Why should I support repealing net neutrality?
- Thread starter Flash
- Start date
So who should be in charge of stopping the centralization of the internet? If someone tries to centralize the internet, who should intervene?
In the other thread, i was pretty much bitching about the lack of choices for my provider. Where i live, we have Comcast for broadband and AT&T for DSL and that... that's pretty much it. Nothing remotely close to living in a capitalist society.
Yesterday i was downstairs, getting ready to take my dog outside for a piss break when an AT&T/Directv salesperson came to my door. I asked them "what are you selling?" to which she replied, "Im blah blah from AT&T/Directv and i wanted to let you know that your area is part of a pilot program for fiberoptics. You will get 100 up and down. Is this...." to which i interrupted her and said, "sign me up!"
Monday, they should be here to hook me up and i can finally cancel Comcast and live in the 21st century. So stoked!
Yesterday i was downstairs, getting ready to take my dog outside for a piss break when an AT&T/Directv salesperson came to my door. I asked them "what are you selling?" to which she replied, "Im blah blah from AT&T/Directv and i wanted to let you know that your area is part of a pilot program for fiberoptics. You will get 100 up and down. Is this...." to which i interrupted her and said, "sign me up!"
Monday, they should be here to hook me up and i can finally cancel Comcast and live in the 21st century. So stoked!
same goes and went for cell phone tech over past 50 years
try to pay attention and not just bitch
competition would intervene. consumers would intervene.
i know this concept is Greek to you, but that is how markets work.
the same people who are "in charge" of bitcoin would intervene
who control the darknet would intervene
who run black markets would intervene
if you don't grasp this yet I don't know what to tell you
Last edited:
stoked to get an AT&T product when compared to other choices
this is how we definitively know we still don't have viable alternatives with ISP providers
isn't he implying non-intervention?
for some reason getting out of the way and doing nothing is never considered a practical solution to moral busybodies
we can't remove one failing piece of legislation without having another(equally terrible) one to replace it with
letting collectivist/leftist lobbyists larp as policy experts and economists has managed to effectively destroy one industry after another(housing, healthcare, value of fiat currency), and we're supposed to want these people to be in control of the internet
but who will control the world under a decentralized platform of completely different countries?
i mean this is as delusional and daft Amadeus is to the larger point i am making
explaining it further is beyond futile i am afraid to say
i mean this is as delusional and daft Amadeus is to the larger point i am making
explaining it further is beyond futile i am afraid to say
bingo.......schiff gets it
u get it
the more profitable and important an industry is the more meddling and hence LACK OF choices we have
the more "individual mandates" and market collusion and coercion we seem to experience
all by design anyone paying attention (who isn't an aspiring tyrant or political puppet) would say
but lucky for me Amadeus is a living Sesame Street character for global domination
with gubmt public school mind controls arm so far up his ass he doesn't know where he begins and they stop
Last edited:
i'm switching to AT&T fiber after the new year have a few things to square away first
What if competition or consumers have either no interest or no practical means of intervening? Should we still try to stop centralization then?
no interest in making money you mean?
LMFAO
yeah then we have world peace
we are already in heaven
god regulates markets then
LMFAO
yeah then we have world peace
we are already in heaven
god regulates markets then
this is where i ask you what industry people have no desire to make money or compete in
when this has ever once happened in history
and if it has happened if we even need (because of want) that service
you play chase the tail for a second
might make you preemptively think about the next step before you ask another dumb question like that
when this has ever once happened in history
and if it has happened if we even need (because of want) that service
you play chase the tail for a second
might make you preemptively think about the next step before you ask another dumb question like that
No, no interest or practical means of intervening, I mean.
how is it that leftists hate monopolies but love centralized power?
it's as if they are only against consolidated power when they don't control it
I still haven't heard a peep from the NN crowd about social media and youtube censoring pretty much anything right of total Marxism under current NN. It's ok, and even a moral imperative for Facebook or Twitter to censor conservatives and libertarians, but it's not ok for Comcast to have higher prices for high data users. I realize it's a totally asymmetrical comparison, but when I see how leftists treat censorship on platforms that they monopolize(far-left silicon valley has a clear monopoly on social media, and information gateways to the internet such as google), I kindof have trouble believing they are actually in favor of an actually 'free' internet in any sense outside of it being literally free of cost to them(socialized). Why is silicon valley unanimously in favor of NN? It's clear their motivation has absolutely nothing to do with fighting censorship(which is the only attractive part of NN to me).
it's as if they are only against consolidated power when they don't control it
I still haven't heard a peep from the NN crowd about social media and youtube censoring pretty much anything right of total Marxism under current NN. It's ok, and even a moral imperative for Facebook or Twitter to censor conservatives and libertarians, but it's not ok for Comcast to have higher prices for high data users. I realize it's a totally asymmetrical comparison, but when I see how leftists treat censorship on platforms that they monopolize(far-left silicon valley has a clear monopoly on social media, and information gateways to the internet such as google), I kindof have trouble believing they are actually in favor of an actually 'free' internet in any sense outside of it being literally free of cost to them(socialized). Why is silicon valley unanimously in favor of NN? It's clear their motivation has absolutely nothing to do with fighting censorship(which is the only attractive part of NN to me).
give an example
because i don't see any
not one........ever
more sunday morning cartoon fantasy world shit
exactly
even worse is listening them cite "well it is a private company" when it comes to this censoring, this abuse, and even firing of Google engineers for even bringing up a thought process or question that they don't consider PC enough.
like just then they care to believe in or subscribe to property rights and the concept of something not being a common good. that they even pretend to recognize privatization.
they are the worst kind of bullshitters who only want control, to achieve their end goal agenda, and then scream at the sky when they lose said control (that at best they never really had)
that is why Trump has physically caused TDS and all but a self inflicted kill off of their species.
THAT WASN"T REAL SOCIALISM........To NEOLIBERALS in Europe
To China .......
To USSR......
To Venezuela.........
To North Korea.......
To the killing fields under Che types of Cuba
they never get their way even when they really really really thought they were.
That is why i have long believed that the best way to ruin a liberals life is to give them exactly what they are after. Nothing will make them more miserable in the end.
Unfortunately it often ruins our lives too. So like the cancer it is we adults must be preemptive.
Last edited:
Say, an ISP in an area owns the only infrastructure there is. Other ISP's are in a catch 22 as they don't have enough money to build their own infrastructure, and without their own infrastructure, they cannot branch out and provide competition to make that money. So there's no competition, and therefore consumers cannot go to a different ISP.
Who should stop centralization in this situation?