|
Post by dlancer on Apr 27, 2024 23:03:23 GMT
Instead of answering, you ask a question unrelated to the answer.
But I'll bite anyway because I'm a reasonable guy.
That "unelected agency" isn't censoring providers by making them unable to throttle the bandwidth I paid for.
By paying for access to it, I want those lines open and neutral.
Why don't you?
The unelected, censorious agency known as the FCC has never shown that ISPs are slowing down websites. They have hijacked new powers over a problem that doesn't exist.
Furthermore, the FCC censors TV and radio, and Canada's CRTC (their version of the FCC) has laid out a framework to censor podcasts for our FCC to copy. imdb1.freeforums.net/thread/40829/justin-trudeau-wants-regulate-podcasts
There is simply nothing the FCC has presented that would justify this power grab.
If there was no FCC, there'd be porn on every single website, not just the adult ones, and every sitcom would have people shouting "fuck you" at each other.
The problem does exist, you just didn't notice it. And in your ignorance, you thought there were no violations of net neutrality.
One simple Google search will show you all the shit Comcast, AT&T, Verizon, etc. have pulled regarding limiting access.
|
|
|
Post by jackspicer on Apr 27, 2024 23:07:25 GMT
The unelected, censorious agency known as the FCC has never shown that ISPs are slowing down websites. They have hijacked new powers over a problem that doesn't exist.
Furthermore, the FCC censors TV and radio, and Canada's CRTC (their version of the FCC) has laid out a framework to censor podcasts for our FCC to copy. imdb1.freeforums.net/thread/40829/justin-trudeau-wants-regulate-podcasts
There is simply nothing the FCC has presented that would justify this power grab.
If there was no FCC, there'd be porn on every single website I stopped reading right there. The internet as of right now has no FCC censorship, and there isn't porn on every single website.
Is there an actual problem this power grab was meant to address?
|
|
|
Post by dlancer on Apr 28, 2024 0:02:47 GMT
If there was no FCC, there'd be porn on every single website I stopped reading right there. The internet as of right now has no FCC censorship, and there isn't porn on every single website.
Is there an actual problem this power grab was meant to address?
The internet is regulated by the FCC, the FTC and the NHTSA.
The problem is ISPs have the power to limit your bandwidth. You're saying it's okay for them to have that power because they don't flex it.
It's stupid in two ways because not only are you supporting them having said power, you are ignorant to them actually using it.
|
|
|
Post by jackspicer on Apr 28, 2024 0:07:31 GMT
I stopped reading right there. The internet as of right now has no FCC censorship, and there isn't porn on every single website.
Is there an actual problem this power grab was meant to address?
The internet is regulated by the FCC, the FTC and the NHTSA.
The problem is ISPs have the power to limit your bandwidth. You're saying it's okay for them to have that power because they don't flex it.
It's stupid in two ways because not only are you supporting them having said power, you are ignorant to them actually using it.
No, the internet is not regulated by the FCC. Please provide evidence for your assertion that the FCC is preventing porn from being on every website? You have no clue what you're talking about. The ISPs are not doing anything that would warrant the government grabbing power to fix a problem that doesn't exist. This is merely a push for censorship.
|
|
|
Post by mikef6 on Apr 28, 2024 0:10:52 GMT
To all those who have not observed a slow-down and wonder why the rule change means anything, I will ask again the question that dlancer has already asked: even if you have seen no slow-downs, why would you want your provider to even have that choice, that power?
|
|
|
Post by dlancer on Apr 28, 2024 0:17:23 GMT
The internet is regulated by the FCC, the FTC and the NHTSA.
The problem is ISPs have the power to limit your bandwidth. You're saying it's okay for them to have that power because they don't flex it.
It's stupid in two ways because not only are you supporting them having said power, you are ignorant to them actually using it.
No, the internet is not regulated by the FCC. Please provide evidence for your assertion that the FCC is preventing porn from being on every website? You have no clue what you're talking about. The ISPs are not doing anything that would warrant the government grabbing power to fix a problem that doesn't exist. This is merely a push for censorship. www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/childrens-internet-protection-act
|
|
|
Post by mikemonger on Apr 28, 2024 0:38:03 GMT
No websites were being blocked or slowed down, so this is a fake solution in search of a fake problem. Why are you happy about an unelected agency that censors TV and radio now controlling your internet? "The vote means that broadband services will be treated as Title II telecommunications services, a category of federal law that originally referred to phone networks to ensure they were nondiscriminatory. It makes the internet closer to an essential service, like power or water." It amazes me that all it took for you to find this objectionable...was someone telling you to..lol
|
|
|
Post by jackspicer on Apr 28, 2024 2:02:02 GMT
No, the internet is not regulated by the FCC. Please provide evidence for your assertion that the FCC is preventing porn from being on every website? You have no clue what you're talking about. The ISPs are not doing anything that would warrant the government grabbing power to fix a problem that doesn't exist. This is merely a push for censorship. www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/childrens-internet-protection-actNothing in there regulates the internet, so why did you post that irrelevant link?
|
|
|
Post by jackspicer on Apr 28, 2024 2:04:42 GMT
No websites were being blocked or slowed down, so this is a fake solution in search of a fake problem. Why are you happy about an unelected agency that censors TV and radio now controlling your internet? "The vote means that broadband services will be treated as Title II telecommunications services, a category of federal law that originally referred to phone networks to ensure they were nondiscriminatory. It makes the internet closer to an essential service, like power or water." It amazes me that all it took for you to find this objectionable...was someone telling you to..lol All it took you to support it was "We're from the government and we're here to help". ISPs are not slowing down websites, and the FCC wants to censor the internet a la Canada's CRTC.
|
|
|
Post by Dracula on Apr 28, 2024 2:17:35 GMT
No websites were being blocked or slowed down, so this is a fake solution in search of a fake problem. Why are you happy about an unelected agency that censors TV and radio now controlling your internet? It has to do with preventing Internet service providers from "controlling your Internet", nothing to do with the FCC or anyone "controlling your Internet", but the direct opposite of that. You don't even know what you're talking about.
|
|
|
Post by jackspicer on Apr 28, 2024 2:20:59 GMT
No websites were being blocked or slowed down, so this is a fake solution in search of a fake problem. Why are you happy about an unelected agency that censors TV and radio now controlling your internet? It has to do with preventing Internet service providers from "controlling your Internet", nothing to do with the FCC or anyone "controlling your Internet", but the direct opposite of that. You don't even know what you're talking about. Can you give me an example of ISPs slowing down websites? I've given you an example of the FCC censoring TV and radio.
|
|
|
Post by Dracula on Apr 28, 2024 2:27:30 GMT
|
|
|
Post by blizzmanb on Apr 28, 2024 2:35:34 GMT
Don't you hate it when you're jerking off to porn and about to cum and the video starts "buffering"? That . . . really sucks, brah!!
|
|
|
Post by mikemonger on Apr 28, 2024 3:30:41 GMT
"The vote means that broadband services will be treated as Title II telecommunications services, a category of federal law that originally referred to phone networks to ensure they were nondiscriminatory. It makes the internet closer to an essential service, like power or water." It amazes me that all it took for you to find this objectionable...was someone telling you to..lol All it took you to support it was "We're from the government and we're here to help". ISPs are not slowing down websites, and the FCC wants to censor the internet a la Canada's CRTC. Actually, all it took me was being an IT professional who realizes that internet connectivity REALLY IS a vital utility in modern applications. No different than phones. Try again dumbass.
|
|
|
Post by jackspicer on Apr 28, 2024 5:28:48 GMT
All it took you to support it was "We're from the government and we're here to help". ISPs are not slowing down websites, and the FCC wants to censor the internet a la Canada's CRTC. Actually, all it took me was being an IT professional who realizes that internet connectivity REALLY IS a vital utility in modern applications. No different than phones. Try again dumbass. That has nothing to do with what I said.
|
|