I love the new talking point that Obama's FCC basically invented net neutrality in 2015. Those of us who are older than 12 may remember being in Net Neutrality groups of Facebook back in 2006. I certainly do.
I love the new talking point that Obama's FCC basically invented net neutrality in 2015. Those of us who are older than 12 may remember being in Net Neutrality groups of Facebook back in 2006. I certainly do.
Beautiful Day wrote:
https://twitter.com/RoKhanna/status/933016966071234560/photo/1
And why would this be a problem? What if I only want the internet for email and nothing else? More consumer choice is a good thing. If the consumer has more choice, doesn't that force more competition within the market?
The current unlimited and neutral internet styles will disappear or become much more expensive.
Again, this is some (wishful?) projection.
It's like Bernie saying that having 23 brands of toothpaste is bad (or was it deodorant?).
More likely result: less power/control for the few current controllers, more innovation for little guys to compete with them; end-game for consumers = pay for what you want (and less than previously), ignore what you don't.
Beautiful Day wrote:
Point out the Democratic FCC member who voted to do away with Net Neutrality.
Is this a trick question? Everyone who voted to do away with it was democratic. I think you are misunderstanding several things about this situation.
Nice try. This will not end well for you.
gahuga wrote:
I love the new talking point that Obama's FCC basically invented net neutrality in 2015. Those of us who are older than 12 may remember being in Net Neutrality groups of Facebook back in 2006. I certainly do.
I think you are mis-reading "implemented"...
In essence, in 2015 the tide was such that the marketplace losers could turn to their DC friends for a few extra years of oxygen.
Regulate as public entity wrote:
jamin wrote:
Libruhls don't want "neutrality."
GIVE. ME. A. BREAK.
Never hear them complain about the left-wing idealogues Mark Cuckerberg and Eric Schmuck who control the content of the internet.
Content is not access. This is (or at least should be) a different debate.
But it's easier to win a debate if you change what its about it in the middle of it. If you can't make a point on the issue, change what the issue is to something you CAN make a point on.
Except liberals hate Mark Zuckerburg over Russian content, so as usual, jamin doesn't actually have a point. He was standing on the 50-yard line, moved the goalposts to the 40, and still shanked his kick wide right.
Aren't they Other Countries or something who have experience with this Brave New World of Wild West internet schemeing, that we can look to, to see how it will turn out?
gahuga wrote:
I love the new talking point that Obama's FCC basically invented net neutrality in 2015. Those of us who are older than 12 may remember being in Net Neutrality groups of Facebook back in 2006. I certainly do.
I also remember (and bought into) Net Neutrality fear campaigns going back to 2005 - even back then, ISPs were soon going to divide the Internet into packages where $19.99 would get you Google and AltaVista and $39.99 would throw in MySpace and Wikipedia. It never happened, and that's why people are quite right to point out Net Neutrality was not in place until 2015.
Wasn't broken, harmed consumers wrote:
Umm, let's see..... in 2015, how much "pay-for-play" and "fast lanes" were there? Obama FCC made a fact-less assertion they needed to "preempt" this phantasmal possibility.
If it were the other way around, 9th Circuit would likely have declared it unconstitutional, being an agency decision without basis. But that's the politicized Obama courts for you nowadays.
Regulate as public entity wrote:
jamin wrote:
Libruhls don't want "neutrality."
GIVE. ME. A. BREAK.
Never hear them complain about the left-wing idealogues Mark Cuckerberg and Eric Schmuck who control the content of the internet.
Content is not access. This is (or at least should be) a different debate.
My understanding of net neutrality is that internet providers can't intentionally make one site slower than another. How is that fundamentally different than Google or Facebook having intention in what is "relevant" to be pushed to the top of search results, news feeds, etc.? Or the government taking down sites it doesn't like? At most this law would make the internet 0.00001% less "rigged" than it is already.
Sorry to ruin your narrative, but:
https://www.pcworld.com/article/2048209/net-neutrality-at-the-us-fcc-a-brief-history.htmlFebruary 2004: After many months of debate about the potential for broadband providers to selectively block or slow some Internet traffic, FCC Chairman Michael Powell, a Republican, calls for four Internet freedoms encompassing net neutrality.
Thousand markets bloom wrote:
Aren't they Other Countries or something who have experience with this Brave New World of Wild West internet schemeing, that we can look to, to see how it will turn out?
Russia has no "Net Neutrality", we hack others on equal opportunity basis.
http://transition.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Cable/News_Releases/2002/nrcb0201.htmlI love the new talking point that Obama's FCC basically invented net neutrality in 2015. Those of us who are older than 12 may remember being in Net Neutrality groups of Facebook back in 2006. I certainly do.
Yawn.
Guess what guys, if you feel like your ISP is screwing you over by slowing down sites, then pick another ISP. This is what competition is all about.
Noticer of strawmen wrote:
stryker drilling wrote:
I haven't seen anyone on here explain why repealing Net Neutrality is a good thing. Just reflexive "it's regulation so it must be bad" responses...
