Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

Who is excited for the end of net neutrality?

13

Comments

  • Pitchfork51Pitchfork51 Member Posts: 27,023
    2001400ex said:

    DirecTV is 200 bucks now to get everything. Internet is a bargain in comparison. AT%T bought DirecTV so when satellite dies they are in position to replace it. Business has this funny desire to make money and not go out of business. People forget that they don't exist to give you free shit. That's the gubmint's job

    If you have Verizon you need to ask yourself where you went wrong in life

    I actually travel around rather than sit in Mom's basement. And my e-coli burger joint in Montana pays my entire cell phone bill.

    #winning
    Shut the fuck up. Having fast internet in your home is a necessity.

    Even for non basement dwellers.


  • Pitchfork51Pitchfork51 Member Posts: 27,023

    2001400ex said:

    DirecTV is 200 bucks now to get everything. Internet is a bargain in comparison. AT%T bought DirecTV so when satellite dies they are in position to replace it. Business has this funny desire to make money and not go out of business. People forget that they don't exist to give you free shit. That's the gubmint's job

    If you have Verizon you need to ask yourself where you went wrong in life

    I actually travel around rather than sit in Mom's basement. And my e-coli burger joint in Montana pays my entire cell phone bill.

    #winning
    You aren't fooling anyone
    He had me at e.coli to be fair.
  • ThomasFremontThomasFremont Member Posts: 13,325
    Nothing brings out the uninformed stupid like a net neutrality thread.

    The irony of a pirate ship message bored full of poasters that got banned or couldn't take it any more at the big corporate Doogman site and their FOX lawyers being against an open and freedom based internet is really something else.
  • KaepskneeKaepsknee Member Posts: 14,886
    I see ths

    If cable companies are losing so much money because of people cutting cable TV in favor of streaming TV services, then why aren't cable companies already jacking internet rates out of control?

    It seems like, if anything, this will allow people to pay less for internet if they aren't going to be hogging a bunch of bandwidth due to streaming TV services. For example, somebody who has cable TV, DVR, On-Demand, etc.

    I see this as an opportunity for more competition. It's not the same as when Ma Bell broke up but eventually you will see resellers coming into the market to offer internet service just as there were to offer phone service and just as they do now with cell phone services. The Boost Mobiles, Straight Talks, Metro(faggy wink) PCS' of the world.

    Also people forget, and in this case the so called progressives, that technology improves and more data will be able to be delivered through the same sized pipe as time moves on.
  • KaepskneeKaepsknee Member Posts: 14,886

    Nothing brings out the uninformed stupid like a net neutrality thread.

    The irony of a pirate ship message bored full of poasters that got banned or couldn't take it any more at the big corporate Doogman site and their FOX lawyers being against an open and freedom based internet is really something else.


    Drama much Tommy?
  • UWhuskytskeetUWhuskytskeet Member Posts: 7,113
    salemcoog said:

    I see ths

    If cable companies are losing so much money because of people cutting cable TV in favor of streaming TV services, then why aren't cable companies already jacking internet rates out of control?

    It seems like, if anything, this will allow people to pay less for internet if they aren't going to be hogging a bunch of bandwidth due to streaming TV services. For example, somebody who has cable TV, DVR, On-Demand, etc.

    I see this as an opportunity for more competition. It's not the same as when Ma Bell broke up but eventually you will see resellers coming into the market to offer internet service just as there were to offer phone service and just as they do now with cell phone services. The Boost Mobiles, Straight Talks, Metro(faggy wink) PCS' of the world.

    Also people forget, and in this case the so called progressives, that technology improves and more data will be able to be delivered through the same sized pipe as time moves on.
    You think that net neutrality is stifling competition? Comcast isn't going to willingly share their last mile connections regardless of whether they are allowed to rape their customers.

    And where has this competition been for the last 20 years? ISPs have been classified under Title II for two years. We'll get it eventually, but it will be wireless, definitely not from traditional cable.
  • KaepskneeKaepsknee Member Posts: 14,886

    salemcoog said:

    I see ths

    If cable companies are losing so much money because of people cutting cable TV in favor of streaming TV services, then why aren't cable companies already jacking internet rates out of control?

