slash23579 Posted November 10, 2014 Share Posted November 10, 2014 President Obama voiced his opinion on Net Neutrality today In basic words, Net Neutrality is the principle that the internet should be open and free for anyone. Taking Net Neutrality away would basically give ISP's complete control over what you can and can't do on the internet. For example, if your ISP was Verizon, and you decided you wanted to look into getting a phone plan or whatever from AT&T, they would have the authority to block AT&T's website from your internet because they are seen as a competitor. Also, chances are internet prices will get massively inflated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtyDeeds Posted November 10, 2014 Share Posted November 10, 2014 The only people not for net neutrality are some of the ISPs themselves and the politicians in bed with them. It's really a no-brainer. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rustycage Posted November 10, 2014 Share Posted November 10, 2014 It's ridiculous when you read the reactions to this stance. Take Ted Cruz, for example. Please take him. Take him the hell out of the USA.And ordinary people that argue against this position are among the main people that will be screwed. Turds >>>>>>>>> People that rally against their best interests.The only people not for net neutrality are some of the ISPs themselves and the politicians in bed with them. It's really a no-brainer. People follow politicians like leaders, though so theres a problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bran Posted November 10, 2014 Share Posted November 10, 2014 i agree with president obama....... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ace Nova Posted November 10, 2014 Share Posted November 10, 2014 (edited) The only people not for net neutrality are some of the ISPs themselves and the politicians in bed with them. It's really a no-brainer. I never realized it was even an issue. Doesn't seem constitutional....at all. Of course, ISP's are already starting to throttle websites like Netflix..... Edited November 13, 2014 by Kasanova King Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Facekicker Posted November 10, 2014 Share Posted November 10, 2014 Can they not just leave it fuckin alone? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
downzy Posted November 11, 2014 Share Posted November 11, 2014 According to Senator Ted Cruz, net neutrality is "Obamacare for the Internet." As a Canadian, I want to apologize to the U.S. for sending him your way. Though I am glad he's revoking his Canadian citizenship 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apollo Posted November 11, 2014 Share Posted November 11, 2014 Why in the world would you people want MORE government control over your lives? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
downzy Posted November 11, 2014 Share Posted November 11, 2014 Sorry Groghan, are you saying that you're against the net neutrality? That you're in favour of ISPs deciding what websites load faster? I'm being serious here, I'd really like to understand how anyone thinks striking down net neutrality is a good thing for the common consumer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apollo Posted November 11, 2014 Share Posted November 11, 2014 Sorry Groghan, as you saying that you're against the net neutrality? That you're in favour of ISPs deciding what websites load faster? I'm being serious here, I'd really like to understand how anyone thinks striking down net neutrality is a good thing for the common consumer. This is basically a democrat-republican thing, right?Republicans believe you should let the market govern itself.Democrats believe that people are helpless and feeble minded and need the government to save them from evil business owners.I don't think the government needs to be involved in every aspect of our lives.I think this should be about the 19,893 thing that Obama should put his time and effort into "fixing." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
axlslash Posted November 11, 2014 Share Posted November 11, 2014 Democrats believe that the market should not regulate basic public goods, and that it is the government's responsibility to protect public goods from private exploitation. The Republicans believe in letting conglomerates corner the "market" for public goods and sell them back to the public at a steep mark-up. That's just a repackaging of what you said worded differently. Still agree? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
downzy Posted November 11, 2014 Share Posted November 11, 2014 Sorry Groghan, as you saying that you're against the net neutrality? That you're in favour of ISPs deciding what websites load faster? I'm being serious here, I'd really like to understand how anyone thinks striking down net neutrality is a good thing for the common consumer. This is basically a democrat-republican thing, right?Republicans believe you should let the market govern itself.Democrats believe that people are helpless and feeble minded and need the government to save them from evil business owners.I don't think the government needs to be involved in every aspect of our lives.I think this should be about the 19,893 thing that Obama should put his time and effort into "fixing."Wow, so I asked for a serious answer and this is what I get? Generalizations and hyperbole? Democrats believe people are helpless and feeble minded? Come on Groghan, you're better than that, aren't you?You must believe that government oversight into certain matters is important. Nobody would argue that market forces should decide whether drug manufacturers get to distribute any drug they want. Nobody would argue that the markets can govern the actions of food producers in terms of health and safety. Allowing the markets to decide everything isn't the most stable, safe, or even the best way to run everything, right? If that were the case, why should the U.S. even have a military? Why not just farm all of that out to private contractors? I'm not suggesting the alternative, that governments should take over everything, but isn't there a happy medium somewhere? You are familiar with the concept of the tragedy of the commons, right? Isn't is the role of government to avoid such a situation when at all possible? And by saying that you don't think government needs to be involved in every aspect of our lives, you do think that they should be involved in some capacity, right? I mean, it sounds by your assertion that you're saying that they shouldn't be involved in any aspect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amir Posted November 11, 2014 Share Posted November 11, 2014 Read The Master Switch by Tim Wu, great book on history of telecommunications and information tech in the US. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
