You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Net Neutrality: The Battle for Internet Freedom, and Why It Matters
It's the principle that you can't be denied access to certain websites or services based on the company you get Internet from
Nope.
It's the exact opposite of that. Don't you know that any government legislation means exactly the opposite of what they say it means?
Google, Facebook, etc are FOR net neutrality...wonder why THAT is?.
I meant Net Neutrality was the principle that the Internet is open to everyone, not the legislation! The legislation is trying to repeal net neutrality.
Google and Facebook support net neutrality through something called the Internet Association. They know that since they have a lot of money, ISPs may attempt to require lots of royalties/charges from them to speed up their content, which is why it's for their interests to support net neutrality.
I personally think net neutrality is a really fundamental feature of the Internet, and without it, censorship or paywalls would reign.
Surrre. Like the Affordable Health Care act?
I'm all for repealing.
it'll do exactly what you WANT...because...competition.
a monopoly is impossible in a free market.
if they can write the regulations to suite themselves.
"we have to pass the bill to know what's in it"...sound familiar?
they build a wall...a barrier to entry.
they use the government to prevent competition.
Obama passes legislation (or executive order...did he know the difference?) to do that...(help the big companies)
Trump is trying to repeal it.
Exactly! Net Neutrality recasting internet access as a public utility will speed up and exacerbate regulatory capture, where the telecom execs are the ones writing the rules, and it'll create huge hurdles to other people trying to get in the market.
yup...If the Net Neutrality thing is allowed to remain in place it will slow, delay or prevent the implementation of mesh net.
odd how that works?
Like you said earlier: if a piece of legislation or regulation is called one thing, it's a safe bet that it's going to do the exact opposite.
perfect example..the Affordable Health Care Act.
How's that work out?
maybe give us more than the teaser?
"I'm from the government and I'm here to HELP you...I'm gonna regulate the internet so that it's FAIR".
riiiiight.
anything the government get's involved with something...we lose.
does the term 'regulatory capture' ring any bells?
Fair to everyone who pays for their rights
what right?
were you born with it?
anything you weren't born with isn't a right
do you think someone else should pay for your 'stuff'?
Good point. I am trying to see this more open mindedly. @everittdmickey, would you say that people who want to have faster access will pay? Are the people who actively complain for it, not important because they are not doing anything themselves to get better access?
if you want something.
pay for it your ownself.
other wise youre no better than a thief.
Despite or several disagreements (which I think are more semantics than anything else), you are 100% on point here, boss!
well it doesn't help that I'm a jerk.
can't help it...genetic.
but I'm usually right...
Eventually folks realize it.
sometimes it takes decades..
Thank you for the clarification!
your comment makes no sense, there is one law as it is that says internet companies cant charge websites more for faster access, and there's a new law trying to revoke that... which one is the government trying to "help" ?
it makes perfect sense.
net neutrality...isn't.
if you want it...deregulate.