Next Level BS #19: Net Neutrality, Ted Cruz, and Obamacare

originally posted by: Grimpachi

Why do you think it would be either or? They could do both.

So they're gonna accept people's money, then slow them down anyway? Come on man... really? Don't we already have laws to protect us against such practices?

a reply to: Bone75

Well, if you look at what already happened with Netflix for instance, you will see what I mean. Or you could spin it if you wanted to I imagine. That is up to you, but the facts speak for themselves.

Reality: we already pay for the service we receive, and content providers already pay for the ability to deliver content. Net Neutrality would prevent levers being applied by mercenary communication companies, in order to infate their ridiculous coffers.

originally posted by: DarkkHero
I miss the days of ATS being a neutral place, where you can come to discuss Conspiracy, Aliens, Secret Societies, etc.

These days the outright overt leftist "in your face" content such as this is just driving people away.
Maybe that's what you want. Who knows?

I didn't bother watching this episode, or any of the past 4 or 5 episodes, simply because the headline was all I needed to know about what it would be about.

Um. Leftist?? Good Gracious. I guess you should watch the video then, because our friend Joe did not have kind words for the President, nor was he promoting anything other than Freedom. I thought Freedom was First and Foremost on the right side of our political spectrum. Am I wrong???

If you are a Ted Cruz fan, then you are understandably upset by some of the name-calling, but honestly, he is not God, and even if you like him, he will not always be correct (even if he's always "right"), especially when his campaign was sponsored by Comcast, who does not want Net Neutrality.

In fact, let's change the entire name of this "net neutrality" thing - let's just call it "Net Freedom," and that freedom, which we all already pay for, is about to die.

peace,
AB

originally posted by: Bone75

originally posted by: Grimpachi

Why do you think it would be either or? They could do both.

So they're gonna accept people's money, then slow them down anyway? Come on man... really? Don't we already have laws to protect us against such practices?

Nope. The law under consideration by the FCC would eliminate that protection and site owners could be extorted to join the fast lane, or, no matter how sweet and fast my internet ride is on the way to a site, if the site I want to go to doesn't pay additional "fast lane fees" it will be slow as molasses. This strangles, literally, smaller users of the internet and magnifies the Almighty Media Sites and those Big Box Sites, etc., thus neatly controlling access to information - information like ATS, for example.

(Joe explains it in detail in the video...)

That is why Net Neutrality is a big deal.

I'm calling for a new name - let's call it "Net Freedom" - our freedom to access content, and our freedom to create accessible content without having some giant corporation strong-arm us (further) into "fast lane" fees.

I Vote for FREEDOM of the NET!

- AB

originally posted by: DarkkHero

I didn't bother watching this episode, or any of the past 4 or 5 episodes, simply because the headline was all I needed to know about what it would be about.

I love when people come and salt my gravy.

originally posted by: DarkkHero
I miss the days of ATS being a neutral place, where you can come to discuss Conspiracy, Aliens, Secret Societies, etc.

These days the outright overt leftist "in your face" content such as this is just driving people away.
Maybe that's what you want. Who knows?

I didn't bother watching this episode, or any of the past 4 or 5 episodes, simply because the headline was all I needed to know about what it would be about.

And the fact that the owners of this site are the force behind it just makes me shake my head.

It's ok to have an opinion about these subjects, but to make it the first thing you see, and then force it down our throats with all the banners, advertisements, etc, just makes me scroll past it as fast as I can.

That's just my humble opinion, and i'm sure it will fall on deaf ears.

you don't have to worry about "leftist content" taking over....the few remaining sites are being marginalized as we speak to a corporate pseudo-police-state. it's really simple...if you do not have money, you have no say, and no political power. the amount of freedom you have, is directly correlated to the amount of money you have or control.

a reply to: theNLBS

Great video, as usual. I loved the Oatmeal's take and explanation of what Net Neutrality is and how it's being threatened. One of the charts was in your video, so you must have seen it, but I'll post it here for others to read:

theoatmeal.com...

originally posted by: Bone75
Come on man... really? Don't we already have laws to protect us against such practices?

No. That's what we're saying. There is no law that protects us. Net Neutrality IS the "law" that would protect us from such practices. It's a classification of the Internet that says all information must be treated equally and those with money can't restrict, deny or slow down whomever they choose to.

This classification says that telecom companies have to remain neutral to the information. We are being outright TOLD that it's going to change (and it's already happening - see link above) and we're being given the chance to prevent it by classifying the Internet as Neutral. But since the telecom lobbyists WANT the control, they're supporting people (like Ted Cruz) who will turn Americans against it by lying and saying it's a "government takeover" of the Internet and Obamacare for the Internet.

You can read about it and find out what it really is, or you can listen to Ted and others who are getting big bucks to say what they're saying. They don't give an crap about you or your internet access. They want more money and they know how to get it. Don't just follow blindly. You're smart enough to understand this.

I went ahead and watched the episode, because you're right.
How can I judge something I haven't seen?

It was just what I thought it would be.
Mostly political, and left leaning. /shrug

The point of my original post was I don't want to come here for politics from either side.
I want to read about technology, secret aircraft projects, Mars, the Moon, Aliens, etc.
Those are what I come to this site, and have for 10+ years, to read about.
Those subjects are Above Top Secret.
Those topics are why I am constantly telling people about this site.

