Bitcoin Forum
May 23, 2024, 07:01:54 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Poll
Question: Do you think that it is good that the bill went through?
Yes - 7 (41.2%)
No - 10 (58.8%)
Total Voters: 17

Pages: « 1 2 [3]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Net neutrality just went through, opinions?  (Read 3019 times)
Beliathon
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 784
Merit: 1000


https://youtu.be/PZm8TTLR2NU


View Profile WWW
March 10, 2015, 03:52:31 PM
 #41

Basically. If a website like Netflix wanted their website to load at a decent speed or be available at all they would potentially have to pay the ISP's to let their websites work through that ISP's services. Because of this vote, that is illegal now.
That's correct. Net neutrality is a great thing,  this was a huge victory for the free flow of information,  and a major loss for the greedy Internet Service Parasites that sought to profit from throttling some information while favoring those who bribe tbem.

Remember Aaron Swartz, a 26 year old computer scientist who died defending the free flow of information.
TheButterZone
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3010
Merit: 1031


RIP Mommy


View Profile WWW
March 10, 2015, 10:04:54 PM
 #42

So I should have to bribe the government to respect my right to make contracts with all my customers that specify they are to use separate dedicated lines for high bandwidth uses and not interfere with other customers who contracted to receive specific speeds for their non-high bandwidth uses?

Saying that you don't trust someone because of their behavior is completely valid.
Beliathon
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 784
Merit: 1000


https://youtu.be/PZm8TTLR2NU


View Profile WWW
March 11, 2015, 01:24:27 AM
Last edit: March 11, 2015, 01:50:14 AM by Beliathon
 #43

So I should have to bribe the government to respect my right to make contracts with all my customers that specify they are to use separate dedicated lines for high bandwidth uses and not interfere with other customers who contracted to receive specific speeds for their non-high bandwidth uses?
Bandwidth is a zero sum game. You can't give extra to one party without reducing the speed of (an) other party/ies. No government or private organization will have the power to do that for you now. That's the whole point of net neutrality. Fucks sake, you conservatives are thicker than molasses When it comes to the dreaded government bogeyman.

Remember Aaron Swartz, a 26 year old computer scientist who died defending the free flow of information.
TheButterZone
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3010
Merit: 1031


RIP Mommy


View Profile WWW
March 11, 2015, 01:40:10 AM
 #44

So I should have to bribe the government to respect my right to make contracts with all my customers that specify they are to use separate dedicated lines for high bandwidth uses and not interfere with other customers who contracted to receive specific speeds for their non-high bandwidth uses?
No government or private organization will have the power to do that for you now. That's the whole point of net neutrality. Fucks sake, you conservatives are thicker than molasses When it comes to the dreaded government bogeyman.



Nobody can be that stupid and still be able to use the internet. Withdraw your baseless contrarianism already.

Or when all else fails, attempt to libel an actual (classical) liberal (aka libertarian, since "liberal" got hijacked by totalitarians) as a "conservative" (also hijacked by totalitarians).

/yawn

Saying that you don't trust someone because of their behavior is completely valid.
Beliathon
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 784
Merit: 1000


https://youtu.be/PZm8TTLR2NU


View Profile WWW
March 11, 2015, 01:52:54 AM
 #45

Only halfwit redneck muricans think libertarian means right-wing corporate bootlicker. For the rest of the world, the word refers to folks on the left of the political spectrum. You sad, clueless clown.

It'd be the ISP's you'd have to bribe, not "big gubmint". And the effect would be immediately noticeable,  so you'd end up getting yourself and your ISP in big trouble. Why don't you retreat to your mountain bunker and spare the internet your ignorance. No one likes listening to idiots parroting fox news neo-fascist corporate talking points.

Remember Aaron Swartz, a 26 year old computer scientist who died defending the free flow of information.
TheButterZone
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3010
Merit: 1031


RIP Mommy


View Profile WWW
March 11, 2015, 02:02:23 AM
Last edit: March 11, 2015, 02:16:50 AM by TheButterZone
 #46

Only halfwit redneck muricans think libertarian means right-wing corporate bootlicker. For the rest of the world, the word refers to folks on the left of the political spectrum. You sad, clueless clown.

