AR Ammo/Internet neutrality

[StPaulHusker]

John Oliver always gets a +1

[strigori]

You don't want to live in a county without Net Neutrality. Your Local Telecom Monopoly would get absolute control over what you can see on the internet, and they would be defacto gatekeepers of all new businesses that would have a web focus.

[zoogs]

PRC, but with corporate interests.

[BIGREDIOWAN]

I'm cancelling all of it and selling my AR, screw it!

[VectorVictor]

You don't want to live in a county without Net Neutrality. Your Local Telecom Monopoly would get absolute control over what you can see on the internet, and they would be defacto gatekeepers of all new businesses that would have a web focus.

 

You don't want to live in a county without Net Neutrality. Your Local Telecom Monopoly would get absolute control over what you can see on the internet, and they would be defacto gatekeepers of all new businesses that would have a web focus.

 

A hypothetical example of an internet without Net Neutrality:

 

[Blackshirt39]

You don't want to live in a county without Net Neutrality. Your Local Telecom Monopoly would get absolute control over what you can see on the internet, and they would be defacto gatekeepers of all new businesses that would have a web focus.

 

The next target we need to aim at IMO. I think what the FCC did yesterday was a big step in the right direction, but we won't have true net neutrality until these ISPs have some damn competition.

[VectorVictor]

 

You don't want to live in a county without Net Neutrality. Your Local Telecom Monopoly would get absolute control over what you can see on the internet, and they would be defacto gatekeepers of all new businesses that would have a web focus.

 

The next target we need to aim at IMO. I think what the FCC did yesterday was a big step in the right direction, but we won't have true net neutrality until these ISPs have some damn competition.

 

 

There needs to be initiatives to get FttP going as the defacto standard of home communication in the next ten years.

 

I think the competition will come, though, not from the ISP side...but rather, from the content provider side. We're already seeing folks cutting the cord for cable, and applications like Sling TV, Hulu, Netflix, taking over traditional TV viewing. The next step is for a full-fledged television provider to go internet only--you can have your ABC, CBS, NBC, etc. but it's all streamed online, and the ISP just supplies the fat data pipe to your house to let you choose.

 

Frankly, there's no good reason why every single house in the U.S. that wants 100Mbps/100Mbps shouldn't be able to have it at a reasonable cost. The infrastructure is there--it's just the ISPs that are being greedy SOBs, and it's finally biting them square on the ass.

[Moiraine]

This thread would've been so much better if the OP-maker had replied (multiple times). I am disappoint.

[knapplc]

This thread would've been so much better if the OP-maker had replied (multiple times). I am disappoint.

Vizsla's mom?

[rawhide]

you are meaning the term of endearment, right Knapp

[Vizsla1]

Been away a bit- so sorry I missed the discussion after starting the thread. Doomsday prepping takes an insane amount of time. I agree with Mark Cuban. The worst case scenario is always the risk of regulation which never keeps up with the times- let the market swing and make its own adjustments. Let's say the government wanted to be in the plasma/lcd tv business, what do you suppose we would be paying for or viewing (quality) on those at the moment?

 

The internet is a free domain and cannot be controlled by government. The government has no right to control the information provided over the internet. They do wish to charge/or decide whom will get a license to conduct internet sites. Some of you believe the government is always inherently good. Do you agree with them copying on your conversations/writings now? You say, you have nothing to hide, yet if it was your neighbor hacking into your phone or email- you would surely say it is an invasion of privacy.

 

Controlling the internet is a large price to pay to think you are receiving faster broadband service. Americans use more band width than any other nation in the world. Our speeds are fine, and let the market sort that out. Yes, some foreign capitals have faster internet than a few cherry-picked handful us towns.

 

People often react poorly to being censored by the government- look at China or Suadi Arabia that have a tendency(government) to do harm to those that use political satire against them.

 

I realize many here does not think the government is big enough and can do so much more for its public. Heck, we got casinos in Iowa to help with the children's and the schools. Have Iowans property taxes receeded? I think this week they just added another dime for their gas tax. just think what will happen once the government seizes control of the net.

[Landlord]

The government isn't controlling the internet dude. They are protecting it from being controlled by Verizon, TWC and the other monopolies, who also don't have a right to control it.

[ZRod]

Been away a bit- so sorry I missed the discussion after starting the thread. Doomsday prepping takes an insane amount of time. I agree with Mark Cuban. The worst case scenario is always the risk of regulation which never keeps up with the times- let the market swing and make its own adjustments. Let's say the government wanted to be in the plasma/lcd tv business, what do you suppose we would be paying for or viewing (quality) on those at the moment?

