Tumblin Tumbleweed
Platinum Member
- Mar 16, 2015
- 22,775
- 8,011
Until today.
Nice! A heavily biased article from a conservative source. Uh, thanks? Let's go over the gist of this 'article':
"In a significant victory for American consumers, a federal appeals court struck down Federal Communications Commission (FCC) rules regulating broadband Internet service on January 14."
Notice how the writer blatantly avoids mentioning net neutrality in his opening sentence.
"The much-anticipated decision clears the way for more investment, more innovation, and lower costs for Internet users."
The shenanigans continue in line 2. Gee, lots of promises, zero details about how this becomes a possibility. Hmm. Par for the course with Republican policy these days if you ask me, but I digress.
"But the political battle over these “network neutrality” rules—which limit differentiation and prioritization of Internet traffic—is far from over."
Yeah, no shit, Sherlock. Welcome to the issue. Injecting politics into it is totally unnecessary and has already proven to be a mistake. The fact that Mr. Cattuso refers to it as "Network Neutrality" in quotes already tells me he's way in over his head.
So what is "network neutrality?"
Net neutrality is the principle that Internet service providers must treat all data on the Internet the same, and not discriminate or charge differently by user, content, website, platform, application, type of attached equipment, or method of communication.
That's it, kids! Any added explanation, theory or unwelcome political spin beyond that description must be heavily vetted regarding its merit. The internet will always work best the less government and private industry monkey around with it. It must be treated as a common carrier, like telephones, because the Internet is, at its heart, still an amazing tool for communication and so much more.
Think of the Internet like you would your local electrical service. It's a constant in most American lives, yes? Our infrastructures are so sound we sometimes take it for granted. If we lose it, our lives can be drastically affected at times. It is an expense that truly goes without saying when it comes to mainstream society. Now imagine if your electrical service was able to discriminate against powering certain devices. For example, your Samsung TV will receive full power 24/7, but that Frigidaire fridge of yours? It's probably only going to get about 1/3 power. On Fridays. Hopefully.
Would you be on board with all that?
^This by far is the best and most packed full of bovine excrement sentence you came up with. Good show.
But, I actually read your contribution above. T-Mobile was criticized for giving users more bandwidth to a sponsor over an ordinary Joe. Net neutrality actually prevents this, but sometimes money and politics prevail. Ignorance is in amazing supply these days, however. I suppose it balances things out.
There's no meat in that turkey of a comment, IMHO.
With no govt heavy hands. There IS a bit of anarchy to it all. But it's efficient and it's consumer driven for the most part. Companies can sue each other, negotiate with each other. BUY each other.
The Big Corporations are just going to chew them up and spit them out.
