It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

net neutrality under trump

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 18 2017 @ 10:45 AM
link   
While I'm very happy that Hillary is not our POTUS but yet hoping she will become POTUS as in Prisoner Of The United States , I also acknowledge that Trump is no prize.

Now that the neocon Republicans are going to have a good amount of control in 2017 they are surely going to try to make their ISP lobbyist overloads happy by trying to overturn net neutrality principles once again.

Despite net neutrality principles existing since the inception of the internet and being a big factor in what allowed the internet to become what it is, do you think Trump is going to let the neocon congress Screw over the consumers? Or will he call them out.

So far most tech online journals are fear mongering that Trump will kill net neutrality principles but they appear to be based on speculation on wanting to deregulate things not necessary just on net neutrality.

While I agree with deregulation I also see a need under certain circumstance such as net neutrality which protects the consumers in a monopolistic run industry. Not to mention that industry is run by some of the most hated consumer anti friendly corporations in America such as Comcast,Att, and Verizon which will grant them full control of what the consumer can access.

Getting rid of Net neutrality is a threat to freedom of speech via paid to play censorship. I hope that the individual republicans call out the neocon republicans in congress that support killing net neutrality and don't simply align in order based on their parties stance.

Killing net neutrality principles is nothing more than censorship and getting back control of the one medium the lobbyist and gov't didn't have the foresight to see and let slip through their claws.
edit on 14131America/ChicagoWed, 18 Jan 2017 11:14:19 -0600000000p3142 by interupt42 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 18 2017 @ 10:48 AM
link   
a reply to: interupt42

They tried that with a GOP controlled congress already and it ended up failing because good people put up a damn good fight.

And considering Trump's agenda, he's never once spoken about the internet in that way, other than increasing cyber security, which doesn't require having anything to do with Net Neutrality as far as I can tell.

I think we are pretty safe on that aspect of all this for now.

~Tenth



posted on Jan, 18 2017 @ 10:51 AM
link   
a reply to: interupt42

When you have republicans in control and there is an issue, you'll have 100% of the people fighting for freedom and rights.

When democrats are in control and there is an issue, you'll have 50% of the people fighting for freedom and rights.




posted on Jan, 18 2017 @ 10:52 AM
link   
a reply to: interupt42



I never thought about it until now.
It was all about the Donald Trump Memorial Wall of Excellence and digs at the Chinese.
You bring up an issue that needs to be monitored closely by the people...



posted on Jan, 18 2017 @ 10:54 AM
link   
a reply to: tothetenthpower

Yeah I'm hoping the same will happen but it took a lot of pressure to get them to not succeed and as we both know they are likely not to stop trying .

Such as this lobbyist street walker :
"FCC’s Ajit Pai says net neutrality’s “days are numbered” under Trump



posted on Jan, 18 2017 @ 10:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: interupt42

When you have republicans in control and there is an issue, you'll have 100% of the people fighting for freedom and rights.

When democrats are in control and there is an issue, you'll have 50% of the people fighting for freedom and rights.





Rights of who exactly?



posted on Jan, 18 2017 @ 11:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: interupt42

When you have republicans in control and there is an issue, you'll have 100% of the people fighting for freedom and rights.

When democrats are in control and there is an issue, you'll have 50% of the people fighting for freedom and rights.




Really? I see quite a few Trump supporters daily calling for suppression of the 1st Amendment because liberals are trying to exercise it to protest, and when not doing that I see others calling for the "fake news" MSM to be silenced as well.
edit on 18-1-2017 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2017 @ 11:08 AM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

Honestly I see the same thing from both parties and consider them political cheerleaders who have ruined this country by refusing to call out their own parties BS.

I saw numerous republicans here,friends, and family members claiming net neutrality principles was bad for the consumer simply because they were republicans and clearly had no idea what neutrality principles were nor that they had existed since the inception of the internet.

Killing net neutrality under a monopolistic controlled industry by the most hated companies in America is not a good thing for consumers as the neocon republicans would like you to think.

Killing net neutrality principles is nothing more than censorship and getting back control of the one medium the lobbyist and gov't didn't have the foresight to see and let slip through their claws.




edit on 13131America/ChicagoWed, 18 Jan 2017 11:13:13 -0600000000p3142 by interupt42 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2017 @ 12:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: interupt42
Such as this lobbyist street walker :
"FCC’s Ajit Pai says net neutrality’s “days are numbered” under Trump




I certainly hope so. We're supposedly living in a free market capitalist society, these types of draconian regulations and federal meddling in everything have no place in our society.



posted on Jan, 18 2017 @ 12:16 PM
link   
a reply to: interupt42

Arguing for or against net neutrality is one thing.

Blindly obeying what the political party does is quite another.

I've always been leery about net neutrality and have never gone along party lines for either party.

But I see clear evidence of that type of behavior all the time.



posted on Jan, 18 2017 @ 12:23 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Burd you can't honestly say that you support the removal of Net Neutrality right?

It's literally the backbone of the internet as we know it and the only thing keeping ISP's from total bandwidth control.

I don't want to have to start buying 'internet packages' to get access to certain sites I like. I don't think you would like that either.

~Tenth



posted on Jan, 18 2017 @ 12:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: interupt42
Such as this lobbyist street walker :
"FCC’s Ajit Pai says net neutrality’s “days are numbered” under Trump




I certainly hope so. We're supposedly living in a free market capitalist society, these types of draconian regulations and federal meddling in everything have no place in our society.


Well thats the rub, the internet is not a commodity or object that you go to best buy and purchase. The internet is a MARKET Place.