    It seems like, if anything, this will allow people to pay less for internet if they aren't going to be hogging a bunch of bandwidth due to streaming TV services. For example, somebody who has cable TV, DVR, On-Demand, etc.

    I see this as an opportunity for more competition. It's not the same as when Ma Bell broke up but eventually you will see resellers coming into the market to offer internet service just as there were to offer phone service and just as they do now with cell phone services. The Boost Mobiles, Straight Talks, Metro(faggy wink) PCS' of the world.

    Also people forget, and in this case the so called progressives, that technology improves and more data will be able to be delivered through the same sized pipe as time moves on.
    You think that net neutrality is stifling competition? Comcast isn't going to willingly share their last mile connections regardless of whether they are allowed to rape their customers.

    And where has this competition been for the last 20 years? ISPs have been classified under Title II for two years. We'll get it eventually, but it will be wireless, definitely not from traditional cable.
    When technology improves and there's surplus bandwidth they sure will.
  • UWhuskytskeetUWhuskytskeet Member Posts: 7,113
    salemcoog said:

    salemcoog said:

    I see ths

    If cable companies are losing so much money because of people cutting cable TV in favor of streaming TV services, then why aren't cable companies already jacking internet rates out of control?

    It seems like, if anything, this will allow people to pay less for internet if they aren't going to be hogging a bunch of bandwidth due to streaming TV services. For example, somebody who has cable TV, DVR, On-Demand, etc.

    I see this as an opportunity for more competition. It's not the same as when Ma Bell broke up but eventually you will see resellers coming into the market to offer internet service just as there were to offer phone service and just as they do now with cell phone services. The Boost Mobiles, Straight Talks, Metro(faggy wink) PCS' of the world.

    Also people forget, and in this case the so called progressives, that technology improves and more data will be able to be delivered through the same sized pipe as time moves on.
    You think that net neutrality is stifling competition? Comcast isn't going to willingly share their last mile connections regardless of whether they are allowed to rape their customers.

    And where has this competition been for the last 20 years? ISPs have been classified under Title II for two years. We'll get it eventually, but it will be wireless, definitely not from traditional cable.
    When technology improves and there's surplus bandwidth they sure will.
    That still has nothing to do with net neutrality.
  • KaepskneeKaepsknee Member Posts: 14,886

    salemcoog said:

    salemcoog said:

    I see ths

    If cable companies are losing so much money because of people cutting cable TV in favor of streaming TV services, then why aren't cable companies already jacking internet rates out of control?

    It seems like, if anything, this will allow people to pay less for internet if they aren't going to be hogging a bunch of bandwidth due to streaming TV services. For example, somebody who has cable TV, DVR, On-Demand, etc.

    I see this as an opportunity for more competition. It's not the same as when Ma Bell broke up but eventually you will see resellers coming into the market to offer internet service just as there were to offer phone service and just as they do now with cell phone services. The Boost Mobiles, Straight Talks, Metro(faggy wink) PCS' of the world.

    Also people forget, and in this case the so called progressives, that technology improves and more data will be able to be delivered through the same sized pipe as time moves on.
    You think that net neutrality is stifling competition? Comcast isn't going to willingly share their last mile connections regardless of whether they are allowed to rape their customers.

    And where has this competition been for the last 20 years? ISPs have been classified under Title II for two years. We'll get it eventually, but it will be wireless, definitely not from traditional cable.
    When technology improves and there's surplus bandwidth they sure will.
    That still has nothing to do with net neutrality.
    But you have to admire my segue game at least a little, right?
  • Fenderbender123Fenderbender123 Member Posts: 2,988
    I'm sorry if I'm having a hard time buying the idea that businesses are going to get rich by screwing over their customers. Doesn't seem to happen 99.9% of the time.
  • dfleadflea Member Posts: 7,236

    I'm sorry if I'm having a hard time buying the idea that businesses are going to get rich by screwing over their customers. Doesn't seem to happen 99.9% of the time.

    The Epi Pen disagrees. So does Wells Fargo. The 300% increase in the price of insulin in 10 years would also like to dispute your findings.

    Either these are the .1% of cases or you don't pay very close attention.
  • Pitchfork51Pitchfork51 Member Posts: 27,023
    dflea said:

    I'm sorry if I'm having a hard time buying the idea that businesses are going to get rich by screwing over their customers. Doesn't seem to happen 99.9% of the time.

