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

net neutrality

Options
dhdawg
dhdawg Member Posts: 13,326
edited January 2017 in Tug Tavern
http://www.wsj.com/articles/ajit-pai-donald-trumps-fcc-pick-set-to-target-net-neutrality-1485259207?mod=e2tw
If this guy gets his way all you lovers of breitbart and haters of the large corproratized media may be out of luck
«13

Comments

  • Southerndawg
    Southerndawg Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 8,343 Founders Club
  • dhdawg
    dhdawg Member Posts: 13,326


    Really? Butt hurt snowflake syndrome run amok.

    Forbes.com - why is the media smearing new fcc chair Ajit Pai

    Good. I hope they are right. His transition team was full of anti net neutrality guys so it would be a pleasant surprise
  • UWhuskytskeet
    UWhuskytskeet Member Posts: 7,113


    Really? Butt hurt snowflake syndrome run amok.

    Forbes.com - why is the media smearing new fcc chair Ajit Pai

    An op-ed from a guy that regularly lobbies against net-neutrality isn't an impartial source.
  • GrundleStiltzkin
    GrundleStiltzkin Member Posts: 61,516 Standard Supporter
  • ThomasFremont
    ThomasFremont Member Posts: 13,325
    Sure won't help the little guys of the internet, like Hardcore Husky.
  • priapism
    priapism Member Posts: 2,294
    I think 99+% of the American public supports net neutrality. Trump is going to have to be very tough on this issue, if he wants it to pass...maybe even an executive order. He should fill all the FCC chairs with cable executives.
  • Southerndawg
    Southerndawg Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 8,343 Founders Club
    The heart of the disagreement is not over "net neutrality" per se, it's over government policy under the heading of net neutrality; a litany of government regulation and classification as a public utility that result in excessive government control. Hand wringing over aims to change policy on this is at this point a lot like defending Obamacare on the basis that the Affordable Care Act is affordable (or free) just because it says so in the name.
  • Pitchfork51
    Pitchfork51 Member Posts: 27,613

    priapism said:

    I think 99+% of the American public supports net neutrality. Trump is going to have to be very tough on this issue, if he wants it to pass...maybe even an executive order. He should fill all the FCC chairs with cable executives.

    If previous conversations here on this topic are any indication, most of the American public has no idea what net neutrality is.
    Will I still be able to visit pornhub and watch movies on Netflix? If so, I don't give a fuck about any of this.

  • 2001400ex
    2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457

    The heart of the disagreement is not over "net neutrality" per se, it's over government policy under the heading of net neutrality; a litany of government regulation and classification as a public utility that result in excessive government control. Hand wringing over aims to change policy on this is at this point a lot like defending Obamacare on the basis that the Affordable Care Act is affordable (or free) just because it says so in the name.

    Oh so net neutrality is bad because big government is bad. We just shouldn't have any regulations. While we are at it, let's deregulate banks more. And get rid of the EPA and the department of education. That'll help our country.
  • UWhuskytskeet
    UWhuskytskeet Member Posts: 7,113

    The heart of the disagreement is not over "net neutrality" per se, it's over government policy under the heading of net neutrality; a litany of government regulation and classification as a public utility that result in excessive government control. Hand wringing over aims to change policy on this is at this point a lot like defending Obamacare on the basis that the Affordable Care Act is affordable (or free) just because it says so in the name.

    Only a Trump bootlicker could spin Net Neutrality into a negative.

    It literally means: Treat all data the same regardless of its origin. Comcast can't slow down bits of data from competitors.
  • Southerndawg
    Southerndawg Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 8,343 Founders Club

    The heart of the disagreement is not over "net neutrality" per se, it's over government policy under the heading of net neutrality; a litany of government regulation and classification as a public utility that result in excessive government control. Hand wringing over aims to change policy on this is at this point a lot like defending Obamacare on the basis that the Affordable Care Act is affordable (or free) just because it says so in the name.

    Only a Trump bootlicker could spin Net Neutrality into a negative.

    It literally means: Treat all data the same regardless of its origin. Comcast can't slow down bits of data from competitors.
    Uh, no it doesn't. You're describing a principal of net neutrality, that's not the same as government regulations using the term as a heading.
  • AlCzervik
    AlCzervik Member Posts: 1,774


    Really? Butt hurt snowflake syndrome run amok.

    Forbes.com - why is the media smearing new fcc chair Ajit Pai

    The heart of the disagreement is not over "net neutrality" per se, it's over government policy under the heading of net neutrality; a litany of government regulation and classification as a public utility that result in excessive government control. Hand wringing over aims to change policy on this is at this point a lot like defending Obamacare on the basis that the Affordable Care Act is affordable (or free) just because it says so in the name.

    You seem confused.
  • 2001400ex
    2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457

    The heart of the disagreement is not over "net neutrality" per se, it's over government policy under the heading of net neutrality; a litany of government regulation and classification as a public utility that result in excessive government control. Hand wringing over aims to change policy on this is at this point a lot like defending Obamacare on the basis that the Affordable Care Act is affordable (or free) just because it says so in the name.

    Only a Trump bootlicker could spin Net Neutrality into a negative.

    It literally means: Treat all data the same regardless of its origin. Comcast can't slow down bits of data from competitors.
    Uh, no it doesn't. You're describing a principal of net neutrality, that's not the same as government regulations using the term as a heading.
    Rather than just say "you are wrong". Why don't you actually explain what you think is in the net neutrality regulations.
  • RaceBannon
    RaceBannon Member, Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 112,643 Founders Club
    Comcast paid for the regulations.
  • tenndawg
    tenndawg Member Posts: 1,161
    2001400ex said:

    The heart of the disagreement is not over "net neutrality" per se, it's over government policy under the heading of net neutrality; a litany of government regulation and classification as a public utility that result in excessive government control. Hand wringing over aims to change policy on this is at this point a lot like defending Obamacare on the basis that the Affordable Care Act is affordable (or free) just because it says so in the name.

    Only a Trump bootlicker could spin Net Neutrality into a negative.

    It literally means: Treat all data the same regardless of its origin. Comcast can't slow down bits of data from competitors.
    Uh, no it doesn't. You're describing a principal of net neutrality, that's not the same as government regulations using the term as a heading.
    Rather than just say "you are wrong". Why don't you actually explain what you think is in the net neutrality regulations.
    If someone poasts a picture of Michelle Obama and an Orangutan then all providers by law must instantly show it at the same time - like when TV says "We interupt this broadcast..."
  • 2001400ex
    2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457

    Comcast paid for the regulations.

    What kind of bizarro world do you live in where an ISP would be pro-net neutrality?

    image

    http://www.dailydot.com/layer8/lobbyists-net-neutrality-fcc/
    Race is right again