay up big time.

Everything comes down to the profit motive. Cable companies control the broadband in this country. They bribed your state legislatures to criminalize the push for municipal broadband services more than ten years ago so they have monopolies now. They also have shitty on demand television services that cannot really compete with Netflix or Amazon streaming services. The cable package is a fucking waste of money, which is why most people just purchase the broadband internet and then get Netflix. Cable companies want to end net neutrality because it means they can throttle and essentially shut down competition. Competition they allow won't really be competition at all, since the cable company will get a cut out of that business in exchange for allowing their broadband customers to view the content.

It's a giant steaming pile of burning horse shit.

So why be for something that will directly affect us?

I don't care what any particular corporation wants. They all want what best profits them. I am talking about the principle of the matter and what this will do to the consumers of America, and also what it means for our ability to transmit and receive information freely without corporate censorship. This is really fucking bad.

[DBTrek]

This is some serious chicken littling.
As if Facebook, Google, Twitter, etc, weren’t censoring before. Oh, now that the 2015 Obama rule is down we’ll have corporate censorship.

[Speaker to Animals]

This is some serious chicken littling.

That's some serious chicken shit. Not an argument. Fuck off.

[DBTrek]

This is some serious chicken littling.

That's some serious chicken shit. Not an argument. Fuck off.

Take your meds.

[The Conservative]

This is some serious chicken littling.
As if Facebook, Google, Twitter, etc, weren’t censoring before. Oh, now that the 2015 Obama rule is down we’ll have corporate censorship.

Have to agree here, I've seen if anything censorship get worse...

[The Conservative]

Comcast is not for net neutrality.

Google wavers back and forth, depending upon what benefits them at the time.

Amazon is for net neutrality because they know Comcast and other cable ISPs are going to throttle their streaming services lest they pay up big time.

Everything comes down to the profit motive. Cable companies control the broadband in this country. They bribed your state legislatures to criminalize the push for municipal broadband services more than ten years ago so they have monopolies now. They also have shitty on demand television services that cannot really compete with Netflix or Amazon streaming services. The cable package is a fucking waste of money, which is why most people just purchase the broadband internet and then get Netflix. Cable companies want to end net neutrality because it means they can throttle and essentially shut down competition. Competition they allow won't really be competition at all, since the cable company will get a cut out of that business in exchange for allowing their broadband customers to view the content.

It's a giant steaming pile of burning horse shit.

So why be for something that will directly affect us?

I don't care what any particular corporation wants. They all want what best profits them. I am talking about the principle of the matter and what this will do to the consumers of America, and also what it means for our ability to transmit and receive information freely without corporate censorship. This is really fucking bad.

The feels! The feels!

[Speaker to Animals]

This is some serious chicken littling.

That's some serious chicken shit. Not an argument. Fuck off.

Take your meds.

Learn to form an argument. Just announcing something is "chicken little" is weak and reflects poorly on the entire forum. If you disagree with something, then explain why you disagree with it.

I could just reply to everything you post with a comment about your incessant faggotry, and that wouldn't represent a valid argument against anything you said either.

[K@th]

I didn't notice anything magical when NN went into place. My prices didn't go down, my service didn't get better. I'm not clear that it did anything, really.

Frankly, the more I hear the two different opinions, the more muddled the conversation gets. I suspect both sides are being hyperbolic to the extreme, making it confusing for the rest of us.

No need to re-create your giant walls of text (both sides.) I've read and understand them.

It's just hard to discern fact from opinion, since the difference between 2015 and 2017, cost and experience wise, is not really different for me.