|
It really is as simple as; we know what we want the internet to do. We know how we want it to behave, and we have a good idea of how we would like it to be priced. All it would take is some real muscle flexing by the FCC and Congress to ensure that this issue died a happy death. This isn't a business argument, or a practical argument, it is a political and ideological argument.
|
#
¿
May 19, 2014 02:33
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 08:18 |
|
|
Install Windows posted:But that has absolutely nothing to do with net neutrality. Sure it does. We could, as a society; create rules that protected, fostered and guaranteed cheap internet to everyone. If we wanted to. The reasons we should do those things are limitless, the reasons we don't are obvious.
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2014 02:49
|
|
|
Install Windows posted:Yeah things like improving customer speeds, or reducing profiteering, or even upgrading links between networks don't have anything to do with net neutrality. Net neutrality is an extremely narrow subject. Holy mother of god take me now.
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2014 03:09
|
|
|
Install Windows posted:"Sure mate, just the same way that it has nothing to do with the FCC or Time Warner or legal precedents or anything else. Those are all totally different subjects that have nothing to do with network neutrality. " What is your ideal internet situation? What do you want to see happen? When you argue that somebody doesn't understand net neutrality, what they are usually arguing is their ideal opinion. Somehow, you miss the context of their argument, however. But really, tell us, what is your ideal solution to the internet. What do you think the answer is? I think you believe a lot of the same things we do, but we are arguing different things. Pohl fucked around with this message at 05:01 on May 19, 2014 |
|
#
¿
May 19, 2014 04:58
|
|
|
Install Windows posted:Essentially the status quo, with eventual actual nationalization of infrastructure, but no bullshit pseudo nationalization. What is pseudo nationalization?
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2014 05:04
|
|
|
Install Windows posted:The poo poo FRINGE posted about setting arbitrary limits but still allowing the providers to operate as private for profit entities for stockholders. So, complete nationalization and government control is what you want? I'm trying to parse your messages, if I'm wrong, be more clear.
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2014 05:06
|
|
|
Install Windows posted:Yes, eventually. There is no place for leaving it as multiple for-profit entities with tightly controlled profit/price/whatever margins on them. Ok, thank you. So what we are arguing in this thread is process and procedure, not outcome. Right? I want you to correct me if I'm wrong.
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2014 05:10
|
|
|
Install Windows posted:Yes, pretty much. So before I said that we could do this poo poo now, if we wanted to... but I included price and access. That hosed up my messaging. I stand behind what I said however, because even in the context of net neutrality, if the FCC and Congress wanted to institute net neutrality, they could do it tomorrow. Edit: I just saw your edit. It seems we completely agree. Pohl fucked around with this message at 05:21 on May 19, 2014 |
|
#
¿
May 19, 2014 05:18
|
|
|
edit is not post
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2014 05:20
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 08:18 |
|
|
HBO Go is going to change the way we pay for content. I've been waiting for this to happen for decades.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2015 02:12
|
|