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.

 

So Y'all for Net Neutrality now?

page: 1
7
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 10 2021 @ 10:52 AM
link   
arstechnica.com...



Judge: Like cable TV, ISPs “decide” which websites to transmit
Consumers generally expect ISPs to deliver Internet content in un-altered form. But Kavanaugh argued that ISPs are like cable TV operators—since cable TV companies can choose not to carry certain channels, Internet providers should be able to choose not to allow access to a certain website, he wrote.


You guys flip and flop worse than a half dead fish on a sunny day.
So which is it, You like Net neutrality or Don't?
It can't be both!

Some of you, and you know who you are, have very short term memories.
Just do a wee little search on net neutrality on here and see what comes up, it may surprise you.
I will say some of you had CRYSTAL clear foresight on what was going to go down.



posted on Jan, 10 2021 @ 10:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: JAGStorm
arstechnica.com...



Judge: Like cable TV, ISPs “decide” which websites to transmit
Consumers generally expect ISPs to deliver Internet content in un-altered form. But Kavanaugh argued that ISPs are like cable TV operators—since cable TV companies can choose not to carry certain channels, Internet providers should be able to choose not to allow access to a certain website, he wrote.


You guys flip and flop worse than a half dead fish on a sunny day.
So which is it, You like Net neutrality or Don't?
It can't be both!

Some of you, and you know who you are, have very short term memories.
Just do a wee little search on net neutrality on here and see what comes up, it may surprise you.
I will say some of you had CRYSTAL clear foresight on what was going to go down.


One issue is that cable companies don't always have the choice since so many channels are owned by the same company. If you carry one, you carry all of their channels. That's what Charter told me years ago.



posted on Jan, 10 2021 @ 10:57 AM
link   
www.abovetopsecret.com...



The Republicans are using fear-mongering tactics that have no facts behind them, like "Obamacare for the internet" to confuse people into thinking that it is better for them to NOT support net neutrality. But the reality is, the individual is going to be better off if they DO support net neutrality. People are being played.


Basically, the Republican voter will wake up one day to find out they screwed themselves out of the internet - and then will probably be manipulated into thinking it was the Democrat's fault. But they were MANIPULATED by LIES.


Crystal Clear!!!



posted on Jan, 10 2021 @ 10:58 AM
link   
Government control or corporate.

They're in bed with each other. So this would make very little difference I think.



posted on Jan, 10 2021 @ 11:01 AM
link   
a reply to: JAGStorm

I doubt the majority of the people here understand the issue in it’s entirety. They just look to what Donald Trump said, what his lackeys say, and run with it.

I don’t know how else to explain the complete disconnect between what repealing net neutrality would mean and their opinions on it. Nobody in their right mind would want to change the internet to be like cable tv. I’m seeing the same disconnect from the same people concerning 230 now. I doubt that’s coincidence.



posted on Jan, 10 2021 @ 11:05 AM
link   
a reply to: underwerks
You clearly don't either. How could you not have posted just your second paragraph?

Seriously, take a moment to read your post without the first paragraph and ask yourself who is doing the dividing.



posted on Jan, 10 2021 @ 11:06 AM
link   
a reply to: underwerks

So if net neutrality had been passed would you have been against censoring trump and supporters

Would Biden, Harris, pelosi, Aoc and others?



posted on Jan, 10 2021 @ 11:07 AM
link   
a reply to: underwerks




I doubt the majority of the people here understand the issue in it’s entirety. They just look to what Donald Trump said, what his lackeys say, and run with it.


Of course they don't understand it. Look up at my link. That is the guy they pushed so hard for and wanted.
He gave them exactly what they wanted and now they don't like it.

What many didn't realize is that we are all fighting for the samething but so many want to divide and conquer they make us think we are fighting for something different...



posted on Jan, 10 2021 @ 11:08 AM
link   
a reply to: JAGStorm

Seems like that is actually the case.

Regardless, we now have a one-party government everywhere but the SCOTUS and they don't seem too interested in giving up the fascist structure Republicans were all too willing to build for them.

Actions have consequences.

When I say that Americans view fascism favorably, I meant that independently of party affiliation. I really feel like Americans love the fascism they've built for themselves and the reaction to net neutrality among the right, in general, seems to fit that bill. Right now, it's the conservatives that are feeling the brunt of this newly-found fascist love affair that their own Republican party has cast them aside for. Eventually, it will be everyone.