downzy Posted November 11, 2014 Share Posted November 11, 2014 Read The Master Switch by Tim Wu, great book on history of telecommunications and information tech in the US.Yeah, I still have that on my Kindle waiting to be read. I think you're the one who recommended it to me awhile ago. Just started reading a book called Before the Storm: Barry Goldwater and the Unmaking of the American Consensus, but Master Switch will probably be the next book I take up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amir Posted November 11, 2014 Share Posted November 11, 2014 Read The Master Switch by Tim Wu, great book on history of telecommunications and information tech in the US.Yeah, I still have that on my Kindle waiting to be read. I think you're the one who recommended it to me awhile ago. It is a very good book, though I did read an interesting counterpoint to it a few months ago. Still, there's some great stories and arguments made in it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rustycage Posted November 11, 2014 Share Posted November 11, 2014 Sorry Groghan, as you saying that you're against the net neutrality? That you're in favour of ISPs deciding what websites load faster? I'm being serious here, I'd really like to understand how anyone thinks striking down net neutrality is a good thing for the common consumer. This is basically a democrat-republican thing, right?Republicans believe you should let the market govern itself.Democrats believe that people are helpless and feeble minded and need the government to save them from evil business owners.I don't think the government needs to be involved in every aspect of our lives.I think this should be about the 19,893 thing that Obama should put his time and effort into "fixing." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rustycage Posted November 11, 2014 Share Posted November 11, 2014 (edited) Senator Ted Cruz ✔ @SenTedCruz "Net Neutrality" is Obamacare for the Internet; the Internet should not operate at the speed of government.9:43 AM - 10 Nov 2014 I love theoatmeal.com Edited November 11, 2014 by downzy The picture is too damn good to hide behind a spoiler 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtyDeeds Posted November 11, 2014 Share Posted November 11, 2014 GRRR AWFUL WORST-PRESIDENT-EVER OBAMA STICKING THE GOVERNMENT INTO THE INTERNET TO KEEP IT EXACTLY THE SAME AS IT'S ALWAYS BEEN! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magisme Posted November 11, 2014 Share Posted November 11, 2014 What exactly is he proposing the government do? Net neutrality sounds nice and all - although I'm sure how nice it sounds had nothing to do with why the phrase was chosen - but what exactly is the plan? And will it require a 10,000 page bill that no one will read and that no one, therefore, will be able to oversee adequately? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
downzy Posted November 11, 2014 Share Posted November 11, 2014 What exactly is he proposing the government do? Net neutrality sounds nice and all - although I'm sure how nice it sounds had nothing to do with why the phrase was chosen - but what exactly is the plan? And will it require a 10,000 page bill that no one will read and that no one, therefore, will be able to oversee adequately?I think the basic premise of his argument is that he'll instruct the FCC to use their authority to ensure that ISPs are not discriminating data from the source to the user. Much like how the FCC regulates the air and radio waves, the FCC assurmingly has the power to intervene if an ISP is using its services to discriminate what they carry between server and user. Practically speaking, this means ISPs can't squeeze a company like Netflix into paying them more for data transmission speeds similar to its own proprieties (or chosen entities). I don't know enough if the FCC has this regulatory power, but I suppose Obama feels as though they do. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Georgy Zhukov Posted November 11, 2014 Share Posted November 11, 2014 Ted Cruz needs to be deported. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bran Posted November 11, 2014 Share Posted November 11, 2014 Ted Cruz needs to be deported.i will sign the petition Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtyDeeds Posted November 11, 2014 Share Posted November 11, 2014 I know this is petty and meaningless and doesn't contribute to helpful, meaningful dialogue, but I do want to stoop low for a second post in a row. Ted Cruz looks like the the arrogant, annoying, cocky, ugly fuck with a weird nose that I went to high school with, and that makes me like him even less. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apollo Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 (edited) You all believe the government can walk in and fix things. I don't believe that to be the case. Regardless of their political affiliation.Downzy,would you be cool if the Gov told you guys that you have a monopoly on your new Mygnrforum t-shirts and that you are selling them for too much money. So if you want to continue selling them you'll have to reduce the price down to $6 per shirt.Also - I read part of the picture that Rusty posted. Until I kept seeing the word "forced" in it. Paying to use an internet provider is a choice - nobody is "forcing" you to use them. If you don't like their policies/prices/ways they do business - then don't use them. It's like going to a restaurant and then complaining that they "forced" you to buy food off their menu.I don't base my opinions on political affiliations you most of you do.I don't care if it's a republican or democrat president. I don't want the gov taking more control over our daily lives and choices. And I think Obama has way more important things to worry about than this. Edited November 12, 2014 by Groghan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtyDeeds Posted November 12, 2014 Share Posted November 12, 2014 You all believe the government can walk in and fix things. I don't believe that to be the case. Regardless of their political affiliation. Groghan, in this case, nothing was broken. The companies want to come in and fuck with a system that is wonderful as it is. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.