Net Neutrality, notice a pattern?
Created on: August 23rd, 2006
www.savetheinternet.com ; http://www.savetheinternet.com/=senatemap for ease of who's on what side ; http://www.senate.gov/index.htm to send some emails to those who hate the internet. Do it now. Get your local reps of your city involved.
Sponsorships:
| user | amount | user | amount |
|---|---|---|---|
| No one has sponsored this site ( ._.) | |||
| Sponsor this site! | Total: $0.00 | Active: $0.00 | |
Vote metrics:
| rating | total votes | favorites | comments |
|---|---|---|---|
| (4.01) | 508 | 12 | 275 |
View metrics:
| today | yesterday | this week | this month | all time |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 15,043 |
Inbound links:
| views | url |
|---|---|
| 47 | https://www.bing.com |
| 8 | http://www.google.com.hk |
| 1 | http://www.google.com/search |
| 1 | http://www.google.com |
"Net Neutrality". They can make anything evil sound good. "Patriot Act" "Pro-Choice" "Pro-Life" "Democrat" "Republican". The world is too big with too many ideas for a two party system. I'm against abortion and against the death penalty. Where's my f*cking vote?
*ssh*l*es.
Guess I'll make my own party. Where I can cry if I want to.
"ISPs already the right to block access to
sites as they see fit." Uh ya, and then they lose all their customers when they start being f*cktards and blocking stuff people want to go to. Without net neutrality, you can't go to another ISP because it will virtually be like all ISP's blocked the same site (except you can still get to it, it would just be incredibly slow depending on the bandwidth being used in that area.)
Ironic. You mentioned in the comment before your last that companies LOSE THEIR BUSINESS when the customer is unsatisfied with their performance, which only reaffirms what I've been saying all along. People can and WILL go to new ISPs when they've had enough sh*t. Companies that adopt Net Neutrality as part of their business practice are the solution, not a law passed by the government that forces them to do so.
"Companies that adopt Net
Neutrality as part of their business practice are the solution" Lol, wow, you are retarded. Unless giant companies like AT&T adopt it, what the f*ck is a small company going to do? They have to pay AT&T, Comcast, etc, to use their lines. Get a clue you dumbass, and learn how the internet works first before commenting.
You know what the most bizaar thing is? Usually Democrats are the ones that want the Govt. to interfere with and regulate business. The republicans have historically wanted little govt. involvement. There must be some frighteningly powerful lobbying goin on up at Capital hill... I'll vote Democrat next time.
This really shouldn't be an issue divided by parties. The whole Net Neutrality argument is not without flaws. Some regulations suggested by Snowe and others are good while some suggestions made by Senator Markey (he's an idiot by the way) flat out suck. If there were more compromise, perhaps more Republicans would be for it. 1'd for being a Republican bash fest without reviewing the details.
I'm cofused on this subject because nobody knows anything about it. I mean, really. What everybody says is that it's either good or bad and I can't figure out who to listen to. The division outweighs the knowledge. "Wah! I'm a democrat so I'm for something and I have no idea what it is!" "Wah! I'm republican so I must follow what my party says!" Where are the facts? Not opinions. This just reeks of needless diversion.
The issue here is that corporations are trying to divide web service into 'good' and 'poor' qualities, charging more for good quality. In other words, sites that have a large fan base but low income (YTMND), will become virtually non-functional if not impossible because of inability to afford premium service. Urge your senators to vote for net neutrality.
This is an enormous problem in our political system -- it's pervasive. Media has convinced both politicians and denizens that the American political system is red & blue, democrat & republican, liberal & conservative. Politicians and voters are becoming more concerned with which political image they emit rather than what they really care about. It's a sad state of affairs, folks.
Do half of you even know what this bill is about? It's trying to bar telecom companies from selling different Broadband speeds at different prices.. It doesn't make sense for the government to meddle in the affairs of a corporation. If I want sh*tty internet at 10 bucks less a month I should damn well be able to get it!
In theory, people should be able to control gas prices by favouring those companies with lower prices and compancies that price gouge would be "committing economic suicide". However, in reality they collaborated and now control us to make the most money. Besides this issue, I would agree that people shouldn't be able to pay to get higher priority in net power than others. The key difference here between Pro and Con appears to be one side saying what the internet IS like and the other side saying what...
Actually, Mewtwox, since both Republican- and Democratic-controlled Congresses have investigated allegations of gasoline price fixing and gouging and found no evidence of widespread malfeasance, your claims with regard to that market are just a bunch of bullsh*t. Gas prices have nothing to do with price fixing and everything to do with Western nations that refuse to allow drilling and refining because of environmental concerns, and the rapid development taking place in India and China.
If you honestly think that prices aren't being controlled for profit, you don't spend much time looking at the pumps. Funny how predictable the price fluctuations are, isn't it? Not to mention what happens whenever there's oil related news... prices drop way before actual reprocussions are even felt.
The government investigation was the equivalent of a handwaive. Like they actually cared...
Bold
Italic
Underline
Code
User Link
Site Link