'Net Neutrality'

[Nickdfresh]

Originally Posted By: Trav
Originally Posted By: NickR
You are making me want to break my computer screen with my face. You obviously don't understand the internet,

By all means start breaking because you obviously don't understand government. This con job is opening the door for a government shakedown to provide welfare bums and illegals with free internet and telephone and we are going to pay for it, nothing more or less.
You are very naive if you believe that at some future date isn't just 6 months to a year away.

Quote:
Internet providers won't be asked to contribute to the subsidy fund, known as Universal Service, right away. The draft rules merely open the door to that obligation down the road should the FCC determine that step is necessary. (The Universal Service Fund helps schools and libraries buy Internet service and reduces the cost of telephone service for low-income Americans. It also subsidizes connectivity for rural areas. If the FCC later decides to ask Internet providers to pay into the fund, the money would go toward these programs.)


http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-...ity-rules-ever/


Trav, do you actually believe this [censored] or are you just an epic troll...

The internet wouldn't have existed without the U.S. federal gov'ts DARPA programs and the last people I trust to regulate anything are cable monopolies...

 

[Nickdfresh]

The FACT is that dolts chirping against Net Neutrality are in favor of this:

 

[CT8]

300 + pages of regulations paid for by the largest corporations lobby money scares this dolt.

 

[sleddriver]

Originally Posted By: Nick R
Originally Posted By: sleddriver
Originally Posted By: Nick R
The internet DOES need regulation, because ISPs are starting to figure out just how much they can get away with screwing over their customers. The answer is-- as much as they want, because we are a "captive audience" we don't have a choice. If I want high speed internet, my only choice is Time Warner Cable. If I don't like how they are treating me, I can't just switch to someone else. And that means without basic regulation, ISPs are going to start even more doing things to pad their own bottom lines. Make you pay extra to get to certain sites. Make services that compete with theirs a worse experience so you are more likely to buy THEIR service. [censored] like this. It's started to happen already, and if the FCC is not allowed to pass net neutrality regulation, we might as well kiss new technology and development of the internet goodbye. Or rather, our ISP overlords will be the ones who will tell us what we are allowed to use.

• What's your definition of "high speed internet"?
  -
• So you have no competition in your area? There are other options if you don't like how you're being treated. After all, you now have an insiders perspective.
  -
• You've stated government "basic regulation" as a method to prevent ISP's from "padding their own bottom lines." What about personal regulation and being pro-active?
  -
• Being a TWC former-employee, you have the inside scoup on telling customers here how to get a better deal. So why don't you? I've posted many times how I get a better deal out of AT&T. Even posted their CRD number. If TWC is your only option, and their profits are "obscene" why not educate fellow users how to get a better deal? OR ween yourself from endless supply of #$%^! supplied from the engorged digital ^!^ (milk supply).
  -
• BTW, look at your phone/internet bill. See all of those taxes listed? Local, state & federal. Some of us here remember when those didn't exist. The TAX on my phone bill alone is close to 50%. Look up the Telecommunication Act. Whose admin was it passed under? (Clintons). It's "purpose" was to "wire up the schools". OK...they were and are. Yet that tax has never gone away.....decades later. All schools and libraries, both public & private, now have computers + internet. Done. Check that box.
  -
• It's not wise to carry water for Big Brother. Eventually, you'll be drowned in it. Caveat Emptor.

I have helped people on here get a better deal on their twc service before. I tell people all the time how to do it. There is one member on here I even went do far as to directly help him with his account when I still worked there. He is free to chime in if he wants.

In short, you don't know anything, shut your mouth.

I know that you're sensitive about being confronted. Having your thinking challenged. It adds up to your a young, punk kid. We'll see how you feel about taxes when you're my age.

BTW, one more thing I know...you ignored the rest of my points. My questions & comments still stand. Just what is your definition of "high-speed internet?".

 

[Nick R]

Originally Posted By: sleddriver
Originally Posted By: Nick R
Originally Posted By: sleddriver
Originally Posted By: Nick R
The internet DOES need regulation, because ISPs are starting to figure out just how much they can get away with screwing over their customers. The answer is-- as much as they want, because we are a "captive audience" we don't have a choice. If I want high speed internet, my only choice is Time Warner Cable. If I don't like how they are treating me, I can't just switch to someone else. And that means without basic regulation, ISPs are going to start even more doing things to pad their own bottom lines. Make you pay extra to get to certain sites. Make services that compete with theirs a worse experience so you are more likely to buy THEIR service. [censored] like this. It's started to happen already, and if the FCC is not allowed to pass net neutrality regulation, we might as well kiss new technology and development of the internet goodbye. Or rather, our ISP overlords will be the ones who will tell us what we are allowed to use.

