Net Neutrality ( and more)
Oh, the irony of streaming the destruction of the Internet live over the Internet.
You know, I usually try to follow Hanlon's rule: ""Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." But lately I have a lot of trouble staying away from "cynical" and "vicious" for pretty much everything these people do (most of all with regard to Obamacare, but 99 other things, too).
it’s funny that you say this because I was thinking about this and Bush Jr the other day. He was stupid. He did stupid things, said stupid things and was embarrassing. But I never felt what he did was with malice. And even though I disagreed with him on everything, I always felt him to be a decent man.
That’s what hurts about this so much. And what hurts so much when venom is spewed at Obama. You can dislike every policy or law or act he did but to call that man anything less than good hearted and sincere and kind is truly disgusting.
what I don’t get, is: just how will this ‘make America great again’, when it’s going restrict pretty much access on everything from education to communication (applying for jobs) to workforce participation (e-commuting etc) to small business and innovation and even farming?? I mean, where’s the sense???
I pledge allegiance to the United Corporations of America and to the profit for which they stand...
one Nation under Trump, divisible by race, religion, ideology, with liberty and justice for all (but some more than others).
Arrived home this evening to find this week's News Record in the mail. They have an editorial urging support for net neutrality. They must have that slow internet we're being warned about, if they didn't address it before the day of the decision.
mjc said:
You know, I usually try to follow Hanlon's rule: ""Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." But lately I have a lot of trouble staying away from "cynical" and "vicious" for pretty much everything these people do (most of all with regard to Obamacare, but 99 other things, too).
This became clear to me back when the House managed to pass one of their Obamacare repeal bills and held a big celebration outside the White House. It was a real blow to see my government being so gleeful about something that could seriously hurt me. I’ve never felt that way before.
Still not sure how to look at this mess but the article was informative.
https://www.wired.com/2014/06/net_neutrality_missing/?mbid=social_fb_onsiteshare
kthnry, oh yes, in depth. There are great fears that US politics will be replicated here, given the 'colourful' characters we've already got in parliament.
And what he's doing with to FBI right now. He creates his own reality by constantly calmly hammering away about how corrupt and how disgraceful the FBI is. And the Republicans are allowing him to do it. He is creating his own Banana Republic right before our eyes and no one is stopping him. We can protest all we want but no one is stopping him from creating his own government and his own idea of america. This is such insanity. It's like a movie or a series that you stop watching because it's so implausible and disturbing.
blianderson said:
We can protest all we want but no one is stopping him from creating his own government and his own idea of america. This is such insanity. It's like a movie or a series that you stop watching because it's so implausible and disturbing.
What would you suggest other than protest?
I don't know, I can't think of anything that wouldn't result in a prison sentence for me...
Would it be possible to get municipal broadband here? Does anyone know?
KILLING NET NEUTRALITY HAS BROUGHT ON A NEW CALL FOR PUBLIC BROADBAND
https://theintercept.com/2017/12/15/fcc-net-neutrality-public-broadband-seattle/
nan said:
Would it be possible to get municipal broadband here? Does anyone know?
KILLING NET NEUTRALITY HAS BROUGHT ON A NEW CALL FOR PUBLIC BROADBAND
https://theintercept.com/2017/12/15/fcc-net-neutrality-public-broadband-seattle/
Fine with me. Set it up as a public utility, charging a monthly user fee. But joining s/b optional.
I read somewhere that there were laws in place against municipal broadband (work of lobbyists on the behalf of corporations), but I don't know how that works.
nan said:
I read somewhere that there were laws in place against municipal broadband (work of lobbyists on the behalf of corporations), but I don't know how that works.
Don't tell that to the good people of Virginia or else they may be going to jail.
nan said:
I read somewhere that there were laws in place against municipal broadband (work of lobbyists on the behalf of corporations), but I don't know how that works.
I haven't studied the issue in detail but this site suggests that NJ is a state that does not have barriers to municipal broadband: https://muninetworks.org/communitymap
Given the corruption and lack of citizen involvement in public affairs in our state, I'm not sure it would be easy.
dave23 said:
nan said:
I read somewhere that there were laws in place against municipal broadband (work of lobbyists on the behalf of corporations), but I don't know how that works.
Don't tell that to the good people of Virginia or else they may be going to jail.
They have it in some places, but others don't allow. Factotum above says it is OK in NJ, so maybe there is hope?
has anyone considered that when we sign up for service with, say, Verizon for FiOS, we contract for certain speeds. Does the contract permit to throttle sites?
The problem with municipal broadband here would be financial. Most of us bundle services from cable or FiOS. As many of us has found out, it isn't much or any cheaper to try to drop a service, because they hold the cards. So if you went with a municipal system, but still wanted tv service, the provider would screw around with the pricing enough to force the municipal service to be a real money loser for the town. Looking at our town budget there is no room whatsoever for a large, money losing, town run utility.
Steve - Being limited to a certain speed is quite a different thing than eliminating net neutrality. I like to think that net neutrality means bits are bits. By that I mean that if I have a server with data on it and you want to transfer it to your computer, by whatever protocol, those bits will be treated the same as those from any other source. The ISP is acting simply as a conduit; the speed that this occurs at is what you are signing up for. This is essentially the way the net has worked since its inception and rise to greatness, but now with oligopoly and a bunch of short sighted idiots in charge, things might change.
I understand that. My question is that if I'm paying for 50 down, can they throttle my Netflix to 2 down, destroying the service if Netflix doesn't pony up.
Steve said:
I understand that. My question is that if I'm paying for 50 down, can they throttle my Netflix to 2 down, destroying the service if Netflix doesn't pony up.
Well, yes that is a possibility. But informed observers say that Netflix, Amazon, Google, etc. didn't really protest the recent flip very strenuously, meaning that they probably believe that they can afford to pay the ISPs whatever is needed to get their streams priority. It is the smaller fish that will be put at a disadvantage - so much for encouraging competition!
I used Netflix as an example as it uses a lot of data. I contracted for a certain level of service and want to know if anyone has seen anything about this as a possible way of challenging the elimination of net neutrality. I haven't seen this theory advanced.
going into this after that dark November day, I knew what a disaster this was going to be. However, every day brings new surprises that I never even dreamed of. Trump is the gift that just keeps on giving.