Topmounter
Sent By Grocery Clerks
join:2001-02-20
Evergreen, CO
 ·Cox HSI
| This is why...
...you don't want your government legislating how broadband service providers can and cannot do business.
The concept of "Net Neutrality" may appear on the surface to be a benevolent act on the part of a government for the betterment of all, but in the end, like most things the government gets involved in, it will just end up being a thinly guised method for the government to promote their own agenda and favor their friends, stifling competition and choice. |
|
FicmanS
Premium
join:2005-01-11
Brownsburg, IN
clubs: | Big brother wants his cut... |
|
BosstonesOwn
join:2002-12-15
Everett, MA
clubs:
·Comcast
·Comcast Formerly ..
| reply to Topmounter
said by Topmounter  :...you don't want your government legislating how broadband service providers can and cannot do business. The concept of "Net Neutrality" may appear on the surface to be a benevolent act on the part of a government for the betterment of all, but in the end, like most things the government gets involved in, it will just end up being a thinly guised method for the government to promote their own agenda and favor their friends, stifling competition and choice. Dude take a look at how the government wanted to add a net tax last year or maybe a bit before.
They want to take money from as many places as possible. It's nothing to do with net neutrality.
--
"It's always funny until someone gets hurt......and then it's absolutely friggin' hysterical!" |
|
nixen
Rockin' the Boxen
Premium
join:2002-10-04
Alexandria, VA
·Cox HSI
 ·Speakeasy
| reply to Topmounter
said by Topmounter :...you don't want your government legislating how broadband service providers can and cannot do business. Uh, no... This would be an example of why you don't want government in the position of being a competitor within a given service space.
said by Topmounter :The concept of "Net Neutrality" may appear on the surface to be a benevolent act on the part of a government for the betterment of all, but in the end, like most things the government gets involved in, it will just end up being a thinly guised method for the government to promote their own agenda and favor their friends, stifling competition and choice. And you get this from the topic at hand, how, exactly? Sounds like you're looking for any opportunity you can find to push your own bias, whether it's relevant or not.
-tom
--
"Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the government's purposes are beneficial. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well meaning but without understanding." -Louis D Brandeis |
|
wifi4milez
Big Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY
 ·Verizon FIOS
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·RoadRunner Cable
 ·BroadVoice
| reply to Topmounter
said by Topmounter :...you don't want your government legislating how broadband service providers can and cannot do business. The concept of "Net Neutrality" may appear on the surface to be a benevolent act on the part of a government for the betterment of all, but in the end, like most things the government gets involved in, it will just end up being a thinly guised method for the government to promote their own agenda and favor their friends, stifling competition and choice. I completely agree. "Net Neutrality" will only hurt consumers in the end. What most people (especially on this site) have trouble seeing is that the government should never regulate how carriers treat traffic on their networks. As you mentioned, it seems innocent enough from the half blind perspective the Net Neut's are pitching it, but once you peel back the covers a bit you can see how bad of an idea it really is. Look at what Lebanon did. Look at what Iran did. Requiring ISP's provide a set upload for their traffic isnt much different from requiring ISP's provide a specific level of service for their traffic. Its all relative, and all a BAD idea............
--
я люблю медведей! |
|
kyramilan
join:2006-11-26
Pensacola, FL
| reply to Topmounter
If they don't pay they don't play. India is a country and can pass whatever law they want. If Skype doesn't like, so???
If you don't think taxes are going to hit VOIP in the USA, you're nuts. I have a problem paying a real phone company so people can get cheap service with a VOIP like Vonage. I'm subsiziding their calls somewhere.  |
|
karlmarx
join:2006-09-18
iraq
·Fairpoint Communic..
| reply to wifi4milez
Exactly HOW will net neutrality hurt the consumer. If I'm the consumer, I want an INTERNET CONNECTION. That's what net neutrality enforces. It FORCES the companies to provide an 'internet connection', not an AOL connection. If I wanted AOL's walled garden, I'd sign up for AOL.
Net Neutrality isn't just a good idea, it's a REQUIRED IDEA. If we don't stop the megacorps from imposing 'their' vision of what the internet is, we won't have the googles, the yahoo's, the utubes of the world. We won't have bittorrent. We won't have Vonage. We won't have ANY of the features that make the internet what it is today. The megacorp has one objective, and that's to rape the consumer for as much as possible, while providing the lowest level of service possible, for the highest price possible. If we don't have net netrality, plan on seeing an extra charge on your bill if you visit google. Don't kid yourselves, the executives of Verizon, AT&T, SBC, etc all want to charge MORE for LESS. They even state it in their press releases.
--
Stick it to the MAN. Support your local torrent sites. Proudly providing 10mb of upstream for all your TV, Movie, and MP3 needs. |
|
peter_m
Premium
join:2005-07-13
Canada, QC
1 edit | reply to FicmanS
In some cases it's not even big brother. It can be the cousin, the uncle, the nephew or a friend of the country's leader that owns the existing long-distance or cell phone service. If a new comer starts to change the rules of the game, the relatives of the leader start to complain to him... and apparently he listens. |
|
lakino
Premium
join:2003-04-03
Campbell, CA
| reply to Topmounter
said by Topmounter :...you don't want your government legislating how broadband service providers can and cannot do business. The concept of "Net Neutrality" may appear on the surface to be a benevolent act on the part of a government for the betterment of all, but in the end, like most things the government gets involved in, it will just end up being a thinly guised method for the government to promote their own agenda and favor their friends, stifling competition and choice. BS! Net Neutrality has nothing do with any government banning voip or Skype.
If anyone tries to project the banning of anything on the net as advocacy of "net neutrality" they are an out and out propagandist. BS!
Yes to Net Neutrality! No to the banning of Voip or Skype!
--
In an uncertain world, there is absolutely no security in banding together. -- Robert X. Cringely |
|
wifi4milez
Big Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY
·Verizon FIOS
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·RoadRunner Cable
·BroadVoice
| reply to karlmarx
said by karlmarx :Net Neutrality isn't just a good idea, it's a REQUIRED IDEA. If we don't stop the megacorps from imposing 'their' vision of what the internet is, we won't have the googles, the yahoo's, the utubes of the world. We won't have bittorrent. We won't have Vonage. We won't have ANY of the features that make the internet what it is today. You are categorically incorrect. Leaving the internet unregulated will provide consumers with the most possible choices. An unregulated internet will allow companies to create specific content and applications that are currently unavailable, or unfeasible.
--
я люблю медведей! |
|
Topmounter
Sent By Grocery Clerks
join:2001-02-20
Evergreen, CO
·Cox HSI
| reply to lakino
Very simply, Net neutrality is government regulation of the Internet. It may start innocent enough, but this is a Pandora's box that you do not want to open.
If there is only 1 ISP available, then I don't have a problem with some sort of "Net Neutrality" regulation applying.
I want multiple providers competing for my business. There is no incentive to enter the market and compete if the government requires you to sell the same vanilla service as the incumbent. |
|
