FCC votes to enforce net neutrality by regulating ISPs, unleashes municipal broadband

1356719

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 376
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by TheWhiteFalcon View Post





    In what world do you consider this a victory? This is the worst thing imaginable for consumers.



    I hope you don't vote.



    I live in a world where the internet is open and the corporations, at least for now, don't get to decide who gets to use it. I will always vote to keep it that way. How you can think Comcast, and Verizon care one whit about you is beyond me. Is that something you heard on Fox? If they could squeeze another penny out of you by bending you over and inserting something large, they wouldn't hesitate. This is a great victory for the American people despite overwhelming odds against us.

  • Reply 42 of 376
    davendaven Posts: 646member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jetlaw View Post



    Tragic. I am an attorney who practices administrative law for a living. Anyone who thinks this will not be a tragic cacophony of unexpected consequences is, quite frankly, not even qualified to weigh in on the issue.



    Please post your firm's contact information so I can avoid hiring you. I like my attorneys to be objective and not blinded by hate. From your rants, it appears that you are neither.

  • Reply 43 of 376
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Mystigo View Post

     



    I live in a world where the internet is open and the corporations, at least for now, don't get to decide who gets to use it. I will always vote to keep it that way. How you can think Comcast, and Verizon care one whit about you is beyond me. Is that something you heard on Fox? If they could squeeze another penny out of you by bending you over and inserting something large, they wouldn't hesitate. This is a great victory for the American people despite overwhelming odds against us.




    LOL. You realize who makes up the FCC, right? Comcast and Verizon employees. Their resistance is a farce.

     

    The internet was open prior to this afternoon. You lived in some kind of dreamworld of your own making if you thought otherwise.

  • Reply 44 of 376
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by bobborries View Post



    The governments anti-freedom tactics can only lead to one thing.

     

    Bob: you have entirely missed the point. What the Government is doing here is to make sure that big companies don't restrict YOUR freedom.

     

    Under your interpretation, the First Amendment is "anti-freedom". Most of us have long ago seen through the fallacy of that position.

  • Reply 45 of 376
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Mystigo View Post

     



    I live in a world where the internet is open and the corporations, at least for now, don't get to decide who gets to use it. I will always vote to keep it that way. How you can think Comcast, and Verizon care one whit about you is beyond me. Is that something you heard on Fox? If they could squeeze another penny out of you by bending you over and inserting something large, they wouldn't hesitate. This is a great victory for the American people despite overwhelming odds against us.




    Yeah. Because we've done so poorly since corporations were allowed/required to compete in telephone service. My new rotary phone is the bomb. They added a light to it! And my brand spankin' new 1200 baud internet connection is way faster than that crappy old 600 baud connection!

  • Reply 46 of 376
    jbdragonjbdragon Posts: 2,246member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mubaili View Post



    so content providers cannot pay for fast lane but consumer can pay for fast access? I am confused. I would prefer FCC enact a minimum speed rule instead, say the slowest speed cannot be less than 80% of the fastest.

     

    If you Pay for a FAST Internet connection, that's what you should be getting.  You can't have the ISP slowing company's like Netflix down because they don't like that content you're getting over their own content they want you to pay for and then extort money from Netflix which already pays a crap-load of money for it's internet service and all the Upload bandwidth they need.   They're paying, You're paying, the Cable company's don't want to just become another dumb pipe.  They want you using their TV service, their Pay Per View and OnDemand, their Phone service.  To try and slow things, they put CAPS and limit what you can download.  Even though Data has gotten cheaper and cheaper and cheaper over the years.  You notice they don't drop prices, they increase them.  Then they bump up Speeds and then later complain that they don't have enough bandwidth.  Why did you bump up speeds for everyone then?    

     

    These company's have done this to themselves!!!!!  I'd rather the government stayed out of it.  In fact it's the Government that created these Monopolies in the first place!!!!  There should be Comcast and TWC or whoever else fighting it out in the SAME CITY'S!!!  Prices would drop and customer service would get better!!!   Government created the problem.  Government is now trying to fix the problem they created, and it'll never be as good if they hadn't just kept out in the first place.

  • Reply 47 of 376
    jetlawjetlaw Posts: 156member
    daven wrote: »

    Please post your firm's contact information so I can avoid hiring you. I like my attorneys to be objective and not blinded by hate. From your rants, it appears that you are neither.

    It will be my pleasure to never serve you.
  • Reply 48 of 376

     

    Here's the government stooges holding hands in solidarity against the American people. Don't they look so happy? They just pulled of a gigantic power grab.

  • Reply 49 of 376
    mrshowmrshow Posts: 161member

    Wow the crazies and corporate shills are out strong today. 

     

    The little guy, future tech startups, and freedom won today. 

  • Reply 50 of 376
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by TheWhiteFalcon View Post

    Followed by the FCC deciding which content is proper and which is not.