• What's your definition of "high speed internet"?
  -
• So you have no competition in your area? There are other options if you don't like how you're being treated. After all, you now have an insiders perspective.
  -
• You've stated government "basic regulation" as a method to prevent ISP's from "padding their own bottom lines." What about personal regulation and being pro-active?
  -
• Being a TWC former-employee, you have the inside scoup on telling customers here how to get a better deal. So why don't you? I've posted many times how I get a better deal out of AT&T. Even posted their CRD number. If TWC is your only option, and their profits are "obscene" why not educate fellow users how to get a better deal? OR ween yourself from endless supply of #$%^! supplied from the engorged digital ^!^ (milk supply).
  -
• BTW, look at your phone/internet bill. See all of those taxes listed? Local, state & federal. Some of us here remember when those didn't exist. The TAX on my phone bill alone is close to 50%. Look up the Telecommunication Act. Whose admin was it passed under? (Clintons). It's "purpose" was to "wire up the schools". OK...they were and are. Yet that tax has never gone away.....decades later. All schools and libraries, both public & private, now have computers + internet. Done. Check that box.
  -
• It's not wise to carry water for Big Brother. Eventually, you'll be drowned in it. Caveat Emptor.

I have helped people on here get a better deal on their twc service before. I tell people all the time how to do it. There is one member on here I even went do far as to directly help him with his account when I still worked there. He is free to chime in if he wants.

In short, you don't know anything, shut your mouth.

I know that you're sensitive about being confronted. Having your thinking challenged. It adds up to your a young, punk kid. We'll see how you feel about taxes when you're my age.

BTW, one more thing I know...you ignored the rest of my points. My questions & comments still stand. Just what is your definition of "high-speed internet?".


No, it adds up to you don't know what you are talking about, so you make up lies and half truths.

Also
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/01/29/f-c-c-sharply-increases-definition-of-broadband/?_r=0

There you go.

 

[Nick R]

Originally Posted By: KrisZ
If the internet is to be treated as a utility, then it will only get more expensive. On my utility bills, on top of the taxes I have delivery charges, pension charges, yes I pay utilities pension, peak, off peak and a host of other nonsense.

I can't wait for another "outraged" post seeking government's solution...


*cough*

You don't pay tax on internet in most states. There is also no federal tax on it.

Here is a screenshot of my most recent TWC bill by the way. Note the lack of taxes on the internet. The FCC fees are for the phone.

 

[Nick R]

Originally Posted By: CT8
300 + pages of regulations paid for by the largest corporations lobby money scares this dolt.



The largest corporations you should be afraid of are the ones lobbying FOR net neutrality, ie TWC, Comcast, Verizon, ATT, etc

 

[Mystic]

Originally Posted By: Nickdfresh
Originally Posted By: Trav
Originally Posted By: NickR
You are making me want to break my computer screen with my face. You obviously don't understand the internet,

By all means start breaking because you obviously don't understand government. This con job is opening the door for a government shakedown to provide welfare bums and illegals with free internet and telephone and we are going to pay for it, nothing more or less.
You are very naive if you believe that at some future date isn't just 6 months to a year away.

Quote:
Internet providers won't be asked to contribute to the subsidy fund, known as Universal Service, right away. The draft rules merely open the door to that obligation down the road should the FCC determine that step is necessary. (The Universal Service Fund helps schools and libraries buy Internet service and reduces the cost of telephone service for low-income Americans. It also subsidizes connectivity for rural areas. If the FCC later decides to ask Internet providers to pay into the fund, the money would go toward these programs.)


http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-...ity-rules-ever/


Trav, do you actually believe this [censored] or are you just an epic troll...

The internet wouldn't have existed without the U.S. federal gov'ts DARPA programs and the last people I trust to regulate anything are cable monopolies...


Trav is a very intelligent man. He has a right to his opinions the same as anybody else.

I am not an expert on all of this. But it is COMMON SENSE that some new rules that are going to affect everybody who uses the internet should not be kept secret until the new rules are voted on. According to what I hear, they are still keeping it all secret even after it was voted on.

I don't trust the government, especially this administration, too much. Now I am not a big fan of the cable companies either.

The government has been talking about providing internet for low income families. The money for that has to come from somewhere. Obviously the cost will be passed on to people in their internet bills. The internet companies are not going to provide free internet for low income families out of the goodness of their hearts.

I like the Drudge Report on the internet. Why did Drudge seem nervous about these new rules and regulations?

We will all see how this 'net neutrality' works out. If it works out great that is wonderful. But if it does not work out great some people here deserve an apology for being called dolts and trolls.

Everybody is entitled to their opinions here. But I know for a fact the government is talking about providing free internet for low income families and that will either be an added cost for other people using the internet or else there will be taxes to fund that free internet for low income families. It has to be paid for somehow. Again, that is just common sense.

 

[Mystic]

This article in the National Review is an example of various links that have appeared recently at The Drudge Report:

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/414483/comrades-net-neutrality-john-fund

I get a pretty strong impression that Drudge is not impressed with this net neutrality.

The Drudge Report is one of my online sources of news. If it goes away I will listen to Rush Limbaugh on the radio. And I have never listened to him on the radio. Although I checked out his website.

People will have access to alternative news sources even if it has to be by ham radio or CB. Or information passed by word of mouth from person to person.

This country is not a dictatorship-yet.

 

[dishdude]

Originally Posted By: Mystic

This con job is opening the door for a government shakedown to provide welfare bums and illegals with free internet and telephone and we are going to pay for it, nothing more or less.
You are very naive if you believe that at some future date isn't just 6 months to a year away.


What are you talking about?

Originally Posted By: Mystic


The Drudge Report is one of my online sources of news.


NOT a viable source of news. Opinion that caters to the right.

 

[Nick R]

Originally Posted By: Mystic
This article in the National Review is an example of various links that have appeared recently at The Drudge Report:

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/414483/comrades-net-neutrality-john-fund

I get a pretty strong impression that Drudge is not impressed with this net neutrality.

The Drudge Report is one of my online sources of news. If it goes away I will listen to Rush Limbaugh on the radio. And I have never listened to him on the radio. Although I checked out his website.

People will have access to alternative news sources even if it has to be by ham radio or CB. Or information passed by word of mouth from person to person.

This country is not a dictatorship-yet.


If you want actually decent tech news, you need to pay attention to sites like arstechnica, or engadget, or wired.

 

[Trav]

Originally Posted By: Nickdfresh
The FACT is that dolts chirping against Net Neutrality are in favor of this:

That is a pack a lies and you know it. Talk about epic trolls. LOL

 

[02SE]

Originally Posted By: hatt
Originally Posted By: 02SE


Well there you go. Take the risk and start your own ISP, and run it as you deem fit. It should be a piece of cake for someone with such vast experience..

Let us know when we can sign-up for your high-speed internet access, which is cheap for us, and limits how much profit you can make. Lest your profit reach "obscene" levels.

The guys are all talk.


Oh I know. I've seen it all my Adult life.

The ones that continually complain about free enterprise, capitalism, etc. are the ones that lack the drive and intestinal fortitude to risk it all, work harder than they ever have for someone else, and make a go of their own idea for a Business.

They have all kinds of advice on how companies should be run, but they have never had any of their own skin in the game. As such they have no concept of what it takes to run a successful Business, therefore their opinion on the matter carries no real weight in the grand scheme of things.

Lots of young kids fresh out of School with very little life experience, think they have all the answers. Eventually they figure it out, or they spend their life complaining that Uncle Sugar (The Government) isn't doing enough with other people's money, to make their extra-special life comfortable.

 

[Nick R]

Originally Posted By: Trav
Originally Posted By: Nickdfresh
The FACT is that dolts chirping against Net Neutrality are in favor of this:

That is a pack a lies and you know it. Talk about epic trolls. LOL


No, this is pretty close to what the ideal end-game for the ISPs looks like, if they could do whatever they wanted.

And then imagine, if on the other end of this, there was a similar thing for Amazon or google.

If you want Comcast customers to get access to your content at full speed, or dial up speed.

This is basically the way things are going now, with the paid agreement Netflix was forced into with Comcast and Verizon. You severely underestimate just how far these companies will go. Their customer service already stinks, internet speeds in the US are well behind other developed countries, they are starting to impose data caps, all cable company ISPs also provide TV service, so they have a monetary interest in forcing streaming video providers into a worse experience for their customers, to try to strong-arm them into buying cable TV. It goes on and on. This isn't a pipe dream either. Comcast already has said that their own in-house streaming service, included as part of their TV Package, won't count towards their monthly data cap. Netflix does.

And you say it's a pack of lies? We may disagree, but I know you aren't naive, Trav.