Well, there's already that for one.
The fact that the FCC over-reach burdened many startups to the benefit of established actors seems to be "hidden" for some reason, probably because some consumers only understand simple billing methods where they pay for more things they don't want.
Or you could watch the video of the FCC chair, read just about any non-leftist commentary on "Net Neutrality", et cetera, but I can't make you drink knowledge in the end.
CALLER (2017 Oct 13): I wanted to speak to you about net neutrality. Being a Millennial, I have friends who are so scared that evil corporations are going to regulate the internet now that net neutrality is not going to happen, and I was wondering if you can give me a brief synopsis of why we don’t want net neutrality that I can give to my Millennial friends —
RUSH: Happily.
CALLER: — instead of me trying to explain it all the time.
RUSH: Happily. But I guarantee you they are not going to accept what you tell them is true, unless you use the word “sustainability” somewhere in your answer. But first, I just ended up interviewing for the next issue of my newsletter, Thomas Hazlett. He’s a professor of the broadcast spectrum, the communications spectrum. He’s an expert. He’s written a book called The Political Spectrum, and it’s in lay terms to explain the history of regulation over the spectrum — radio, TV, two-way, internet, wireless, cellular, and all of that, so that people can understand what exactly has and has not happened.
Here it is in a nutshell. Net neutrality as advocated by the people that your friends like and support is asking for the government to regulate it. Corporations don’t regulate things; they compete. It’s the federal government that regulates, and your pals are seeking that. Your pals believe that government enforces fairness and equality and sameness, and that’s not at all what’s gonna happen; and the history of the spectrum is all the proof that you need.
The internet, up until two or three years ago (2014/2015) when people started getting crazy about net neutrality, the internet is the one communications medium that was not regulated, and look at how it expanded, and look at how free it was, Rob. The New York Times, the Washington Post, you name it, enter the internet and everything is free. They’re charging their subscribers the same thing, but on the internet it was free. Everything was. Everybody got on board. There wasn’t any regulation. There wasn’t any limitation. It was the wild west. It was the essence of customer and market freedom. Do you know when cellular technology was invented?
CALLER: I can’t say I do.
RUSH: Well, would you be surprised to learn that it was first invented in 1940?
CALLER: Wow.
RUSH: It was suppressed by the government, in collusion with broadcast communities, broadcast companies, to keep it from coming to market until the nineties — well, the late eighties, actually. FM radio was invented and shelved for 30 years by a consortium of the government and AM broadcasters who did not want competition.
Net neutrality would equal the government making partnerships with various corporations based on the politics of the president and the administration at the time, and they would make deals to benefit the corporations. You do not want the government involved in this at all. If you want a free internet, if you want an internet that’s gonna be affordable at what rates you have the ability to pay, if you want different tiers. But if you want the internet to become your cable company, then support net neutrality.
More at the transcript site.
https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2017/10/13/millennial-asks-for-net-neutrality-explanation/Hardloper wrote:
gahuga wrote:
I love the new talking point that Obama's FCC basically invented net neutrality in 2015. Those of us who are older than 12 may remember being in Net Neutrality groups of Facebook back in 2006. I certainly do.
I also remember (and bought into) Net Neutrality fear campaigns going back to 2005 - even back then, ISPs were soon going to divide the Internet into packages where $19.99 would get you Google and AltaVista and $39.99 would throw in MySpace and Wikipedia. It never happened, and that's why people are quite right to point out Net Neutrality was not in place until 2015.
That was before the days of Netflix and massive online streaming of games and movies. ISPs got the idea to hammer the customer over the head for these after it became a thing and the Obama administration stepped in to block it. On a more conspiratorial note, I can't help but think Netflix and Hulu and others are somewhat excited about this, as they now have the most convenient excuse ever to raise prices and deflect blame to the ISP
An Independent Thinker wrote:
Yawn.
Guess what guys, if you feel like your ISP is screwing you over by slowing down sites, then pick another ISP. This is what competition is all about.
Yeah, anyone can just start their own ISP, it's not the government is regulating it (anymore).
gahuga wrote:
I love the new talking point that Obama's FCC basically invented net neutrality in 2015./quote]
No, it was Obama himself who intruded, not just his FCC in the unlawful power grab.
[quote]Commissioner Ajit Pai said that it was “sad to witness” the FCC replacing Internet freedom with “government control.” Pai continued, saying that the FCC only voted on the rules that it did due to intrusion into the agency’s processes by President Barack Obama.
Commissioner Michael O’Reilly criticized the proposal to reverse Title II: “I see no need for net neutrality rules. I am far more troubled the commission is charting for Title II.” He continued, calling the move a “monumental and unlawful power grab.”
Mmnhh wrote:
Democrat-darling Planned Parenthood alone killed over 3000,000 little guys and girls last year.
An unborn fetus is not "little guys and girls." That sort of mentality is so fvcking stupid.