It'd be the ISP's you'd have to bribe, not "big gubmint". And the effect would be immediately noticeable,  so you'd end up getting yourself and your ISP in big trouble. Why don't you retreat to your mountain bunker and spare the internet your ignorance. No one likes listening to idiots parroting fox news neo-fascist corporate talking points.

Your libel out of desperation continues*... apparently that's all you've got, so welcome to my ignore list. Enjoy talking to your brick wall for eternity!

"All libertarians begin with a conception of personal autonomy from which they argue in favor of civil liberties and a reduction or elimination of the state." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism#Philosophy


* which is illogical, as you won the "liberty" to spread your First World Luxury Problem bandwidth demands like feces upon your neighbors who can't afford Netflix and its ethical prerequisite dedicated lines, but deserve every bit of the bandwidth for which they DO pay.

Saying that you don't trust someone because of their behavior is completely valid.
Beliathon
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 784
Merit: 1000


https://youtu.be/PZm8TTLR2NU


View Profile WWW
March 11, 2015, 02:17:51 AM
Last edit: March 11, 2015, 02:48:11 AM by Beliathon
 #47

Aww, the internet hurt the little conservatard's feelings so he had to ignore me. What a precious delicate little flower that corporate bootlicker is. The reason I'm a dick to people like that is because there's just no excuse for willful ignorance for anyone with Internet access. We have at our fingertips the greatest compendium of knowledge ever assembled. A thousand thousand library of Alexandrias, and we don't have to sift through the database manually like in the days of yore.

There is no excuse. It's shameful to be ignorant about any topic you're interested in. It's doubly shameful to engage in debate about a topic without first taking five damn minutes to learn the truth of the matter.

Zero tolerance for willful ignorance. Shame the fuckers.

Remember Aaron Swartz, a 26 year old computer scientist who died defending the free flow of information.
KaChingCoinDev (OP)
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 364
Merit: 250


View Profile
March 11, 2015, 03:28:26 PM
 #48

Basically. If a website like Netflix wanted their website to load at a decent speed or be available at all they would potentially have to pay the ISP's to let their websites work through that ISP's services. Because of this vote, that is illegal now.
That's correct. Net neutrality is a great thing,  this was a huge victory for the free flow of information,  and a major loss for the greedy Internet Service Parasites that sought to profit from throttling some information while favoring those who bribe tbem.

Net Neutrality Is a HORRIBLE thing. I would rather have the ISP controlling everything (it is rightfully theirs to control, like the gatekeepers at alexandria library), that the stupid government. Plus, this is paving the way to internet taxes, etc.
Possum577
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 434
Merit: 250

Loose lips sink sigs!


View Profile WWW
March 11, 2015, 10:29:11 PM
 #49

Where are the details? What's your take?

Beliathon
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 784
Merit: 1000


https://youtu.be/PZm8TTLR2NU


View Profile WWW
March 11, 2015, 11:13:25 PM
 #50

Basically. If a website like Netflix wanted their website to load at a decent speed or be available at all they would potentially have to pay the ISP's to let their websites work through that ISP's services. Because of this vote, that is illegal now.
That's correct. Net neutrality is a great thing,  this was a huge victory for the free flow of information,  and a major loss for the greedy Internet Service Parasites that sought to profit from throttling some information while favoring those who bribe tbem.

Net Neutrality Is a HORRIBLE thing. I would rather have the ISP controlling everything (it is rightfully theirs to control, like the gatekeepers at alexandria library), that the stupid government. Plus, this is paving the way to internet taxes, etc.
No private company has the right to monopolize an industry the way Time Warner, Verizon,  and Comcast have done in the USA. And nothing as important as the internet should be left in the hands of corporations.

Ignoramus.

Remember Aaron Swartz, a 26 year old computer scientist who died defending the free flow of information.
hangar18
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 676
Merit: 500


View Profile
March 12, 2015, 12:51:53 AM
 #51

They can only regulate the actual transmission of data, and the purpose is to maintain the flow, not restrict it. There's no history of the FCC throttling phone transmissions
Rishblitz
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 308
Merit: 100


I'm nothing without GOD


View Profile
March 12, 2015, 12:54:28 AM
 #52

The internet companies should already have that right without spending more money that will be forced on the consumers to pay.

Pages: « 1 2 [3]  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!