Net neutrality takes a major leap today!

[kilofoxtrot]

Verizon and Comcast and the other characters flooded money to many congress men and women trying to stop this. I feel good that for a change our government might have actually represented us and not those with the most cash. But I fully intend to continue to follow it and not just assume.

^^^^ This. Government AND Corporations both have their faults. You have to pick your sides at times because one side isn't always right. Applying sweeping generalizations is a fool's game.

 

[Premium1]

Hopefully someone closes this thread. Turning into another crap political post.

Well this is in the political forum, if you don't like it, don't read it lol.

 

[Premium1]

It's funny verizon threw a hissy fit when the ruling didn't go their way, yet they were the ones who started all of this when they sued a few years back to get rid of net neutrality. That being said, I am not sure how I feel about this. Yes it is good for the internet, but do we really want the government in another thing? I mean look how many things they get their hands in and screw up? It becomes huge, bloated and burns through money, that ultimately, we the taxpayers have to pay for.

 

[kch50428]

Applying sweeping generalizations is a fool's game.

would you like to try a little anarchy with that?

 

[kilofoxtrot]

Just found out my water company wants to charge $100 per gallon. Stay out of it government!! Let them charge what they want!

 

[anon(4698833)]

Just found out my water company wants to charge $100 per gallon. Stay out of it government!! Let them charge what they want!

That's the major problem when you run into a lack of consumer option and a group of service providers who are all kind of in the same crooked scheme. Consumers with no choice have no voice...but on the flip side, allowing the government to regulate EVERYTHING takes away choice as well and starts to dabble in the idea that companies cannot operate to make profit in any other way other than what the GOVERNMENT finds fair.

Where does it end? If we didn't have historic events of government overreach, this wouldn't even be a conversation...but because we know what they tend to do when we give them the power to regulate something, this is something that both pleases me and kind of worries me.

 

[hydrogen3]

I don't understand that statement. What's wrong with organizing locally for the things you want to see enacted?

Grass-roots organizers are qualified to be President?

Obama, Community Organizer In Chief..

 

[anon(4698833)]

Now Comcast is throwing a temper tantrum screaming that the FCC is overstepping their bounds...LOL! They are throwing around words like "lawsuit" against the government. Funny that so much money was invested into Comcast to get their fiber optic system improved, but all I really hear lately is about how they've been using tons of money to try and keep net neutrality from happening so they have full reign over what their consumer base can access and at what speeds.

Un-freakin-believable. I'd get rid of Comcast TODAY if there was a service even remotely as good available. I simply cannot wait for google fiber to get fully setup in Atlanta next year. I'd do without cable to get rid of Comcast to be honest as long as I have great internet service.

 

[BreakingKayfabe]

However you slice and dice it, I really am on the fence about this. I'm sure each and every one of us here on a forum discussing tech are for net neutrality but at what cost? If I had to decide today whether I wanted government involved in keeping net neutrality, I'd have to say no. Because it's going to be F'd either way. Not only did Verizon open up this can of worms, but some others have followed. How about T-Mobile not counting your mobile data when using their handpicked streaming music apps? I was very surprised there wasn't more of an uproar about that. It felt exactly the same to me as Verizon shaking down Netflix. But since T-Mobile is perceived as liberal, I think that's why there wasn't that much of an uproar. Even tech sites like this.

What am I blabbing on about this for? Because at the end of everything the democratic voice is what has the loudest when it comes to media and social networking. For every FOX News there are 10 liberal media outlets you can point to. The government is going to get control of this whether we like it or not and the term "net neutrality" will still exist but won't mean exactly what it means as it does today.

 

[grover5]

Grass-roots organizers are qualified to be President?

Obama, Community Organizer In Chief..

Everyone has to start somewhere. I wouldn't consider it a disqualification.

Posted via the iMore App for Android

 

[hydrogen3]

Everyone has to start somewhere. I wouldn't consider it a disqualification.

Posted via the iMore App for Android

SMH.


Sent from my iPhone 5s using Tapatalk

 

[hydrogen3]

I'm assuming everyone here is comfortable with bloomberg...

Obamacare Effect Linked to Lower Medical Cost Estimates - Bloomberg Business

Bloomberg is a crook.

 

[kch50428]

These new rules have yet to be published for public consumption by the FCC... what are they waiting for?

 

[hydrogen3]

I'm assuming everyone here is comfortable with Fox News..

Save the Internet

 

[kch50428]

https://twitter.com/kerpen/status/571114672360976384/photo/1

Just remembered this classic quote about a public utility Internet paving the way for silencing climate skeptics.

Somebody here will come back and think this is an excellent idea...

 

[Just_Me_D]

How can I explain this? Certain laws and rules appear good, er um, fair on the surface, but years later is when we find out that how bad it really is. For example, remember when all of the historical preservation boards started springing up all across the country? Deeming certain areas and properties as needing to be "preserved" for historical purposes sounds great. Yet, many people found out after being cited for code violations that it would be cheaper to tear down and rebuild than to repair, but being that the property was deemed historical, they weren't allowed to tear down and rebuild. Granted, that was a few years ago. Still, my point is this: when government gets involved, we the people lose, and the effects aren't immediately felt.

 

[kch50428]

Still, my point is this: when government gets involved, we the people lose, and the effects aren't immediately felt.

Indeed.

 

[grover5]

Bloomberg is a crook.

Bloomberg news is a crook?

 

[grover5]

SMH.


Sent from my iPhone 5s using Tapatalk

Yeah, right back at ya.

 

[grover5]

How can I explain this? Certain laws and rules appear good, er um, fair on the surface, but years later is when we find out that how bad it really is. For example, remember when all of the historical preservation boards started springing up all across the country? Deeming certain areas and properties as needing to be "preserved" for historical purposes sounds great. Yet, many people found out after being cited for code violations that it would be cheaper to tear down and rebuild than to repair, but being that the property was deemed historical, they weren't allowed to tear down and rebuild. Granted, that was a few years ago. Still, my point is this: when government gets involved, we the people lose, and the effects aren't immediately felt.

That is too absolute a view for my taste. Government does some things better than private industry and the revers is also true. Some regulations are a necessary part of life.