 

[Nick R]

Originally Posted By: 02SE
Originally Posted By: hatt
Originally Posted By: 02SE


Well there you go. Take the risk and start your own ISP, and run it as you deem fit. It should be a piece of cake for someone with such vast experience..

Let us know when we can sign-up for your high-speed internet access, which is cheap for us, and limits how much profit you can make. Lest your profit reach "obscene" levels.

The guys are all talk.


Oh I know. I've seen it all my Adult life.

The ones that continually complain about free enterprise, capitalism, etc. are the ones that lack the drive and intestinal fortitude to risk it all, work harder than they ever have for someone else, and make a go of their own idea for a Business.

They have all kinds of advice on how companies should be run, but they have never had any of their own skin in the game. As such they have no concept of what it takes to run a successful Business, therefore their opinion on the matter carries no real weight in the grand scheme of things.

Lots of young kids fresh out of School with very little life experience, think they have all the answers. Eventually they figure it out, or they spend their life complaining that Uncle Sugar (The Government) isn't doing enough with other people's money, to make their extra-special life comfortable.








Why should I have to start my own ISP? That's silly. Maybe our existing ISPs could be forced into refraining from anti-competetive behavior, which is one of the governments jobs. Oh right, I guess the government isn't supposed to break up monopolies, or prevent existing ones from abusing their position. You can complain about people who don't start up their own businesses all you want, but the truth is that that shouldn't give companies an excuse to abuse their monopolistic positions.

Trav runs his own business, I bet he gets a lot of business from the internet. I wonder how it would affect his business if his customers had to pay extra in order to be able to access his site. I bet he wouldn't be very happy with that. Lots of small companies wouldn't exist if it weren't for the fact that until recently, all data was considered equal, and customers would get similar experiences from small sites, as they would from big ones like amazon. Most of the purpose behind this is to prevent situations like that from occurring, so small, start ups aren't forced out of business because they couldn't afford to pay for the "Fast lanes" on the internet, or so customers don't have to pay additional fees depending on the type of content they try to access.

 

[SteveSRT8]

I am simply amazed that anyone could believe a completely SECRET set of rules passed by an administration putting intense political pressure on the FCC commissioner including over 190 million dollars of Soros moolah could somehow "protect" consumers from evil Net giants.

I sure hope everyone remembers this thread in a year when the taxes hit us all in the pocketbooks.

BTW, dishdude, Drudge is simply a site that publishes a brief synopsis and links to other news sources. It is not a source itself at all, just links.

Here's one- http://www.nationalreview.com/article/414483/comrades-net-neutrality-john-fund...

 

[Trav]

The problem i have with this whole deal is it was done in secret. You or anyone cant say what is in that 300 pages only cherry pick what may or may not be the good parts they deliberately leaked out.
My grandmother still talks about secret back room government regulations and laws passed in the middle of the night that were all a good thing.

I have had internet since 1995, its been working fine for 2 decades and now all of a sudden this bill needs to be passed so quickly to protect internet users they didn't even have time to let the people or Congress read it.
Come on now, thats B.S and we all know it. I hope this gets thrown out in 2 years by executive order.

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: Trav
The problem i have with this whole deal is it was done in secret. You or anyone cant say what is in that 300 pages only cherry pick what may or may not be the good parts they deliberately leaked out.
My grandmother still talks about secret back room government regulations and laws passed in the middle of the night that were all a good thing.

I have had internet since 1995, its been working fine for 2 decades and now all of a sudden this bill needs to be passed so quickly to protect internet users they didn't even have time to let the people or Congress read it.
Come on now, thats B.S and we all know it. I hope this gets thrown out in 2 years by executive order.


+1 Secrets like this are never a good thing IMO.

 

[salesrep]

Originally Posted By: CT8
The government is our friend it is here to help us.Trust and be a sheep.

Amazing to me, is that with ALL the government run failures and the abysmal economic track record and cliff diving policies, anyone would think the government will run the internet fairly and efficiently.

 

[eljefino]

Originally Posted By: 02SE

Well there you go. Take the risk and start your own ISP, and run it as you deem fit. It should be a piece of cake for someone with such vast experience..




We already have an internet. And interstate highways, a postal service, power company, trash removal, worker's comp, police, Chambers of Commerce...

We have this infrastructure in place so businesses can offer their services and not worry about reinventing the wheel.

And the government "took the risk" with the basic levels of IP with Arpanet 45 years ago then handed the last bits over, royalty-free, to ISPs in the early 2000s. Nice handout. It seems like a good time to remind them that there are moral strings attached.