Republicans Create Rider To Stop Net Neutrality

[Contumacious]

No, they wouldn't be wrong. You're missing the difference between literal and de facto definitions. The internet is a de facto utility just like cable and tv are utilities. It is a method for trafficking information...which means there's a public interest at stake.

Look, just want the same protections on speech and access that tv and radio has currently. I dont want a big brother take over of the net. nor do I want gigantic corporations to get to decide without agreed upon rules how the internet is shuffled.

I like my net how it is now...if your corporation wants to fuck that up...get ready for a fight.

HUH?

WTF.

Like I said the internet is composed of a gazillion computers interconnected to each other. The ONLY way that big brother can control them is if the GOVERNMENT, such as in China, control the various ISP's.

.

wow. you went with the Chewbacca defense. great sidestep.

is English hard for you? Guess so.

And no...the companies that own the ISPs can control the content....feeding them to partners or their own sites or charging outrageous costs to go to competitors' sites.

You actually answered the question yourself, dipwad.

Has that ever happened?

And again the reason that there are gigantic GSP's is because the federal government permitted coercive monopolies.

.

 

[Varth Dader]

If you don't like information you get from one corporation who sells internet access, you can buy it from another.

That's freedom.

The only thing "fettering" the internet right now are governments.

That's freedom? It's the type of freedom the Mark Levin sells. It's fake. It doesn't exist. It's free in name only.

You are free to go buy 10 Ferrari cars tomorrow. Heck, we are all free to do that tomorrow. But somehow only a few of us can ACTUALLY do that. Why is that?

There are really 3 ways to access the internet: Cable, DSL and Wireless. Most of those are controlled by a few big players. The amount of money needed to deploy one of those network is huge. There really isn't much competition in this area. It's not like a grocery store at the corner of the street.

So spare me the "you are free to pick your provider" argument. It's a fake freedom. Just like I am free to buy 10 exotic sports car.

 

[Revere]

Government has no business telling the owners of private computer networks what content they must carry.

Why wont you answer my question.

Are you in favor of corporations restricting our access to information?

They don't. They compete. I have at least a half dozen choices of internet providers.

Only government does this.

 

[Vanquish]

Are you in favor of corporations restricting our access to information?

 

[Revere]

If you don't like information you get from one corporation who sells internet access, you can buy it from another.

That's freedom.

The only thing "fettering" the internet right now are governments.

That's freedom? It's the type of freedom the Mark Levin sells. It's fake. It doesn't exist. It's free in name only.

You are free to go buy 10 Ferrari cars tomorrow. Heck, we are all free to do that tomorrow. But somehow only a few of us can ACTUALLY do that. Why is that?

There are really 3 ways to access the internet: Cable, DSL and Wireless. Most of those are controlled by a few big players. The amount of money needed to deploy one of those network is huge. There really isn't much competition in this area. It's not like a grocery store at the corner of the street.

So spare me the "you are free to pick your provider" argument. It's a fake freedom. Just like I am free to buy 10 exotic sports car.

You want someone to pay for your internet access, too?

 

[Revere]

Are you in favor of corporations restricting our access to information?

Asinine question. They can't do that. No more than newspapers or radio stations can.

 

[Varth Dader]

You want someone to pay for your internet access, too?

Great diversion.

Any more Mark Levin style techniques you want to use to avoid answering?

Get off the phone you big dope?

 

[RDD_1210]

Government has no business telling the owners of private computer networks what content they must carry.

Why wont you answer my question.

Are you in favor of corporations restricting our access to information?

They don't. They compete. I have at least a half dozen choices of internet providers.

Only government does this.

I didn't ask that. Try answering the question I asked.

Are you in favor or any of those corporations restricting our access to information? here, I'll give you choices

a) Yes, I am in favor of corporations being able to keep information from me.
b) No, I do not think corporations should be able to stop me from accessing any website I want to visit.

 

[Varth Dader]

Are you in favor of corporations restricting our access to information?

Asinine question. They can't do that. No more than newspapers or radio stations can.

Actually newspapers and radio stations do that, and the internet was one of the rare places where such control was harder to exert.

 

[RDD_1210]

Are you in favor of corporations restricting our access to information?

Asinine question. They can't do that. No more than newspapers or radio stations can.

Holy shit, THEY CAN AND WANT TO DO THAT!!!

That's the point of Net Neutrality. Revere, don't be dumb.

 

[Revere]

Corporations can't do that. You can get information from lots of places.

Why do you want government to tell you what that information must be?

 

[Revere]

Are you in favor of corporations restricting our access to information?

Asinine question. They can't do that. No more than newspapers or radio stations can.

Actually newspapers and radio stations do that, and the internet was one of the rare places where such control was harder to exert.

Is the Washington Times the same as the Washington Post?

Is the Ed Schulz show the same as the mark Levin Show?

 

[Revere]

Are you in favor of corporations restricting our access to information?

Asinine question. They can't do that. No more than newspapers or radio stations can.

Holy shit, THEY CAN AND WANT TO DO THAT!!!

That's the point of Net Neutrality. Revere, don't be dumb.

How can they do that? Which corporation controls all of the internet?

 

[Jarhead]

Asinine question. They can't do that. No more than newspapers or radio stations can.

Holy shit, THEY CAN AND WANT TO DO THAT!!!

That's the point of Net Neutrality. Revere, don't be dumb.

How can they do that? Which corporation controls all of the internet?

Are you saying that Newspapers do NOT do that?

 

[Revere]

I can buy any newspaper I want. Or none of them.

 

[RDD_1210]

Corporations can't do that. You can get information from lots of places.

Why do you want government to tell you what that information must be?

Forget it. The person who can't type anything more then a quick soundbite in any of his posts obviously can't be expected to string two pieces of information together to reach a logical conclusion.

 

[Revere]

Why should government tell you what to carry on your private network?

 

[RDD_1210]

Why should government tell you what to carry on your private network?

Because that's the only way we can have Obama and Communism take over. We need control of the internet and you're just getting in the way now.

 

[Synthaholic]

That's not a conservative position.

Of course it is, it just depends on what day of the week it is. CON$ have no principles, they are for AND against same thing, whichever suits their purposes at the MOMENT!!! Mandated coverage is just another example.

Wrong. Idiot leftists can stamp their feet and pout all they want, but it's not a conservative position.

Says the guy who lives the Socialist life.

 

[Varth Dader]

Why should government tell you what to carry on your private network?

The government should tell corporations to carry all traffic, without discriminating.

Communications network are not 'private'. Society has a huge interest in that.

If tomorrow Verizon, Time Warner and Comcast decided to shut down their networks, what would you do?