or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by muppetry

Net Neutrality is just a set of proposed regulations to prevent traffic prioritization at the whim of the ISPs. How on earth are you managing to conflate that with "a massive government program" that requires funding by taxation or, for that matter, with anything at all to do with the Constitution? Nice little irrelevant snippet, by the way, that, with depressing inevitability, is about as unrelated to Net Neutrality as one could get. But I'm sure everyone is relieved to...
I'm curious about that too. Seems like an obvious move. And if, for some reason, they thought that it is not technologically feasible, then I would expect them to let others spend money trying with little or no comment, safe in the knowledge that they will continue to have the best product for these applications.
Synthetic sapphire in these applications is pure. Laminated, but the sapphire layers are pure. I don't think that's what he meant at all.
I'm sure you would, if you got to set the priorities. You don't however, so it's actually in your interest (and all other customers too) to prevent the ISPs from making those decisions.
I'm curious now - is there a particular reason why you think the Nature paper is flawed? Have you read it? And I'm not sure how you are going to find a peer-reviewed rebuttal of a study that was itself only just published.
What he and others are saying, of course, is "think of all these terrible things that could happen". The fact that those terrible things are entirely unconnected with the proposals under discussion, except in as much as some of them would become even less likely to occur if the proposals were accepted, is of no consequence at all. These posters either lack even basic comprehension and logic, or are spreading politically motivated FUD. Or possibly both. And they cannot be...
Nothing personal - just pointing out that your posts often appear almost entirely devoid of logic or reason. Even the briefest consideration of your latest argument should have revealed to you that it made absolutely no sense at all. If you stopped assuming up front that everything is some kind of monstrous government conspiracy you might see things more clearly.
Strike my previous comments - a little more digging shows transitions at 0' 17", 0' 37", 1' 10", 1' 43", 1' 58" and 2' 46".
 Before you try to think like a lawyer, I suggest that you just try thinking. Even just a little thought might reduce the amount of embarrassing nonsense that you post.
 Fascinating thought process you have going there. Currently, content does not need to be deemed lawful or unlawful in order to discriminate. But you see this proposal as bad because, under it, even though it would prevent ISPs from discriminating against lawful traffic, they might be able to lobby for content to be declared unlawful for their own benefit. Good catch - definitely a threat to the future of internet freedom.
New Posts  All Forums: