That is a fellow Kentuckian.
Our government thus far has proven superior to the private sector at preventing ISPs from blocking and throttling websites. Sure, they can always demand blocking or throttling of of some websites and services, but they haven't yet (at least that we can prove). However, it's a fact that ISPs blocked and throttled certain websites and services prior to net neutrality rules.
I am assuming it because historically that's what ISPs have done. But you are also failing to realize the majority of America does not have access to more than one ISP. You can't pick up the phone and find a different ISP if another ISP does not exist in your area. What do you fail to understand? Competition can't fix something if competition doesn't exist.
So what market incentives are there to improve when someone has a monopoly? Do without? That's almost impossible for any modern American these days.
And for rural America that only has one ISP, there is virtually zero economic reason to invest in the infrastructure to bring another broadband internet provider to a community when it's going to be very difficult to make your money back. Hell, my town of approximately $8K people lost one ISP because the town proved to not be big enough to support two ISPs. The chances of another ISP coming here are extremely unlikely without government incentives.
Competition is great, but competition isn't always a reality. Stop living in a dream world.
Stop living in a dream world.
HAHAHA! You joined the site in our most recent election year.And no one even knows who you are. A sad little troll popping in once a month. Lurking and stalking like a creep. Can't even at least be funny. Just full of lame. Total fag.
One thing's for sure: if Obama's for it, then intelligent people should be against it.
Well they don't. Silicon Valley has shut them out even with your precious big government laws in place. Just goes to show how much they're protecting you. Google and Go Daddy shouldn't have that much control and power.I'm not exactly going to fight to support the KKK by any means, would be an incredibly stupid move for me professionally, but they should have the ability to have a website.
And that's the biggest flaw of all. They automatically assume the cuts phase out and don't get renewed by Congress, and then they assume the hikes are going to be more than what they are.
The legislation isn’t perfect, but its critics aren’t telling the truth.
At that point, Congress would have to vote to extend most of the family tax cuts. This vote would probably be a formality,
So instead you became a troll?Boston seems like a good guy and prolly is, but he is clueless about politics.
One of the reason I why I quit trying to conversate with FuzzRQ/Cradkilla/Jamelee types. Just not worth dealing with their stupidity and ignorance.
When an ISP is forced to do what content providers want, like that content or not, they have no choice in the matter, and thus their system is devalued. If they can give their own content preference, their system is worth more to them. Not at all hard.How is accessing a website stealing an asset when you are paying for internet access?
Fine. What's the problem?The first thing Verizon is going to do is launch some shitty AOL-esque "content hub" and attempt force that down your throat, because they are retarded. The internet will revolt, Verizon will lose more market share to T-Mobile who has already partnered with Netflix. Not long after, Amazon will be able to acquire the failing Verizon and officially own the world.
You act like this is a brave new world. In fact, it just go back tot he rules of 3 years ago; i.e., pre-Obama.You're right, I'm living in the dream world. Even though every thing you've fear mongered about the ISP's are possibly going to do now that net neutrality is gone, has already happened, and been happening, by Silicon Valley with net neutrality in place, yet you don't seen to care at all. One is reality, the other is a dream. Who's actually living in a dream world?
You've stated the case for a free internet: one IPS provider sucks. NN does nothing to change that.Monopoly power is not always because of local governments. Most of rural America just doesn't have enough people to make it profitable for two ISPs to coexist. As I said in another post, my town of approximately 8K used to have two ISPs. One left town because it wasn't a profitable enough business with them having to share customers with another ISP. I can't fault them for doing that, but it sucks because the ISP we do have has gone to shit since they left and jacked up the prices as well. Nothing I can do about it though other than go without internet, which would cause me to lose my job.
ANd the FTC dealt with those cases w/o NN. Next.Our government thus far has proven superior to the private sector at preventing ISPs from blocking and throttling websites. Sure, they can always demand blocking or throttling of of some websites and services, but they haven't yet (at least that we can prove). However, it's a fact that ISPs blocked and throttled certain websites and services prior to net neutrality rules.
Yes. What the h, why invest in new ISP service when the government tel you what you can do with it?Well, it sucks bc the govt already regulates the hell out of everything and makes it hard for competition to begin with...so repealing this may not help...however, I'm fairly confident we would have already had fiber service in Lexington by now if it weren't for net neutrality
So much for competition, internet startups and jobs.Sure I'm fine with it. It's their business, not yours. Censorship was already happening by Google et al. Let them & Netflix buy their own ISP at market price vs. having ISPs devalued by Obama & crowd. Just love how people are fine with stealing others assets.
You act like this is a brave new world. In fact, it just go back tot he rules of 3 years ago; i.e., pre-Obama.
Net Neutrality is unspoken law of internet
NN means all websites and all information is treated equally - if you have a 5 mbps connection you get a 5 mbps connection to wherever you want (so long as that website's servers can keep up), be it Google, kentucky.rivals, or moe's own autistic webpage with your blacked porn collection, etc.
Obama tries to make it into law
Verizon, Comcast, etc. want to get rid of it so they can charge you more money as well as big websites like YouTube, Netflix, etc. that eat up bandwidth
Google, Amazon, etc. want to keep the law so they don't get charged big bucks for their websites under the guise of "t-they'll take away your porn!"
But moe is completely for the NN repeal because he's a cuck who can't get enough of Trump's dick. Plus he's an edgelord who thrives on getting replies here. good god, almost 6000 posts in a year. how big a chair do you have to get to set in?
That's why I can't figure out why it's supposedly a big deal. Not like it's uncharted territory