 

The internet is a free domain and cannot be controlled by government. The government has no right to control the information provided over the internet. They do wish to charge/or decide whom will get a license to conduct internet sites. Some of you believe the government is always inherently good. Do you agree with them copying on your conversations/writings now? You say, you have nothing to hide, yet if it was your neighbor hacking into your phone or email- you would surely say it is an invasion of privacy.

 

Controlling the internet is a large price to pay to think you are receiving faster broadband service. Americans use more band width than any other nation in the world. Our speeds are fine, and let the market sort that out. Yes, some foreign capitals have faster internet than a few cherry-picked handful us towns.

 

People often react poorly to being censored by the government- look at China or Suadi Arabia that have a tendency(government) to do harm to those that use political satire against them.

 

I realize many here does not think the government is big enough and can do so much more for its public. Heck, we got casinos in Iowa to help with the children's and the schools. Have Iowans property taxes receeded? I think this week they just added another dime for their gas tax. just think what will happen once the government seizes control of the net.

 

First off literally no one here thinks the government isn't big enough. Second the revenue from gas taxes, casino taxes, and property taxes do not go to the same places. Gambling/Lottery proceeds typically go to schools or child programs as you say, but gas tax almost always goes to a highway fund. And third, when it comes to net neutrality I really don't think you understand what is going on here. The government doesn't want to control anything about the internet. They're actually acting in the citizens best interest for once, by saying that no corporation should be able to control the speed or ability for a person to have access to information or services.

[It'sNotAFakeID]

Mark Cuban only speaks out of Mark Cuban's best interest. Of course he thinks most government regulation is bad regulation; that regulation is bad for his pocket!

[strigori]

Been away a bit- so sorry I missed the discussion after starting the thread. Doomsday prepping takes an insane amount of time. I agree with Mark Cuban. The worst case scenario is always the risk of regulation which never keeps up with the times- let the market swing and make its own adjustments. Let's say the government wanted to be in the plasma/lcd tv business, what do you suppose we would be paying for or viewing (quality) on those at the moment?

 

The internet is a free domain and cannot be controlled by government. The government has no right to control the information provided over the internet. They do wish to charge/or decide whom will get a license to conduct internet sites. Some of you believe the government is always inherently good. Do you agree with them copying on your conversations/writings now? You say, you have nothing to hide, yet if it was your neighbor hacking into your phone or email- you would surely say it is an invasion of privacy.

 

Controlling the internet is a large price to pay to think you are receiving faster broadband service. Americans use more band width than any other nation in the world. Our speeds are fine, and let the market sort that out. Yes, some foreign capitals have faster internet than a few cherry-picked handful us towns.

 

People often react poorly to being censored by the government- look at China or Suadi Arabia that have a tendency(government) to do harm to those that use political satire against them.

 

I realize many here does not think the government is big enough and can do so much more for its public. Heck, we got casinos in Iowa to help with the children's and the schools. Have Iowans property taxes receeded? I think this week they just added another dime for their gas tax. just think what will happen once the government seizes control of the net.

Ok, first off the government controls no information over any medium. Over the air broadcasts are not even controlled, though they do have certain standards they are to adhere to as the stations lease the band from the government. And there is zero control over cable networks. As the FCC has to endlessly remind people when they file complaints over content for something like the MTV music awards.

 

Now, without new neutrality, the monopolies would have direct control over what you have access to. Say Comcast decides to get all puritanical, they could throttle porn or atheist websites down to be unusable. That can not happen now, but it very well could without net neutrality.

 

Nothing about Broadband Internet being classified as a utility has any form of connection to what is on a website, who hosts or creates it in any way, shape, or form. Your understanding of what the internet is and how if functions is more than a little uninformed. And none of this changes. What this means is you will actually notice, wait for it, absolutely nothing. The internet will continue on exactly how it has always has. What it prevents is greedy monopolies from having control over what you will see on the web. Without net neutrality we would not have Netflix or Youtube, or Pandora, or any streaming video at all when you really want to get down to it.

 

Our internet sucks compared to the rest of the developed world. What we get, for what we pay for, lags so far behind, its not even funny. And there are plenty of places that still do not have access to true broadband internet. They won't in fact when the definition changes the minimum speeds needed to be called broadband or high speed. And many people have no options on internet choices, they have whichever monopoly controls their town.

 

News Flash. You already pay taxes on your web access, go read your bill. If you want to discuss tax usage, that is for another thread.

News Flash. The NSA already monitors the internet.

News Flash. The First Amendment still applies to the internet in this country.

 

And lastly THERE IS NOT GOING TO BE ANY CENSORSHIP OF THE INTERNET WITH NET NEUTRALITY BEING ENFORCED! Get this BS out of your head, leave your bunker, turn off Fox News and stop listening to people who stand to make a mountain of money if net neutrality dies.