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.

 

This net neutrality move seems a good thing.

page: 8
25
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 10:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
No matter the argument or the complaint, the idea that government regulation is the answer is fundamentally absurd. Net Neutrality is a euphemism for government regulated internet.



The argument that government regulation is never the answer is the one that is absurd.




posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 10:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
No matter the argument or the complaint, the idea that government regulation is the answer is fundamentally absurd. Net Neutrality is a euphemism for government regulated internet.




Oh yeah, this is so true. Remember the halcyon days of the robber barons? A Monopoly just means everyone else is too stupid to compete, amirite?



posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 10:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
No matter the argument or the complaint, the idea that government regulation is the answer is fundamentally absurd. Net Neutrality is a euphemism for government regulated internet.



This is what is wrong with conservatives these days. Just declare all regulation bad without actually looking into why the regulation exists and how effective it is. Conservatives back in the day weren't 100% against regulation you know?



posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 10:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
No matter the argument or the complaint, the idea that government regulation is the answer is fundamentally absurd. Net Neutrality is a euphemism for government regulated internet.



This is what is wrong with conservatives these days. Just declare all regulation bad without actually looking into why the regulation exists and how effective it is. Conservatives back in the day weren't 100% against regulation you know?


Repeal child labor laws and take away women's right to vote I say.



posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 10:07 AM
link   
Remember the days when you bought an HD television, and you automatically had HD tv? Remember that?

Then ATT suddenly realized 'hey! we could make money on that, now that everybody is buying HD TV's."

So they scrambled the HD, and make you pay a fee to unscramble it to get what you already had.

ATT is merciless. Biggest money grubbers on the planet. Hate 'em. But the others are just as bad, so what cha gonna do?

All this mess reminds me of that.



posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 10:07 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 10:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: eriktheawful


What about those born in to the world after the inception of our interwebs?



Well, most of my children were born and raised prior to the internet being in wide use, so I don't have to worry about them.

But for everyone else? Guess they'll have to learn that GASP! You can actually use a check or money order and mail in your bill payment for something.

Or get off your butt and go to the place to pay for a bill.

Or get off their butt and have to actually go to a place and shop.

Sit down and write an honest to god letter with REAL paper and pen, and use a stamp to mail it to someone.

That when you get together with a group of friends, you actually talk with each other.....not sit around with each other with their heads bent down to their smart phones.

The internet is like anything else: a wonderful thing to have, but can also be something that one can imbibe too much of. It's a powerful tool (all the information and one's finger tips), it does make life easier (pay all your bills and do all your shopping while sitting on your couch at home), entertains people (Movies, TV, and online games), and for some it's their business (ebay seller, or many other jobs that is their income).

Thing is: if anyone told you that one thing will completely control your life, chances are, you're not going to like that idea. Like someone addicted to drugs or alcohol.

The Internet. Something that could be completely wiped out in a few minutes from a large CME from the sun.

It's just so sad to see how addicted to it and being completely dependent upon it people have become, to the point where they are basically slaves to it.



posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 10:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
No matter the argument or the complaint, the idea that government regulation is the answer is fundamentally absurd. Net Neutrality is a euphemism for government regulated internet.



This is what is wrong with conservatives these days. Just declare all regulation bad without actually looking into why the regulation exists and how effective it is. Conservatives back in the day weren't 100% against regulation you know?


Repeal child labor laws and take away women's right to vote I say.


I don't know a Conservative that is against every regulation. They're conservative, not Libertarians or anarchists.



posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 10:12 AM
link   
a reply to: luthier




because their employers running the show?

bingo and they run both shows the R and the D show.



posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 10:13 AM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker

Still nothing about the UN though?

I am not the only person in this thread, who has offered you an opportunity to explain what the UN have to do with this, and you have refused on every occasion. There can be no justification for this whatsoever, assuming you have a reason for believing that the UN are in some way involved (which, of course, is not the case at all).

You can post what you like about Alabama, if you like being horrifically off topic, but proper conduct suggests that if you are making a claim, it is upon you to explain your reasoning.

I urge you once again to do so, if there is any basis at all for your belief in the matter of the UN and its relation (or more properly, its lack thereof) to the subject matter.



posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 10:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
No matter the argument or the complaint, the idea that government regulation is the answer is fundamentally absurd. Net Neutrality is a euphemism for government regulated internet.



The argument that government regulation is never the answer is the one that is absurd.


Agreed. There is a balance. The distinction here is regulation that stifles and regulation that corrects. Balance.



posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 10:14 AM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker

I don't get it, are you saying the UN benefits from net neutrality somehow? Where is this coming from?


a reply to: JinMI

So, let me get this straight; people are arguing about how to best govern the net and your solution is to stop using it? That would put an end to the problem, no doubt. And then we can shut down the whole FCC and Ajit Pai will be out of work, he can become a comedy Youtuber instead, oh wait... Hey, maybe you're right in saying that people are addicted to technology too much, but that's not the point, is it? No one here has said they're going to die if they can't get on the internet. That doesn't mean the internet can't be a huge benefit; free speech for dissidents is one benefit of a free internet, that was already brought up. Everyone keeps bitching about Youtube shutting down conservative voices, but that's nothing compared to what we may be facing. Even a Trump-skeptic like me would rather brave the fake news of the internet than rely solely on corporate MSM shills.

God knows I have my own faults but it really looks like the NN critics in this thread are victims of their own stubborn partisanship. You want the internet to work according to your specific ideological tenets and if you can't have that then you'd rather throw it all away. Where's the freedom and innovation in that?

