Forum Statistics

Threads
27,648
Posts
543,027
Members
28,587
Latest Member
BluueWater_Hunter
What's New?
JR Ewing

JR Ewing

MuscleHead
Nov 9, 2012
1,329
420
No, thats not it.
Net neutrality just means that an ISP cant restrict its bandwidth to end points based on content.
It isnt about slowing it down but controlling that bandwidth.

if we let every ISP restrict where we could surf, what we could read and what kind of traffic we can pass then we are fcked.

I dont trust the government much but in this case I trust the ISPs less.
They have already tried to mess with net neutrality.

We have been enjoying net neutrality since the internet became common usage, I really dont want to see it change.
Pretty much the civilized world has figured this out, I dont see no reason we dont want to do the same.

Next step is to control the power of the FCC.

Good luck with restricting or taking away any power from anyone in government or connected to government once it's been assumed. I think the power of the pen and the phone and the president and those who pull his strings is what we need to worry more about. I believe they were the ones who have pushed the FCC and other government agencies into doing these things.

Why would an ISP restrict things not illegal, other than to charge money / more money for certain things? I would think the government would be the one we would need to worry about restricting things like free speech.
 
MorganKane

MorganKane

VIP Member
Nov 12, 2012
1,730
1,016
Good luck with restricting or taking away any power from anyone in government or connected to government once it's been assumed. I think the power of the pen and the phone and the president and those who pull his strings is what we need to worry more about. I believe they were the ones who have pushed the FCC and other government agencies into doing these things.

Why would an ISP restrict things not illegal, other than to charge money / more money for certain things? I would think the government would be the one we would need to worry about restricting things like free speech.

compare this to free speech.
Do you really want your ISP restricting where can visit, what it costs to visit and what traffic you can pass?
The cost goes beyond you paying your ISP lets say 50 bucks for 20mb down and 10mb up.
You want X, then that will cost $. You want Y, then that will cost $.
Forget about torrents or private vpns if they dont like it.

You are on comcast, they can charge you more to visit their competitors.
A large company can pay Comcast to limit or charge for access to their competitors.
How about a ISP owned by a liberal that restricts your access to any conservative sites.
Here in Houston, you got two providers. ATT and Comcast.
This isnt exactly an open market.

Every single organization that works for net neutrality supports this bill.
In this case I trust the corporations less then the FCC.
 
JR Ewing

JR Ewing

MuscleHead
Nov 9, 2012
1,329
420
I guess we'll have to wait until we can read the fine print to know for sure just how "helpful" and "fair" this will be and what the pros and cons actually are. My gut feeling is that it will be a huge bureaucratic overreach and a negative overall - like everything else this admin pushes via exec order or memo in the name of "fairness" or whatever.
 
JR Ewing

JR Ewing

MuscleHead
Nov 9, 2012
1,329
420
I've been surfing these internets for nearly 2 decades, and I've never had any of these hypothetical "issues" with ISPs that big brother is now claiming he needs to protect us from.
 
Who is viewing this thread?

There are currently 0 members watching this topic

Top