CASEK

[MayorMeanBeans]

can you explain today's ruling in favor of comcast against the FCC on net neutrality. will my divx pronz breakneck speeds no longer download at 800k/sec?? is there something congress/fcc/obama the socialist can do to keep porn fast??

 

noooooooooooooo

[lord_casek]

Basically, they ruled that they (FCC) have no control on what companies do.

Here's a good article on the subject

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/FCC-loses-key-ruling-on-apf-78990100.html?x=0

[russell jones]

hopefully this isn't the beginning of the end for net neutrality.

[lord_casek]

Lizard people will eat us before the internet dies if that makes you feel any better.

[russell jones]

Not the Internet, but net neutrality. It makes what we are doing now possible.

[Zig]

epic win for freedom imo. i'm happy with the court ruling, and i hope net "neutrality" dies, it's about as neutral as the patriot act is patriotic.

[WORDISM45]

Do you even know what net neutrality means man? I cannot understand how anyone except a telecom owner or a tyrant would be against this principle. The internet is and has the potential to further become the greatest information revolution since the invention of the written word.

It connects people anywhere on the planet to eachother, provides a fountain of knowledge to anyone that seeks it, contains the majority of the sum total of non-physical human achievement throughout history. And you think it's a bad idea to stop telecom companies from having the ability to filter data and provide a tiered service so that SOME information is more readily available than the rest? Have you ever thought of the implications of a business controlling the accessibility of certain information on the internet?

 

think about it.

[the.crooked]

On principle the whole thing seems a bit ludicrous, how can an entity created to regulate the transmission of media across this country not be entitled to regulate a corporation built on the sending and receiving off data.

 

Let's hope the higher courts see it so simply.

[lord_casek]

Not the Internet, but net neutrality. It makes what we are doing now possible.

 

 

Alien lizard people will still eat us. If the zombies don't get us first.

[ILOTSMYBRAIN]

Do you even know what net neutrality means man? I cannot understand how anyone except a telecom owner or a tyrant would be against this principle. The internet is and has the potential to further become the greatest information revolution since the invention of the written word.

It connects people anywhere on the planet to eachother, provides a fountain of knowledge to anyone that seeks it, contains the majority of the sum total of non-physical human achievement throughout history. And you think it's a bad idea to stop telecom companies from having the ability to filter data and provide a tiered service so that SOME information is more readily available than the rest? Have you ever thought of the implications of a business controlling the accessibility of certain information on the internet?

 

think about it.

 

 

What would stop the FCC from doing the exact same thing?

 

Just wondering.

[WORDISM45]

because it would be illegal that's the point. also it isn't in the FCCs interest to do so.

[ILOTSMYBRAIN]

http://news.cnet.com/Why-Net-neutrality-means-more-federal-regulation/2010-1028_3-6088253.html

 

http://reason.org/news/show/net-neutrality-really-means-in

 

Basically how I see it.

 

To just add to your response. I don't see how it would be illegal for the FCC to do the exact same thing you are worried about. They do it with TV, movies, video games and music. This bill just like the health care reform bill, I'm sure will be revisited, and changed very significantly over a short period of time after it becomes law.

 

I have absolutely no problems with the the service I have been provided since I jumped onto the internet at 13. Over...a decade ago. So calling for more government regulation on an issue that I don't even think exists, is kind of silly.

 

To each their own I guess.

[WORDISM45]

the only regulation i would like to see is a ban on tiered speeds for different websites and a ban on filters. The FCC couldn't do the same thing because it would be banned (no brainer).

 

So how does the FCC allow tiered download speeds for tv, movies, video games, and music? Without just linking me to a website or making blanket statements about government itnerference in the free market do you want to explain what you have against net neutrality?

[Mercer]

The FCC is all about censorship,

Let some wak shit about Internet profanity, racism, whatever make the news.

Next thing you know, some lard ass prude bitch and her church knitting circle are making phone calls.

Then the nice people at the FCC see to it that sites get shut down, a system of fines are put in place ect.

 

Look at how censored TV and Radio are because of them and ask yourself if you want your Internet controlled by these douches.

[WORDISM45]

my point is i don't want the internet controlled by anyone, neither the fcc or telecom companies. The way I see it the government should be able to ban tiered internet access without being able to regulate internet use.

[Zig]

plz... they just want their hands on the internet so they can decide who can say what, what kind of websites you can have, monitor peoples downloads, stop piracy, etc.