EDIT: I guess people have been asking about the UN a bunch already, I don't want to belabor the point, ha

edit on 15-12-2017 by Cutepants because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 10:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: Cutepants
a reply to: nwtrucker

I don't get it, are you saying the UN benefits from net neutrality somehow? Where is this coming from?


a reply to: JinMI

So, let me get this straight; people are arguing about how to best govern the net and your solution is to stop using it? That would put an end to the problem, no doubt. And then we can shut down the whole FCC and Ajit Pai will be out of work, he can become a comedy Youtuber instead, oh wait... Hey, maybe you're right in saying that people are addicted to technology too much, but that's not the point, is it? No one here has said they're going to die if they can't get on the internet. That doesn't mean the internet can't be a huge benefit; free speech for dissidents is one benefit of a free internet, that was already brought up. Everyone keeps bitching about Youtube shutting down conservative voices, but that's nothing compared to what we may be facing. Even a Trump-skeptic like me would rather brave the fake news of the internet than rely solely on corporate MSM shills.

God knows I have my own faults but it really looks like the NN critics in this thread are victims of their own stubborn partisanship. You want the internet to work according to your specific ideological tenets and if you can't have that then you'd rather throw it all away. Where's the freedom and innovation in that?


I don't think anyone posted shut it down. The most I've seen is over reliance of it.



posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 10:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: nwtrucker

Still nothing about the UN though?

I am not the only person in this thread, who has offered you an opportunity to explain what the UN have to do with this, and you have refused on every occasion. There can be no justification for this whatsoever, assuming you have a reason for believing that the UN are in some way involved (which, of course, is not the case at all).

You can post what you like about Alabama, if you like being horrifically off topic, but proper conduct suggests that if you are making a claim, it is upon you to explain your reasoning.

I urge you once again to do so, if there is any basis at all for your belief in the matter of the UN and its relation (or more properly, its lack thereof) to the subject matter.


I will try again,www.business2community.com...

second time. After that, do you own research.
edit on 15-12-2017 by nwtrucker because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 10:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
No matter the argument or the complaint, the idea that government regulation is the answer is fundamentally absurd. Net Neutrality is a euphemism for government regulated internet.



This is what is wrong with conservatives these days. Just declare all regulation bad without actually looking into why the regulation exists and how effective it is. Conservatives back in the day weren't 100% against regulation you know?


Repeal child labor laws and take away women's right to vote I say.

I feel like it's only a matter of time before they get around to it. I'm sure it'll come with some silly rhetoric about how taking away benefits that improve these groups' lives will somehow benefit them more, too.
edit on 15-12-2017 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 10:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
No matter the argument or the complaint, the idea that government regulation is the answer is fundamentally absurd. Net Neutrality is a euphemism for government regulated internet.



This is what is wrong with conservatives these days. Just declare all regulation bad without actually looking into why the regulation exists and how effective it is. Conservatives back in the day weren't 100% against regulation you know?


Repeal child labor laws and take away women's right to vote I say.


I don't know a Conservative that is against every regulation. They're conservative, not Libertarians or anarchists.


Libertarians are conservatives. just fyi

Do you think your provider should be able to stall your Internet for having an opposing political view.

Should your provider be able to slow down all conservative news or out right block it?

How about if you make comments that are conservative stall your access all together?



posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 10:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: Box of Rain

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: interupt42
a reply to: nwtrucker




What I seem to get, in general, is the idea of zero control, complete freedom and zero to little cost. That somehow I should have the right to the fastest car, say a Corvette ZR-1 and it shouldn't be any more expensive than a Honda Accord. Is that an accurate analogy?


No that is not the right analogy.
The right analogy is that you PAID and continue to pay for a corvette ZR-1 with a chip in it that when the dealer wants more money from the Chevy manufacturer, they purposely slow down and convert your ZR-1 to a yugo.

You pay for example 80 bucks a month for 60mb downloads speeds from your ISP. Why should the ISP be able to PURPOSELY go out of their way to NOT provide you with what you are paying for and PURPOSELY slow down your speeds to 1mb. All the while they continue to charge you the full price for the 60mb speeds, but only giving you 1mb download speeds?




Hmm, so your saying I don't already know what I'm buying? That the actual Yugo isn't known? You know it, I know it. So we aren't buying a ZR-1 are we? We leasing the Yugo, not buying it.

If I really want the Vette and can afford it, I will buy/lease it. otherwise, I will settle for the Yugo....over the UN....for now...


First of all and as I mentioned above, please explain the UN connection.

Be specific. I really don't know what this internet control that you allege that net neutrality gives to the UN.


Secondly, the analogy would be that you buy the more expensive performance car, but the car company limits use of the car if they want after you buy it.

That is to say, The expensive car you paid for might handle better around curves, but if you drive around too many curves, the car company has the right to take that better handling away from you because you use it too much (even though you paid for it). I mean, how dare you make full use of that better handling you paid for.



They already reduce the performance of their cars. They're called 'speed limiters'.

Seeing you already know they use 'speed limiters' on the net, it's buyer beware. Yes?

Rather disingenuous to claim you bought a Vette when you know perfectly well it was a Yugo.



posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 10:22 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I am pretty sure if Obama made the child labor laws they would repeal them.

Not a fan of Obama presidency but the overturning of laws simply because he passed them, without debate or reason is a ludicrous.



posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 10:24 AM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker

Either way, still a poor argument against improving it.



posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 10:25 AM
link   
a reply to: eriktheawful

You're right. It's rather appalling if you think about it. But one thing I wouldn't change for anything, is my ability to have on-line banking. I spent two Sunday afternoons, for YEARS writing out checks and trying to balance my checkbook, which I could never get right. What a huge waste of my often beautiful Sundays.

Now a few clicks, and DONE. Always balanced automatically, pay my bills without fail. I just wonder when they will start charging a fee to do it, but whatever it is, I will pay it.

And shopping on-line, I love it. I know the USPS and UPS are sick of me.



new topics




 
25
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join