Nanker Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 There's money in the Intarwebs. Money that various gubments covet. They're not getting their fair fare share. And that is about to change. The clowns running the circus? Hah - the crooks are in charge of the bank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 There's money in the Intarwebs. Money that various gubments covet. They're not getting their fair fare share. And that is about to change. The clowns running the circus? Hah - the crooks are in charge of the bank. Yup. I don't pretend to be an expert on 'Net Neutrality' but I've seen enough government to know this is exactly right and I understand that more money for the government = less money for someone else. And 'someone else' is almost always the public. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 Lawless? Liberal Groups now fear: Government's Internet regulations may be going too far Commisioner: 'Independence of agency has been compromised'... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 (edited) Yup. I don't pretend to be an expert on 'Net Neutrality' but I've seen enough government to know this is exactly right and I understand that more money for the government = less money for someone else. And 'someone else' is almost always the public. I always knew this was coming. I thought they were going to use the kiddie porn angle to get government hooks in it. Not something like net neutrality. Edit. Not really kiddie porn per say but protecting children from porn is what I really meant. Edited February 25, 2015 by Dante Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 I always knew this was coming. I thought they were going to use the kiddie porn angle to get government hooks in it. Not something like net neutrality. Well you can't sell it without good marketing. Who wouldn't be in favor of "Net Neutrality"? Or the "Affordable Care Act"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 Well you can't sell it without good marketing. Who wouldn't be in favor of "Net Neutrality"? Or the "Affordable Care Act"? Like everything else. It's kinda reminiscent of the ACA in that they are trying to ram it through without it being looked at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 (edited) Like everything else. It's kinda reminiscent of the ACA in that they are trying to ram it through without it being looked at. We should expect nothing less from the most transparent Administration in history! Edited February 25, 2015 by KD in CT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted February 25, 2015 Author Share Posted February 25, 2015 Lawless? Liberal Groups now fear: Government's Internet regulations may be going too far Commisioner: 'Independence of agency has been compromised'... Good articles, but unfortunately I don't think folks care too much. Like everything else. It's kinda reminiscent of the ACA in that they are trying to ram it through without it being looked at. It's kinda reminiscent of the ACA in that it's a government takeover of a private system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 Commisioner: 'Independence of agency has been compromised'... FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai: Net Neutrality is a "Solution That Won't Work to a Problem That Doesn't Exist" In other words, a hoax. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 Soros, Ford shovel $196 million to 'net neutrality' groups, staff to White House http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/soros-ford-shovel-196-million-to-net-neutrality-groups-staff-to-white-house/article/2560702 FCC Chair Refuses to Testify before Congress ahead of Net Neutrality VoteRead more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/414380/fcc-chair-refuses-testify-congress-ahead-net-neutrality-vote-andrew-Johnson . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 There's money in the Intarwebs. Money that various gubments covet. They're not getting their fair fare share. And that is about to change. The clowns running the circus? Hah - the crooks are in charge of the bank. Yup. I don't pretend to be an expert on 'Net Neutrality' but I've seen enough government to know this is exactly right and I understand that more money for the government = less money for someone else. And 'someone else' is almost always the public. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai: Net Neutrality is a "Solution That Won't Work to a Problem That Doesn't Exist" In other words, a hoax. Bill probably mostly written by Comcast. Appropriate government officials paid off. Comcast consolidates power so they have a monopoly. Government officials pad there wallet. Also leftists get to regulate/censor the internet. Since the msm is dying fast they have to plug the freedom of speech that exists on the net. Like KD im not expert and how could I be? No one knows whats in this bill. Anyway, it's strictly instinctual. Like Reagan said. "The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 I'll gladly oblige, once you've completed your position statement. Most people would understand that when he asked: Who's the aggrieved party and who are the regulations supposed to protect? He basically claimed there are no aggrieved parties and nobody the regulators are protecting. You, unlike most people, did not understand that so I have explained it to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 (edited) I would love for someone to explain the benefit of net neutrality in plain English. Edited February 25, 2015 by Rob's House Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 I would love for someone to explain the benefit of net neutrality in plain English. Nobody can explain it to you because nobody can define it, because it's a hoax. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 Most people would understand that when he asked: He basically claimed there are no aggrieved parties and nobody the regulators are protecting. You, unlike most people, did not understand that so I have explained it to you. Both GG and yourself are just about the furthest thing from Socrates that exists on this web forum, so I'll politely thank both of you to forego the patronizing tone of Socratic questioning as a substitute for debate. Feel free to substitute a detailed expression of your opinions in the future. That will help to prevent you from appearing to be a huge flapping !@#$. Nobody can explain it to you because nobody can define it, because it's a hoax. Oh, I can explain it in painstaking detail. And I'm opposed, because, as you stated, it's a solution begging for a problem. I'll explain it either tonight or tomorrow, at length, because when you opined, you did not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 Again, there's a wonderful search function on this board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 Again, there's a wonderful search function on this board.And then there's also the common courtesy of sourcing material one is referencing on the internet, even if it's their own material. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted February 25, 2015 Share Posted February 25, 2015 And then there's also the common courtesy of sourcing material one is referencing on the internet, even if it's their own material. There's also a common courtesy on this site for people to do their own homework Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted February 26, 2015 Share Posted February 26, 2015 (edited) There's also a common courtesy on this site for people to do their own homework You not sourcing your work is my fault? ... Try making a justification that wouldn't be laughed out of community college. Edited February 26, 2015 by TakeYouToTasker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts