Who is excited for the end of net neutrality?
Comments
-
My limited memory blocked out your copy and paste comment from six months ago, you are correct.Southerndawg said:
This is becoming a waste of time, you apparently have a very limited memory.UWhuskytskeet said:Southerndawg said:
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.UWhuskytskeet said:
Still waiting for your take.Southerndawg said:
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.salemcoog said:
It's because of liberal shills like yourself fear mongering as if the TSIO already.UWhuskytskeet said:
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.RaceBannon said:
You got meUWhuskytskeet said:
So you have no clue what net neutrality is. Got it.RaceBannon said:If the government is the best option for healthcare then I certainly trust them to run the nternets
Your so smart and stuff
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!!!!
HTH
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.
http://hardcorehusky.com/forums/#/discussion/comment/592175 -
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. -
My internet is up to like 80 bucks. They are.Fenderbender123 said: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. -
Okay, mine is $50 and streams everything (including 4k) just fine. So I'm sure it varies. But let's say they already did jack up our rates....what's the concern over ending NN if cable companies already jacked our internet rates as high as they need to go in order to make up for the cord cutters?Pitchfork51 said:
My internet is up to like 80 bucks. They are.Fenderbender123 said: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. -
You can add Verizon 4g unlimited to your plan for $20. Right now the best deal. And you can take the hot spot with you.Fenderbender123 said:
Okay, mine is $50 and streams everything (including 4k) just fine. So I'm sure it varies. But let's say they already did jack up our rates....what's the concern over ending NN if cable companies already jacked our internet rates as high as they need to go in order to make up for the cord cutters?Pitchfork51 said:
My internet is up to like 80 bucks. They are.Fenderbender123 said: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. -
Well yeah. Mine was 50 like a couple years ago. But every year they decide to raise the price.Fenderbender123 said:
Okay, mine is $50 and streams everything (including 4k) just fine. So I'm sure it varies. But let's say they already did jack up our rates....what's the concern over ending NN if cable companies already jacked our internet rates as high as they need to go in order to make up for the cord cutters?Pitchfork51 said:
My internet is up to like 80 bucks. They are.Fenderbender123 said: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. -
Can you use it to watch Husky games on your tablet with your Dish subscription?2001400ex said:
You can add Verizon 4g unlimited to your plan for $20. Right now the best deal. And you can take the hot spot with you.Fenderbender123 said:
Okay, mine is $50 and streams everything (including 4k) just fine. So I'm sure it varies. But let's say they already did jack up our rates....what's the concern over ending NN if cable companies already jacked our internet rates as high as they need to go in order to make up for the cord cutters?Pitchfork51 said:
My internet is up to like 80 bucks. They are.Fenderbender123 said: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. -
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 -
That settles it. I'm calling DirecTV today to get my Pac12 network!
-
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.RaceBannon 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
#winning -
Shut the fuck up. Having fast internet in your home is a necessity.2001400ex said:
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.RaceBannon 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
#winning
Even for non basement dwellers.
-
You aren't fooling anyone2001400ex said:
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.RaceBannon 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
#winning -
He had me at e.coli to be fair.CuntWaffle said:
You aren't fooling anyone2001400ex said:
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.RaceBannon 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
#winning -
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. -
I see ths
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.Fenderbender123 said: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.
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. -
ThomasFremont said:
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? -
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.salemcoog said:I see ths
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.Fenderbender123 said: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.
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.
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.UWhuskytskeet said:
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.salemcoog said:I see ths
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.Fenderbender123 said: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.
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.
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. -
That still has nothing to do with net neutrality.salemcoog said:
When technology improves and there's surplus bandwidth they sure will.UWhuskytskeet said:
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.salemcoog said:I see ths
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.Fenderbender123 said: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.
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.
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. -
But you have to admire my segue game at least a little, right?UWhuskytskeet said:
That still has nothing to do with net neutrality.salemcoog said:
When technology improves and there's surplus bandwidth they sure will.UWhuskytskeet said:
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.salemcoog said:I see ths
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.Fenderbender123 said: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.
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.
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. -
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.Fenderbender123 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.
Either these are the .1% of cases or you don't pay very close attention. -
Comcast is probably the shittiest company in the world.dflea said:
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.Fenderbender123 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.
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?dflea said:
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.Fenderbender123 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.
Either these are the .1% of cases or you don't pay very close attention.
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. -
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.
-
Epipens costs 10x as much in the US as they do in the UK. Pretty safe to say people are being screwed over.Fenderbender123 said:
Why are people still doing business with Wells Fargo if they just screw over their customers all day?dflea said:
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.Fenderbender123 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.
Either these are the .1% of cases or you don't pay very close attention.
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. -
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.Fenderbender123 said: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.
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.
-
Let me rephrase it, then. If they hadn't misbehaved, their stock price would be even higher.
-
This thread delivers like none other with the exception of the usual hondoFS queefs.
-
The Tug is the biggest waste of time in all of our? lives. HTH.Southerndawg said:
This is becoming a waste of time, you apparently have a very limited memory.UWhuskytskeet said:Southerndawg said:
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.UWhuskytskeet said:
Still waiting for your take.Southerndawg said:
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.salemcoog said:
It's because of liberal shills like yourself fear mongering as if the TSIO already.UWhuskytskeet said:
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.RaceBannon said:
You got meUWhuskytskeet said:
So you have no clue what net neutrality is. Got it.RaceBannon said:If the government is the best option for healthcare then I certainly trust them to run the nternets
Your so smart and stuff
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!!!!
HTH
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.
http://hardcorehusky.com/forums/#/discussion/comment/592175