Hence you should be for net neutrality to ensure that the market is not manipulated nor allow the ISP to determine the winner and loser of the internet markets via restrictions.



posted on Jan, 18 2017 @ 12:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: tothetenthpower
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Burd you can't honestly say that you support the removal of Net Neutrality right?

It's literally the backbone of the internet as we know it and the only thing keeping ISP's from total bandwidth control.

I don't want to have to start buying 'internet packages' to get access to certain sites I like. I don't think you would like that either.

~Tenth


I oppose it. Expansion of federal overreach and regulation is never the answer. What Obama signed into law will ultimately lead to a consolidation of ISP power and result in this country having a handfull of mega-providers who suddenly are "too big to fail," set rates as high as they wish with the blessing of their paid DC overlords, and tap the tax payer anytime their risks blow up in their faces. It's bills like Net Neutrality that lead us to the 2008 spectacle of tax payer funded bail outs that amounted to little more than privatization of profits and socialized losses.



posted on Jan, 18 2017 @ 12:29 PM
link   
a reply to: interupt42

It's still a privately funded infrastructure, which makes it a commodity the same as electricity, oil, or cable TV.



posted on Jan, 18 2017 @ 12:33 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6


I oppose it. Expansion of federal overreach and regulation is never the answer. What Obama signed into law will ultimately lead to a consolidation of ISP power and result in this country having a handfull of mega-providers who suddenly are "too big to fail," set rates as high as they wish with the blessing of their paid DC overlords, and tap the tax payer anytime their risks blow up in their faces.


That's not what Net Neutrality is about.

What we are talking about is making sure that ISP's can't treat one services traffic, as different from another. For example, Verizon can't discriminate against Netflix over it's own VOD service.

I agree with you about consolidation of powers etc. What I don't want to see is the internet carved up into the same kind of nonsense we see with television. Where access to content is directly dependant on how much you are willing to pay your ISP.

Instead of paying a rate for speed/data usage and having full access to the content.

~Tenth



posted on Jan, 18 2017 @ 12:45 PM
link   
a reply to: tothetenthpower

OK, what Ajit Pai is talking about is Obama's Net Neutrality bill which placed the FCC in a regulatory position over any and all innovation, direction, and corporate actions related to ISPs and net infrastructure. It is the FCC version of essentially what Dodd-Frank allowed banks to become: MEGA conglomerates with heavily concentrated power and lobbyists who ensure that it stays that way through political pressure on FCC board decisions.



posted on Jan, 18 2017 @ 12:46 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

No. The opposite is true also. Too many people fall asleep when their chosen party is at the helm.

OT: I think net neutrality is in grave danger simply because Trump will sign most bills that come across his desk if they originate from the GOP.
edit on 1/18/2017 by Kali74 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2017 @ 01:00 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6

That's exactly what the FCC ruling did... classified the internet as a utility and much like gas lines, phone lines, power lines etc, tax dollars paid for some of the infrastructure.



posted on Jan, 18 2017 @ 01:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: interupt42

It's still a privately funded infrastructure, which makes it a commodity the same as electricity, oil, or cable TV.


Its not entirely privately funded and is maintained by tax payers to certain degree by incentives the private Oligopoly have taken from the gov't to build the infrastructure.

This would give comcast the power to extort and put ats,amazon,google,netflix and other online business out of service over night. Kind of like in the few days they killed net neutrality and verizon extorted netflix to pay more by purposely slowing their traffic down.

The problem is that we don't have a free market place in the ISP industry.

Its a manipulated and controlled industry by the big three who do everything they can from regulations, lawsuits, to bribery and political revolving doors to ensure the industry has no competition and the consumer has very little say.

If their was competition in the ISP industry than I would say net neutrality regulations are not needed but that is not the reality . The reality is , that you have a very anti competitive market run by the most hated corporations in America.

That is why they are making billions of dollars per quarter, all the while being consistently rated by its customers as the most hated corporations. That can only happen when the industry has no completion. If you opened a restaurant and your customer constantly complain about your food and service how long would you be in business? Not long because your customers have other choices. Not so much when it comes to the ISP industry.

Net neutrality is not draconian regulation, its a regulation to allow for competition and free markets to compete freely in a virtual market place. Its to prevent draconian control of the internet by any one entity. Doing away with net neutrality would be killing the internet free market place.

I'm typically for anti regulation and anti big gov't , but I'm for regulation that allows for anti monopolies and that encourage competition such as net neutrality. Killing net neutrality creates a bigger monopolies and discourages competition.

You wan't to get rid of net neutrality principles than first get rid of all the ISP anti competition regulations they already have in place. Not even google was able to overcome the ISP anti competitive regulations they put in place.


edit on 56131America/ChicagoWed, 18 Jan 2017 13:56:08 -0600000000p3142 by interupt42 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2017 @ 03:47 PM
link   
I am already prepared for what the future of the internet is ultimately going to become. And the first two things that will pass are going to be the TPP, and a new bill to kill the freedom of information.

Back in November 2016, a bill was passed through congress to allow organizations such as the cia, and the fbi to intercept, and decode information flowing through VPN's. On that day i fried my hard drive. I didn't do anything more than "click on links to download motion pictures." Since i no longer have them in my possession... the tpp will not affect me.

Back in December 2016, i also deleted my facebook account an stopped using it since they became a censor to so called "fake news."

Meanwhile the rest of the world is trying to figure out one of two things: will they catch me? Or. It must be a joke.

But i can tell you it is anything but a joke.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join