With the debate over “net neutrality” emerging pretty much for the first time in this election, it’s only a matter of time before special intersts ruin the last bastion of freedom on the face of the planet. Everything the government touches turns to shit and as soon as the government starts regulating the internet, Biotest won’t even be allowed to advertise their products on their own website. Hopefully the economy will crash before they get their hands on it.
Oh they will try, but the internet is such a vast cavern, they’ll never be able to do it. The nerds will always be one step ahead of Uncle Sam.
[quote]pat wrote:
Oh they will try, but the internet is such a vast cavern, they’ll never be able to do it. The nerds will always be one step ahead of Uncle Sam.[/quote]
You don’t seem to understand what net neutrality means.
[quote]pat wrote:
Oh they will try, but the internet is such a vast cavern, they’ll never be able to do it. The nerds will always be one step ahead of Uncle Sam.[/quote]
Agreed. The citizens are the Linux to the .gov’s Windows Vista.
mike
[quote]lixy wrote:
pat wrote:
Oh they will try, but the internet is such a vast cavern, they’ll never be able to do it. The nerds will always be one step ahead of Uncle Sam.
You don’t seem to understand what net neutrality means.[/quote]
Few people, and even fewer politicians, do.
That was a big part of Paul’s and now Obama’s appeal on teh interbutts.
They actually know what Net Neutrality is, and why it fucks all us internetites so hard.
[quote]lixy wrote:
pat wrote:
Oh they will try, but the internet is such a vast cavern, they’ll never be able to do it. The nerds will always be one step ahead of Uncle Sam.
You don’t seem to understand what net neutrality means.[/quote]
What is it? I am genuinely interested in knowing what it means.
“Net Neutrality” is actually doublespeak for internet regulation. And while the more technically savvy internet users may be able to stay ahead of the government, the masses will be fucked.
[quote]pat wrote:
Oh they will try, but the internet is such a vast cavern, they’ll never be able to do it. The nerds will always be one step ahead of Uncle Sam.[/quote]
The nerds are employed by NSA.
Uncle Sam is in collusion with the universities, with the telecoms, with the software giants.
This is corporatism. There is no clear line of separation between state and business interests. Companies brag about working with the Feds in their PR literature, as if it was a positive thing.
Here in Boston, aspiring nerds all dream of going to MIT. MIT is deeply in collusion with Big Brother.
There is not a single establishment in this country that is not tied into or owned by the central political and business establishment.
[quote]ukrainian wrote:
lixy wrote:
pat wrote:
Oh they will try, but the internet is such a vast cavern, they’ll never be able to do it. The nerds will always be one step ahead of Uncle Sam.
You don’t seem to understand what net neutrality means.
What is it? I am genuinely interested in knowing what it means.[/quote]
Yes
They ruin everything else, why not?
I don’t know about the gov. but my workplace is killing me, the nerve of them to put a website blocker on my computer during march madness…bitches.
It bothers me that people would try to control the internet…it’s this big, free, mass of information…why does it have to be ruined by corporations? This might start slowly, but from what I’ve read it seems there’s a good chance that eventually we’ll just end up with the internet being basically useless.
Net neutrality aims to reduce the amount of control corporations have over the internet. A small number of companies own a lot of the high speed backbones. They can artificially throttle traffic coming from people that don’t pay them a fee. Net neutrality aims at eliminating this practice.
In general, I favor free market solutions, rather than regulatory decisions. I would like to see this regulated for a limited time, until more high speed backbones are laid down and there is greater competition overall.
[quote]nephorm wrote:
In general, I favor free market solutions, rather than regulatory decisions.[/quote]
Sometimes regulations are necessary to ensure a free market actually exists.
ElbowStrike
[quote]ElbowStrike wrote:
nephorm wrote:
In general, I favor free market solutions, rather than regulatory decisions.
Sometimes regulations are necessary to ensure a free market actually exists.
ElbowStrike[/quote]
Which is why I prefer regulation for this particular issue. Backbones are so cost prohibitive that it is not realistic to expect the market to adequately address the issue in the short term.
What about the chilrens…?
[quote]nephorm wrote:
Net neutrality aims to reduce the amount of control corporations have over the internet. A small number of companies own a lot of the high speed backbones. They can artificially throttle traffic coming from people that don’t pay them a fee. Net neutrality aims at eliminating this practice.
In general, I favor free market solutions, rather than regulatory decisions. I would like to see this regulated for a limited time, until more high speed backbones are laid down and there is greater competition overall. [/quote]
Agreed. However, do to entrance barriers, it’ll be awhile before enough ‘backbones’ are established to create a truly competitive market that WON’T screw internet start ups.
[quote]Beowolf wrote:
Agreed. However, do to entrance barriers, it’ll be awhile before enough ‘backbones’ are established to create a truly competitive market that WON’T screw internet start ups.[/quote]
It’ll happen. High speed connections are becoming more and more common. As high speed networks proliferate, and as the speeds they offer continue to rise, the need for dedicated backbones will probably be decreased. After all, the best solution is to decentralize and rely less and less on backbones, which are vulnerable to damage, attack, corporate whim, etcetera.
[quote]nephorm wrote:
Net neutrality aims to reduce the amount of control corporations have over the internet. A small number of companies own a lot of the high speed backbones. They can artificially throttle traffic coming from people that don’t pay them a fee. Net neutrality aims at eliminating this practice.
In general, I favor free market solutions, rather than regulatory decisions. I would like to see this regulated for a limited time, until more high speed backbones are laid down and there is greater competition overall. [/quote]
The solution will be a wireless one.