Bitcoin Forum
May 05, 2024, 09:48:59 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 2 [3]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Elizabeth Warren and Nancy Pelosi are right  (Read 3810 times)
contagion
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 28
Merit: 0


View Profile
December 28, 2014, 02:42:31 AM
 #41

There has been no system of net neutrality in place. The internet has been a free market and grew to serve a billion people with private corporation competition and no regulation of the government.

Net Neutrality (regulation by the government) has been in place since 1995. Now, I believe you were in the middle of defending your dumbfuckery before I interrupted with reality.

Amazing that Wikipedia, Google, and I are ostensibly unaware of any such legal framework.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality_in_the_United_States

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality_law#Historical_precedent

http://www.progressivepolicy.org/issues/economy/a-brief-history-of-internet-regulation-2/

Let me make sure you haven't lost the context:


You do realize that the intelligent Libertarian (or Anarchist) readers know by now that you are a Dunning-Kruger doofus.  The more you go on, the more obvious it is for more readers.

I know socialist pigs will lie to keep their propaganda alive. Always entertaining though.
1714945739
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1714945739

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1714945739
Reply with quote  #2

1714945739
Report to moderator
1714945739
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1714945739

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1714945739
Reply with quote  #2

1714945739
Report to moderator
"The nature of Bitcoin is such that once version 0.1 was released, the core design was set in stone for the rest of its lifetime." -- Satoshi
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
1714945739
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1714945739

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1714945739
Reply with quote  #2

1714945739
Report to moderator
1714945739
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1714945739

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1714945739
Reply with quote  #2

1714945739
Report to moderator
1714945739
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1714945739

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1714945739
Reply with quote  #2

1714945739
Report to moderator
jaysabi
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2044
Merit: 1115


★777Coin.com★ Fun BTC Casino!


View Profile
December 30, 2014, 05:36:47 PM
 #42

There has been no system of net neutrality in place. The internet has been a free market and grew to serve a billion people with private corporation competition and no regulation of the government.

Net Neutrality (regulation by the government) has been in place since 1995. Now, I believe you were in the middle of defending your dumbfuckery before I interrupted with reality.

Amazing that Wikipedia, Google, and I are ostensibly unaware of any such legal framework.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality_in_the_United_States

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality_law#Historical_precedent

http://www.progressivepolicy.org/issues/economy/a-brief-history-of-internet-regulation-2/

Let me make sure you haven't lost the context:


You do realize that the intelligent Libertarian (or Anarchist) readers know by now that you are a Dunning-Kruger doofus.  The more you go on, the more obvious it is for more readers.

I know socialist pigs will lie to keep their propaganda alive. Always entertaining though.


That's funny, here you are making your case with the underpinnings of what  a technological expert you are, when there are people with real internet pedigrees who have dismissed your arguments almost ten years before you made them.

Enshrining a rule that broadly permits network operators to discriminate in favor of certain kinds of services and to potentially interfere with others would place broadband operators in control of online activity. Allowing broadband providers to segment their IP offerings and reserve huge amounts of bandwidth for their own services will not give consumers the broadband Internet our country and economy need. Many people will have little or no choice among broadband operators for the foreseeable future, implying that such operators will have the power to exercise a great deal of control over any applications placed on the network.

As we move to a broadband environment and eliminate century-old non-discrimination requirements, a lightweight but enforceable neutrality rule is needed to ensure that the Internet continues to thrive. Telephone companies cannot tell consumers who they can call; network operators should not dictate what people can do online.

There have been suggestions that we don't need legislation because we haven't had it. These are nonsense, because in fact we have had net neutrality in the past -- it is only recently that real explicit threats have occurred.

Control of information is hugely powerful. In the US, the threat is that companies control what I can access for commercial reasons. (In China, control is by the government for political reasons.) There is a very strong short-term incentive for a company to grab control of TV distribution over the Internet even though it is against the long-term interests of the industry.

Yes, regulation to keep the Internet open is regulation. And mostly, the Internet thrives on lack of regulation. But some basic values have to be preserved. For example, the market system depends on the rule that you can't photocopy money. Democracy depends on freedom of speech. Freedom of connection, with any application, to any party, is the fundamental social basis of the Internet, and, now, the society based on it.

Please go on with your tired corporate-shill arguments and what an expert you are and how you're defending the internet from gub'ment regulations. The people whose opinions I should actually pay attention to heard your arguments when this debate was had 10 years ago, and it turns out they're still as stupid and irrelevant now as they were back then. If you're attempting to win this argument based on an asshole attitude and your self-proclaimed qualifications, I'm afraid you've already lost both battles. 

contagion
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 28
Merit: 0


View Profile
December 30, 2014, 11:39:41 PM
Last edit: December 31, 2014, 12:06:39 AM by contagion
 #43

There has been no system of net neutrality in place. The internet has been a free market and grew to serve a billion people with private corporation competition and no regulation of the government.

Net Neutrality (regulation by the government) has been in place since 1995. Now, I believe you were in the middle of defending your dumbfuckery before I interrupted with reality.

Amazing that Wikipedia, Google, and I are ostensibly unaware of any such legal framework.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality_in_the_United_States

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality_law#Historical_precedent

http://www.progressivepolicy.org/issues/economy/a-brief-history-of-internet-regulation-2/

Let me make sure you haven't lost the context:


You do realize that the intelligent Libertarian (or Anarchist) readers know by now that you are a Dunning-Kruger doofus.  The more you go on, the more obvious it is for more readers.