In the end, I should have just kept my opinion to myself, and will probably do so from now on.

a reply to: DarkkHero

Net Neutrality wasn't a partisan issue until Obama opened his mouth in his desperate attempt to stay relevant. Conservatives were recommending Title II reclassification way back in 2005. The only reason conservatives don't like it now, is because Obama said it.

a reply to: DarkkHero

I'm not being rude here but is it fair to diss the content on the site when you don't add to it? You've been here almost 8 years and only 20 posts. If you want to read more of what you've put forth there, why not start a thread or 2 for discussion then?

a reply to: DarkkHero

So what you are saying, unless I miss my mark, is that you would rather that ATS produced some visual media related to the more esoteric subjects covered on the site? Well that is a fair suggestion, but surely it would have been better to make that suggestion in a thread other than this one? There is in fact a forum for suggestions and complaints, and I would have thought that would be the ideal place for the sort of comment you want to make.

Coming here after the guys have put in all the work of producing actual content for the site, and badmouthing it, is bad form. Like it or not, NLBS covers the political issues with a frank, unapologetic, and despite your arguments otherwise, even handed approach. Joe is not biased by partisan politics, in fact from what I gather he hates the whole sorry mess, because he knows that it is a shell game, rather than being real.

Left and right are not important to the issue, except in so far as how both sides have spun this issue for their own gain, at different times throughout the last decade. The only thing that matters is ensuring that the corporations cannot put people over a barrel with regard to internet access speeds, that is all. Left and right is not important, only which people are making the right noises toward the subject are important. The issue is important, the politics is not.

originally posted by: DarkkHero

The point of my original post was I don't want to come here for politics from either side.
I want to read about technology, secret aircraft projects, Mars, the Moon, Aliens, etc.
Those are what I come to this site, and have for 10+ years, to read about.
Those subjects are Above Top Secret.

No those are just some of the topics on ABove Top Secret. If Politics doesn't float your boat (understandable) stick to the topics you enjoy, the whole site content can't be designed to cater to one persons preference.
This show is not a rehash and discussion of threads (that's kinda what we do on radio) rather it is a presentation of someones thoughts and/or investigative journalism. They present it in a media format for rational discussion by the membership base.
If you think it is left leaning, maybe Joe can adjust his tight fitting jeans, dunno, don't care about that American Bipartisan obsession anymore.

You know you would think that an ISP would revel in the need for its subscribers to need more bandwidth so they can be sold a pricier service package. Which only proves to my mind that the ISPs really don't need more capacity due to Netflix et al. They just see an opportunity to do some gouging on the back end rather than profiting by delivering additional value.

Hey Comcast, by the way how about letting me subscribe to an a la carte menu of channels rather than forcing me to take 12 Spanish Language and 17 religious broadcasting channels as part of my 'basic service'?

originally posted by: DarkkHero

That's just my humble opinion, and i'm sure it will fall on deaf ears.

And it deserves to.

You didn't watch it, won't watch it, and yet you decry it.

Thats Next Level Bull# right there.

'Nuff said, really.

originally posted by: neformore

originally posted by: DarkkHero

That's just my humble opinion, and i'm sure it will fall on deaf ears.

And it deserves to.

You didn't watch it, won't watch it, and yet you decry it.

Thats Next Level Bull# right there.

'Nuff said, really.

Can't tell you how many times this happens. People just want to debate thread topics and not the content.

It's non stop struggle against stupid.

a reply to: theNLBS

I know and understand the frustration Americans must be feeling, but as an outsider I am jealous and in administration of your country (and please I am not a shill), but it is extremely awesome that you guys have ACCESS to this kinds of information that Joe and NLBS presents.

Joe you guys are doing a great job.

a reply to: theNLBS
I hear what you're saying and thank you for the explanation on what net neutrality is. I'm on the fence on whether or not I want the government sticking its nose in anymore of our business. Everything they touch seems to turn into BS.

originally posted by: Tarzan the apeman.
a reply to: theNLBS
I hear what you're saying and thank you for the explanation on what net neutrality is. I'm on the fence on whether or not I want the government sticking its nose in anymore of our business. Everything they touch seems to turn into BS.

Just as you state, I am extremely leery of the FCC regulating the internet. What regulations will they come up with? What limits will be placed on their authority to regulate? Anytime the feds get involved, we are assured the screwing is on it's way. Look at the new agreement our President just signed with China. The U.S. must drastically reduce pollution over the next 10 years or so. In exchange, China can continue on as they are, and agree to slow down pollution starting in 2030. Say What?!

This is the same government that has "fixed" our education system, our infrastructure, the student loan program, put millions back to work, and fixed immigration. I'm sorry, I don't trust them to regulate the internet. Who writes the regulations for all the agencies that already regulate us to death? The Corporations. Who wrote the ACA? The Corporations. And now we find out they think Americans are too stupid to know what they did to us.

I'm not saying Net Neutrality is bad, I just don't trust the government to do what they think is best for everyone. I don't have the answer, wish I did. I fear giving the government more power over our day to day lives.

S.O. said it better.

originally posted by: retiredTxn
What regulations will they come up with?

The regulations already exist. Obama is merely repeating what people have been asking for, for a along time, Title II Common Carrier reclassification of the Internet under the COMMUNICATIONS ACT OF 1934

It shall be unlawful for any common carrier to make any unjust or unreasonable discrimination in charges, practices, classifications, regulations, facilities, or services for or in connection with like communication service, directly or indirectly, by any means or device, or to make or give any undue or unreasonable preference or advantage to any particular person, class of persons, or locality, or to subject any particular person, class of persons, or locality to any undue or unreasonable prejudice or disadvantage.

What limits will be placed on their authority to regulate?

See the link above. There's a great deal of language regarding financial penalties.

Anytime the feds get involved, we are assured the screwing is on it's way.

The feds are already involved. This reclassification improves it. The EFF agrees.

This is the same government that has "fixed" our education system…

The road to net neutrality began with the Bush administration in 2005. Obama is proposing no new laws or legislation.