There was no victory on November 3rd for Americans anywhere. I maintained that then and I maintain it now.



posted on Jan, 10 2021 @ 11:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: underwerks

So if net neutrality had been passed would you have been against censoring trump and supporters

Would Biden, Harris, pelosi, Aoc and others?


It wouldn't matter if he was for censoring or not, it wouldn't have been able to happen, that's the point.

We've talked about it on here for a while. Should FB, Twitter etc, be considered a utility?



posted on Jan, 10 2021 @ 11:09 AM
link   
a reply to: JAGStorm

Most people simply use a VPN in an attempt to spoof the bastards these days.

That way you can somewhat circumvent most censorship and geographical constants put in place.

There not quite CRYSTAL but they do the job.



posted on Jan, 10 2021 @ 11:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

Of course not, Grambler.

Fascism IS popular.



posted on Jan, 10 2021 @ 11:12 AM
link   
You gotta be really stupid to come to such a ridiculous viewpoint.

Kavanaugh Is dumb. I figure most judges are dumb since almost all rulings on matters such as these i hear about favour corporations and monopoly building. Or bought off. Or both. Perhaps the law really is just that bad, but congress was always trash so there we go.

I would love the old wild west feeling internet back, but i really don’t think it is posdible now.

Section 230 needs reform, not abolition. Section 230 also theoretically protects sites such as this one. Not sure what the reform would look like though since i doubt my preferred phrasing of “google, twitter, facebook, amazon, netflix et al. can go fornicate themselves with a rusted pipe” is legally binding.

Though i do feel most issues people with tech corporations could be resolved not through abolishing section 230 but some good old fashioned monopoly busting. Good luck getting the government to do that in this age.
edit on 1012021 by Ohanka because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2021 @ 11:16 AM
link   
a reply to: projectvxn




When I say that Americans view fascism favorably, I meant that independently of party affiliation. I really feel like Americans love the fascism they've built for themselves and the reaction to net neutrality among the right, in general, seems to fit that bill. Right now, it's the conservatives that are feeling the brunt of this newly-found fascist love affair that their own Republican party has cast them aside for. Eventually, it will be everyone.



I can't add anything to that because it's spot on!



posted on Jan, 10 2021 @ 11:18 AM
link   
a reply to: JAGStorm

There's a double edged sword here.

You could go with net neutrality, but you have vast powers of control to the government which is in favor of this same censorship. So you cannot say this would not happen.

On the other hand, you go without, but you have a monopoly situation which is basically a different form government control via the corporate entities or fascism.

We were damned either way.

And ultimately, you have to realize the laws say that monopolies cannot happen for this reason, and yet they have been allowed to. Plus, teh COTUS says that censorship for political reasons above all cannot happen, but it's also being allowed to.

If we are already in a place where violation of existing laws are being ignored, what makes you think net neutrality would have mattered because of government? You place too much faith in an entity that clearly has no interest in enforcement of statutes inconvenient to its purpose of control already.


edit on 10-1-2021 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2021 @ 11:21 AM
link   
This comes back to 1996 when isp's were not declared common carriers.



posted on Jan, 10 2021 @ 11:21 AM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko




We were damned either way.


I'd take my chances with the government over a corporation any day.



posted on Jan, 10 2021 @ 11:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: JAGStorm
a reply to: ketsuko




We were damned either way.


I'd take my chances with the government over a corporation any day.


BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

You still haven't realized that we're in a fascist point where there is NO DIFFERENCE anymore.



posted on Jan, 10 2021 @ 11:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bluntone22
This comes back to 1996 when isp's were not declared common carriers.


1996...... Seems like a lifetime ago.

Remember dialing up, hearing that screeaaaaching sound.
Who knew that we would be here today discussing the ethics of free speech on such a thing...
We thought just having a pager was so futuristic...



posted on Jan, 10 2021 @ 11:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: JAGStorm

originally posted by: Bluntone22
This comes back to 1996 when isp's were not declared common carriers.


1996...... Seems like a lifetime ago.

Remember dialing up, hearing that screeaaaaching sound.
Who knew that we would be here today discussing the ethics of free speech on such a thing...
We thought just having a pager was so futuristic...



If I remember correctly the reason isp's were not declared common carriers is so tech companies would continue to invest in the hardware.
Government restrictions would have stifled investment.
It's amazing how little vision our government has about where the future is heading. Why they couldn't see this issue popping up eventually is hard to believe. Kick the can down the road mentality I guess.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join