It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Aazadan
Net Neutrality in it's purest form could be written on one sheet of paper, with no restrictions on content, only on how data can be processed.
originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: beezzer
Actually I prefer the don't do a damn thing to the internet, leave it as is. But, exercising my brain cells, I realize the major cable corporations that are our ISPs are not going to allow that to happen. They've sued the FCC in order to gain this tier system, they also lobby their asses off to get politicians to support them, enter Ted Cruz and his deliberate baiting with the Obamacare comparison. And you went baaaahing like a good little boy.
After all those comments, the FCC still might balk and side with the big corps/lobbyists. What is the point of having a public forum if you are just going to do what you want anyways, regardless how the American public feels.
originally posted by: SkepticOverlord
a reply to: OpenMindedRealist
You ask for an example, then reject the one provided.
So, in essence, your "that's how capitalism works" statement seems to support the notion that it's okay for the US to have some of the slowest Internet speeds of all industrial nations? That's just capitalism?
You don't seen to understand the core realities here.
originally posted by: Bearack
All net neutrality is, is nothing more than another form of distribution of wealth.
Taking higher band widths which people are willing to pay for and either forcing the price down to those who could not afford it or merely driving those speeds down to those levels of the cheaper band width.
originally posted by: peck420
Caveat 2: When we don't have actual data, we just make assumptions. Great again! We are going to assume that everything that came yesterday is irrelevant because we want to make a point TODAY!
originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Indigo5
Yes, how has it played out with cable?
Is your cable any more free with the government in charge of it?
How much choice do you have with your cable providers?
Did the government do anything to break up that monopoly that the big telecoms have over your cable in many areas of the country?
originally posted by: thov420
a reply to: beezzer
See I think this is where the divide happens, I don't want the government to change anything, only keep it the way it is now. What they migfht do with some regulatory power is a whole different yet related topic.
All net neutrality is, is nothing more than another form of distribution of wealth
At that point, what incentive is it for companies to try and drive innovation across a huge footprint when the incentive to do so is gone?
originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: Hefficide
If you put the net in control of government in the form of a utility, then (in effect) Cruz will be part of the party in charge of the internet.
Now I don't want that and I'm a hatin' evil conservative!