     

    Actually, it used to do that a bit (think: Nipplegate) but hardly ever does now.

     

    I don't see any likelihood for that to change. Why do you??

  • Reply 51 of 376
    davendaven Posts: 646member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jetlaw View Post





    It will be my pleasure to never serve you.



    And yet you do not post your firm's name. Why am I not surprised? Let me guess. You are the 'Better call Sol' guy. That figures.

  • Reply 52 of 376
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 10,163member

    From the comments here I see it boils down to two competing socio-economic views, those who think that government is the solution and those who think that government is the problem. As for the first group these are the same people howling at the top of their lungs about the NSA, the FBI, the IRS surveilling its citizens but are now pleased that this same government just totally took over the Internet. Cognitive dissonance doesn’t even begin to describe this irrational thought pattern. To this group I say “Well you asked for it and now you’ve got it.” If you think this only about fast lanes and other such nonsense you are incredibly naive. 

     

    As for the second group, of which I am an adherent, the lawsuits will be fast and furious tying this action up in the courts for years. Unless the SCOTUS turns sharply left quickly this anti-business nonsense will be thrown out of court in short order, just like the last so-called net-neutrality edict was. This ain’t over by a long shot especially if our side takes the presidency in 2016.

  • Reply 53 of 376
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by plovell View Post

     

     

    Actually, it used to do that a bit (think: Nipplegate) but hardly ever does now.

     

    I don't see any likelihood for that to change. Why do you??




    We live in a country where the IRS was utilized to target organizations that didn't agree with the current regime.

     

    You really think the FCC won't do the same thing?

     

    This goes beyond party lines.

  • Reply 54 of 376
    mrshowmrshow Posts: 161member

    Title II is all about common carrier status. Cable television, broadcast radio, and broadcast television are not common carriers, and Title II does not give the FCC either the requirement or permission to fine or censor obscene content. Neither does it give ISPs the requirement or permission to censor obscene content.

    As Title II has been interpreted by courts, you are actually _more_ protected from internet censorship if they are considered Title II common carriers.

  • Reply 55 of 376
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by MrShow View Post

     

    Title II is all about common carrier status. Cable television, broadcast radio, and broadcast television are not common carriers, and Title II does not give the FCC either the requirement or permission to fine or censor obscene content. Neither does it give ISPs the requirement or permission to censor obscene content.

    As Title II has been interpreted by courts, you are actually _more_ protected from internet censorship if they are considered Title II common carriers.


    <img class=" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" /><img class=" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" /><img class=" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />

     

    Oh, to be a simpleton...

  • Reply 56 of 376
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member

    image

  • Reply 57 of 376
    mrshowmrshow Posts: 161member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by TheWhiteFalcon View Post

     

    <img class=" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" /><img class=" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" /><img class=" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />

     

    Oh, to be a simpleton...




    After reading some of your posts, I think that would be a step up for you.

  • Reply 58 of 376
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JBDragon View Post

     

     

    If you Pay for a FAST Internet connection, that's what you should be getting.  You can't have the ISP slowing company's like Netflix down because they don't like that content you're getting over their own content they want you to pay for and then extort money from Netflix which already pays a crap-load of money for it's internet service and all the Upload bandwidth they need.


     

    Have any companies actually done this? Any ISP that does so deserves to be sued for anti-competitive behavior. (There should already be laws which apply.)

     

    I know companies have limited how much Netflix traffic they'll carry. But every ISP has a maximum amount of bandwidth available unless they spend money to build more. So who gives them the money they need to build that additional bandwidth? Why not the biggest user of that bandwidth?

  • Reply 59 of 376
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 10,163member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by krreagan View Post

     

    Your ISP cannot restrict your freedom of speech or prevent you from hearing someone else's speech.


     

    Now the government can prevent your freedom of speech. Just like television networks, your ISP can be fined if you type the word **** in this forum. Your criticism of Al Sharpton could be labeled hate speech and banned. 

  • Reply 60 of 376
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jetlaw View Post





    Sure, after all, why would anyone in their right mind want to hear a legal opinion from someone who is actually trained in the law. I'm guessing you don't believe in vaccinations, either, since the only people who are proponents of them are those annoying doctors. Keep drinking the Kool Aide.

    You can find just as many laywers on either side of an argument. Their opinions (and your credentials) are useless here. You are an anonymous puke on the internet. Your view is not worth anymore then anyone else. Saying you are a lawyer only diminishes your credibility as you try to enhance it.

     

    I am a believer in scientific skepticism and open discussion... Lawyers take either/both sides and and bastardize the argument so that it no longer has meaning. Look at (your example) vaccine deniers, climate deniers, evolution deniers, Fox News sponges .. to name a few. All driven by the special interests and supported on all sides by the lawyers. And all _scientifically_ settled topics!

Sign In or Register to comment.