    The Epi Pen disagrees. So does Wells Fargo. The 300% increase in the price of insulin in 10 years would also like to dispute your findings.

    Either these are the .1% of cases or you don't pay very close attention.
    Comcast is probably the shittiest company in the world.
  • Fenderbender123Fenderbender123 Member Posts: 2,988
    dflea said:

    I'm sorry if I'm having a hard time buying the idea that businesses are going to get rich by screwing over their customers. Doesn't seem to happen 99.9% of the time.

    The Epi Pen disagrees. So does Wells Fargo. The 300% increase in the price of insulin in 10 years would also like to dispute your findings.

    Either these are the .1% of cases or you don't pay very close attention.
    Why are people still doing business with Wells Fargo if they just screw over their customers all day?

    Are those medical supplies not...you know...saving their customers lives? Gosh, I'd say that if somebody is making and selling a product to me that saves my life, regardless of cost, they certainly aren't screwing me over.
  • Fenderbender123Fenderbender123 Member Posts: 2,988
    edited July 2017
    And what do you think happened to WF when they fucked people over? They lost money, customers, share prices went down, etc. More or less proves my point.
  • UWhuskytskeetUWhuskytskeet Member Posts: 7,113

    dflea said:

    I'm sorry if I'm having a hard time buying the idea that businesses are going to get rich by screwing over their customers. Doesn't seem to happen 99.9% of the time.

    The Epi Pen disagrees. So does Wells Fargo. The 300% increase in the price of insulin in 10 years would also like to dispute your findings.

    Either these are the .1% of cases or you don't pay very close attention.
    Why are people still doing business with Wells Fargo if they just screw over their customers all day?

    Are those medical supplies not...you know...saving their customers lives? Gosh, I'd say that if somebody is making and selling a product to me that saves my life, regardless of cost, they certainly aren't screwing me over.
    Epipens costs 10x as much in the US as they do in the UK. Pretty safe to say people are being screwed over.
  • dfleadflea Member Posts: 7,236

    And what do you think happened to WF when they fucked people over? They lost money, customers, share prices went down, etc. More or less proves my point.

    A year ago their stock price was 48. It closed today at 55. It was at 50 right before the scandal broke in the news and dipped to 43. That's what I think happened.

    They've clearly been devastated by the consequences of their misconduct.



    At least they canned all the lower level manager drones that were responsible for the whole thing in the first place.




    That was fucking sarcasm.

  • Fenderbender123Fenderbender123 Member Posts: 2,988
    Let me rephrase it, then. If they hadn't misbehaved, their stock price would be even higher.
  • haiehaie Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 22,012 Swaye's Wigwam
    This thread delivers like none other with the exception of the usual hondoFS queefs.
  • WilburHooksHandsWilburHooksHands Member Posts: 6,803

    salemcoog said:

    If the government is the best option for healthcare then I certainly trust them to run the nternets

    So you have no clue what net neutrality is. Got it.
    You got me

    Your so smart and stuff
    It's weird how this has been shaped into a left/right thing. There is zero reason to not want NN unless you hold stakes in an ISP.

    It would be like cheering for water companies to have the ability to charge you more for using water to make generic coffee, and less for making Starbucks. Water is water. Data is data.

    But regulashuns!!!!
    It's because of liberal shills like yourself fear mongering as if the TSIO already.



    HTH
    There's fear mongering used by the corrupt to persuade the ignorant, and then there's the ignorant perpetuating the fear mongering as if TSIO already. What we have here is clearly the latter.
    Still waiting for your take.
    No, you're not. Your only interest is in agreement that "Net Neutrality" as policy and regulation is only about net neutrality, which it clearly isn't. I suggest you develop a deeper understanding, try reading from sources other than the Daily Kos and Huffington Post, and learn a little history, this game has been played before.
    image

    You are second to Sledog in your love for biased reporting.

    Re: Net Neutrality: You basically don't have an actual opinion other than parroting spooky right-wing conspiracies.

    This is becoming a waste of time, you apparently have a very limited memory.

    http://hardcorehusky.com/forums/#/discussion/comment/592175
    The Tug is the biggest waste of time in all of our? lives. HTH.
Sign In or Register to comment.