I know socialist pigs will lie to keep their propaganda alive. Always entertaining though.

...[two internet pioneers were socialist pigs]...

Don't try obfuscate that you still haven't refuted that you lied above.

Socialism pigs are always the same. They lie and obfuscate their lies.

I won't let you escape from this humiliation. Go ahead and try, but I will just keep repeating your lie. Now you can throw a hissy fit.

P.S. that some internet pioneers were socialist pigs have nothing to do with our original discussion.
jaysabi
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2044
Merit: 1115


★777Coin.com★ Fun BTC Casino!


View Profile
January 09, 2015, 10:26:45 PM
Last edit: January 09, 2015, 10:41:36 PM by jaysabi
 #44

There has been no system of net neutrality in place. The internet has been a free market and grew to serve a billion people with private corporation competition and no regulation of the government.

Net Neutrality (regulation by the government) has been in place since 1995. Now, I believe you were in the middle of defending your dumbfuckery before I interrupted with reality.

Amazing that Wikipedia, Google, and I are ostensibly unaware of any such legal framework.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality_in_the_United_States

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality_law#Historical_precedent

http://www.progressivepolicy.org/issues/economy/a-brief-history-of-internet-regulation-2/

Let me make sure you haven't lost the context:


You do realize that the intelligent Libertarian (or Anarchist) readers know by now that you are a Dunning-Kruger doofus.  The more you go on, the more obvious it is for more readers.

I know socialist pigs will lie to keep their propaganda alive. Always entertaining though.

...[two internet pioneers were socialist pigs]...

Don't try obfuscate that you still haven't refuted that you lied above.

Socialism pigs are always the same. They lie and obfuscate their lies.

I won't let you escape from this humiliation. Go ahead and try, but I will just keep repeating your lie. Now you can throw a hissy fit.

P.S. that some internet pioneers were socialist pigs have nothing to do with our original discussion.

You're right. I stated a straight up non-fact, which I believed to be based on common-law decisions related to neutrality dating back to telegrams, applied to telecoms, and then applied to the internet in the 1990s. This is not accurate. And yet, you still haven't a valid point, and you still can't present your ideas without being the worst type of human being imaginable, as evidenced by the fact that all your posts are full of name calling and posturing to obfuscate the fact that your point is weak and your fear mongering unwarranted. People with weak ideas have to resort to those tactics for the attention their shitty ideas so desperately need, because you can't sell people on them based on the merits. All the bluster and posturing just makes you look like a dick, and attempting to converse with you confirms it. Unfortunately for you, your shitty ideas were discredited ten years ago when people as equally misguided and wrong as you also tried to pitch the same distortion of facts based on all manner of fear mongering about destroying the internet, and were roundly defeated by people who actually have the credentials to publicly sound opinions on the topic. You were wrong ten years ago, and you're wrong now.

That some internet pioneers have sounded off on how wrong you are is relevant to the extent you tried to invoke your technical expertise to bolster the credibility of your opinion, which carries no weight without the delusional grandiosity you assign to it. According to you, everyone who disagrees with you is a socialist pig. But more accurately stated, it's everyone who is smarter than you. Don't be jealous you're on the losing side, mate. I'm sure if you think up some new names to call us all, you can restore the badly damaged reputation you've brought upon yourself by shilling for such garbage.

P.S. you highly underestimate the hackers and technologists (such as myself, who helped invent the internet) who will never allow the monopolists (nor the government) to take over. We are actively developing technological paradigm shifts to render impotent any of their attempts to monopolize.

It is really annoying when a dumbshit, young snot such as yourself tries to tell the older people who invented the internet and are doing the programming and design work to keep it freedom directed. Do you not realize how stupid you are?

No, it's you who doesn't realize how stupid you are. How embarrassing for you to claim to have invented the internet, therefore your opinions matter more, only to have the people who actually invented the internet say your ideas about it are wrong. But I guess you can save face on this one by claiming that the people who are smarter than you and actually invented the internet are just socialist pigs. I wonder if Tim Berners-Lee and Vint Cerf would consider you a "dumbshit snot." Odds are pretty good based on how inferior your accomplishments are to theirs, but then again they're probably too upstanding to tell you.

iamback
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 98
Merit: 10


View Profile
January 10, 2015, 12:47:22 AM
 #45

jaysabi,

The pot calling the kettle black.

Password scrambled, ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE. Formerly AnonyMint, TheFascistMind, contagion, UnunoctaniumTesticles.
Possum577
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 434
Merit: 250

Loose lips sink sigs!


View Profile WWW
January 10, 2015, 05:48:01 AM
 #46

Technically Warren and Pelosi are Left, hahaha.

I agree that corruption happens on both sides of the aisle. The problem is that neither Repbulicans or Democrats really give a shit about getting anything done (that includes Pelosi). Warren seems like she might actually shake things up, which would at least set a nice example for all politicians following.

The voters need to get so upset that they vote out all incumbents that do nothing in office. If Politicians don't realize they can lose their job they'll never be motivated to do what the voters want them to do.

Keep voting!

BTW, do you agree with Pelosi's stance on wanting to bomb Syria a few months back?

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!