 

ohhh and we get SUPER FAST INTERNET FOR EVERYONE, as their gimmick to getting the dummies to sign up for it. everything is anti corporation now of days, so the government steps in and say "ok we'll do it for you since you can TRUST US" (trollface)

 

gtfo my face with this shit, i'll stick with my road runner Time Warner cable... works just fine.

[WORDISM45]

alright man don't forget to wear your tin foil hat while you unmask the governmentz controlling your interwebz

[lord_casek]

plz... they just want their hands on the internet so they can decide who can say what, what kind of websites you can have, monitor peoples downloads, stop piracy, etc.

 

ohhh and we get SUPER FAST INTERNET FOR EVERYONE, as their gimmick to getting the dummies to sign up for it. everything is anti corporation now of days, so the government steps in and say "ok we'll do it for you since you can TRUST US" (trollface)

 

gtfo my face with this shit, i'll stick with my road runner Time Warner cable... works just fine.

 

 

You're partially right. Here's the thing, though: they already do spy on us. They don't need net 2.0 to do it. It makes it easier, but it's already being done.

 

If you do some more research into the subject you'll find lots more and worse.

 

Pour over these for a day or two and tell me you don't feel sick at your stomache

 

http://cryptome.org/

[ILOTSMYBRAIN]

alright man don't forget to wear your tin foil hat while you unmask the governmentz controlling your interwebz

 

I don't really understand the basis for this, when the government is trying to take control over the internet. Which is exactly what is being discussed here.

 

:rolleyes:

[nsmbfan]

"But the court in no way disagreed with the importance of preserving a free and open Internet; nor did it close the door to other methods for achieving this important end."

 

CANT STOP

WONT STOP

JIGGA JIGGA WHAT

bad boy fo life

[Mercer]

I remember in the 90's when this shit first started taking off and dial up was used.

Many small time mom and pop people went out and bought their own servers and you could pay them for dial up.

Shit was mad slow, a normal jpg would take minutes to load some times.

 

As far as the anti corporate ranting goes you guys are missing something.

They invested in the fiber optics and infrastructure that brings you high speeds.

You can't just go and seize that from them, it's theirs and they payed for it.

[WORDISM45]

I don't really understand the basis for this, when the government is trying to take control over the internet. Which is exactly what is being discussed here.

 

:rolleyes:

 

making 2 or 3 basic restrictions on how much corporations can themselves control the internet is not the government taking control of the internet.

[ILOTSMYBRAIN]

I highly doubt that when and if the bill is passed it will only have 2 or 3 basic restrictions in it.

 

It will probably be a several hundred paged bill with a lot stuff in it that has absolutely nothing to do with the Internet. Which like I said before will most likely be expanded upon multiple times before all is said and done.

 

So yeah, it is like the government taking control of the internet.

[Zig]

alright man don't forget to wear your tin foil hat while you unmask the governmentz controlling your interwebz

 

i don't need to wear a tinfoil hat to see the obvious fucking common sense truth blatantly right in my face, maybe you're the one wearing a tinfoil hat and it is some how, in combination with your thick skull, blocking you from thinking correctly. not my problem.

[WORDISM45]

look up mate the sky is falling

[Fist 666]

a great example of what to fear is whats taking place in australia.

their censorship filters being put in place block (besides /b/ and ED) porn depicting women with small breasts (among several other categories of porn and non-porn). they claim this is a means of fighting CP, and not downright discrimination.

 

 

if it were possible for a short bill to pass that would simple restrict tiered speeds, i wouldn't mind gov regulation, but the fact is that a bill of a simple nature is never going to happen.

i feel better having the decision in the hands of the telecom companies as that leaves the opportunity for small time anti-censorship telecom companies to form and regulate as they choose (or don't choose). once its in the govs hands we're fucked.

[Spitfire15]

Just keep the shit as it is. Fuck.

[ILOTSMYBRAIN]

Just keep the shit as it is. Fuck.

 

The sky is falling. I agree with Spitfire.

[bloodsweatxylene]

I wonder how long it's going to take for a cop to be able to just waltz into out houses and peek freely. Oh, I forgot, they already can.

 

Us Patriot Act FTW

 

-__-

[WORDISM45]

For all the conspiracy theorists that think the US government wants to take over the internet, a must read:

http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/australia-pushes-net-censorship-in-washington-20100423-tgkh.html