- 68,248
- 103,592
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2010
What are your qualifications as far as conducting social movements and running a business?
FCC to Propose New 'Net Neutrality' Rules (Vol. Pay for play internet) ++SIGN THE PETITION++
- Thread in 'General' Thread starter Started by crcballer55,
- Start date
am1x90xnike
Banned
- 3,034
- 1,217
- Joined
- May 21, 2013
Common sense.
ben roethlisberger
Banned
- 2,676
- 1,334
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2009
I see both points. The man attacked you and name called, probably pushing you further away from the petition. He could have easily broke down what the petition was and what exactly the FCC is trying to do, but maybe he doesn't even know exactly what any of it means. "If a man can't explain something in the simplest form, he doesn't truly know what it is he is trying to explain".
However, let's not pretend that we are on a site built on common sense and rational decisions. If a site was giving away a free pair of space jams, but you had to go through a registration process that took 30 minutes to complete, you wouldn't do it?
Stating that you understand the human condition is a broad statement and a big statement that if you truly can't back it up, someone who does know their **** is going to poke holes all through it. Maybe you should say, "I understand my human condition and I understand there is people out there just like me". Because I know MY first thought when I didn't understand it wasn't to say "wow they can't make this simpler for us dumb folk?! **** it then".
Like I said, I see both points. But boy oh boy is this not divide and conquer at its finest lol. Irrationalism on both sides. The real issue is that they don't want this incredible invention to keep distributing open information to the public that "they" never wanted the masses to find out. Quit the bickering and come together.
Last edited:
- 22,895
- 26,766
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2010
How does something like this die with all the ******** posted on here
ben roethlisberger
Banned
- 2,676
- 1,334
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2009
Because people start arguing with each other about beliefs and opinions rather then letting the truth be the truth.
Good thing Google, Netflix, and a handful of other powerful corporations are all over this and won't let it happen.
Leave it to us and well... Just look outside and what we do when it's left to us lol.
- 22,895
- 26,766
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2010
The thing about google & Netflix handling this is that they are huge corps also... It doesn't really make sense for them to not support this in some form or fashion
ben roethlisberger
Banned
- 2,676
- 1,334
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2009
Oh I'm not saying "here comes google and Netflix to the rescue! Praise google and Netflix! They did this for us!". They don't give a **** about you and me. They care about money. And this will lose them billions of dollars. And in doing so will keep us on their side, trumping the fact that they are still giving our private information to the government. It's a win/win for them. Loss/win for us. Eventually leading to a win/win for us in the future.
- 770
- 150
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2007
I dont believe for a second that Big Tech supports the petition(depending on their mission...)
It makes enormous sense for a company that already has access to "pay to play" to do so
It keeps them on top while killing competition
Net Neutrality doesn't really make sense though***
Some info must have "priority" tho, who defines the priority is the ?
should a company that offers a service get priority over me looking up a bloggers cooking recipe?
Big Tech wants to be an ambulance on a road where cars are pulled to the side bc they gotta pay
The only difference is that a road really is "neutral", you can keep going if you want too
ISPs are just avoiding the fact they need to update their infrastructure
It makes enormous sense for a company that already has access to "pay to play" to do so
It keeps them on top while killing competition
Net Neutrality doesn't really make sense though***
Some info must have "priority" tho, who defines the priority is the ?
should a company that offers a service get priority over me looking up a bloggers cooking recipe?
Big Tech wants to be an ambulance on a road where cars are pulled to the side bc they gotta pay
The only difference is that a road really is "neutral", you can keep going if you want too
ISPs are just avoiding the fact they need to update their infrastructure
Last edited:
- 27,783
- 12,444
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2011
I think they do care. Wouldn't people that use their streaming services pay more money because they're using more bandwidth thus leading to unsubscribing?
This was what happened a while ago with Netflix and Verizon. Verizon would throttle Netflix speeds. Netflix had to sign some sort of deal with Verizon to make the streams smoother.
- 27,783
- 12,444
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2011
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/...28-8kbps-slow-lane-in-net-neutrality-protest/
need more companies to do this.
need more companies to do this.
Last edited:
- 3,949
- 1,197
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2001
Why wouldn't "Big Tech" support this? The ISP's ARE the roads they're traveling on. The ISP's are trying to not only double dip by charging consumers for the service, but also charging content providers for access to those customers (ala cable subscriptions). Not only is it not good for shareholders of their companies, ISP's are the ones who are able to give special preference to those they deem worth of sweetheart deals since they have already been granted geographic monopolies by the FCC. If we actually had some type of ISP competition, then this wouldn't even be an issue. This is a play by ISP's who offer their own content services (Pay-per-view, online DVR, etc.) to undercut other services providing similar content like Hulu, Netflix, Amazon Prime, etc.
It's a myth to believe that they need other companies to help them in building more infrastructure. During the Dot Com boom, there was more fiber built out than we'll be able to use for a long time. Most buffering is because they refuse to implement the necessary resources to provide a seamless experience.
Here's a blog by Level 3, which is a "middleman" from website hosts to "Last Mile" providers like Comcast, Time Warner, etc. : http://blog.level3.com/global-connectivity/observations-internet-middleman/
If you're too lazy to read it, just scroll to the bottom for the graphs explaining why your internet is so slow. Hint: it's not because they don't have the capacity.
- 4,323
- 4,705
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2011
I agree with your entire point, EXCEPT this one. Big Tech companies have a plethora of reasons why they potentially would be against this.
1. Degregation of customer experience, due to the last mile = Money lost.
2. Increased cost for a minimal improvement = Money lost.
3. Less access to more potential customers due to barrier of entry (depends on services rendered,) = potential money lost.
For ISPs, its great. For companies that make their money from user experience and data collection, its terrible.
- 3,949
- 1,197
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2001
weren't those my points?
- 8,715
- 5,390
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2013
Bump & signed.
- 698
- 111
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2012
- 4,323
- 4,705
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2011
Just making a distinction between different Big Tech agendas is all. Not everyone is for it...mostly just ISPs, and even then, its only the top guns.
- 3,949
- 1,197
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2001
I think you misunderstood me, or vice-versa. I was saying that of course the Big Tech companies like Google, Facebook, Amazon, etc. were for net neutrality since their whole model is based on the concept of equal access to consumers regardless of whether they are big or small. All, they frequently buy up startups to help build their business and without that access to consumers, those startups would die before they even got off the ground.
- 770
- 150
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2007
- 37,757
- 15,440
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2005
Don't know how I missed this. I'll read this entirely when I get home later.
- 24,926
- 23,230
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2010
Bump
