A world king to tell everyone that is dumb what to do
facepunch shall be his advisors
[QUOTE=ZeldaFN;24224727]
All opinions on here are very important. I want to hear all sides.[/QUOTE]
There shouldn't be anyone against net neutrality.
I'm naked
Of course, there should be some government regulation I guess but chances are "some regulation" can lead to more regulation and then that regulations leads to corporations being able to buy in on a part of that regulation. In a perfect world, government and corporation regulation would be balanced on the internet so that not one or another could take that much control of it but we live in a capitalistic and monopolistic society so that won't happen
I don't care who controls it as long as it's cheap and it works.
My friend is convinced that if net neutrality doesn't pass all major icps will royally fuck us over, (For example he said they could redirect google to yahoo or something along those lines and there would be nothing we could do about it) they would have the power to, but they wouldn't, because that mean a lot less customers.
Net Neutrality has nothing to do with the first amendment. It more of freedom from government, not freedom from corporations. Its like saying the new Facebook violates the first amendment. Its a service. If you don't like it, find a new provider.
I am totally pro net-neutrality. In Canada the government is doing nothing to help us with net neutrality, they are leaving the regulation up to the cablecorps, which is idiotic.
[QUOTE=TrafficMan;24224920]doesn't pass all major [b]icps[/b] will royally fuck us over[/QUOTE]
[img]http://knowyourmeme.com/i/000/046/123/original/magnets.jpg?1270937748[/img]
But on a related note.
I still believe that the internet should be a free place for everyone's idea's and not something that is controlled or monitored.
We might lose it temporarily but if people lose the ability to go to our websites, corporations will lose customers.
Some new ISP will pop up offering full access and instantly gain millions of customers.
[QUOTE=OogalaBoogal;24224966]Net Neutrality has nothing to do with the first amendment. It more of freedom from government, not freedom from corporations. Its like saying the new Facebook violates the first amendment. Its a service. If you don't like it, find a new provider.[/QUOTE]
It's not about corporate regulation over people, it's about governments regulation over corporation. Using government to control the internet offends the first amendment because the first amendment protects the rights of entities, including corporations, by extensions of the right to peaceably assemble, etc
[B]No one[/B] should be against net neutrality.
Why would you be?
profits
[QUOTE=Onlyonebowman;24225758][img]http://knowyourmeme.com/i/000/046/123/original/magnets.jpg?1270937748[/img]
But on a related note.
I still believe that the internet should be a free place for everyone's idea's and not something that is controlled or monitored.[/QUOTE]
That's the whole point of Net Neutrality, and that has been around since the internet was created. If this was an issue that had existed before, this wouldn't be so insane, but the fact that we've always had free (You can do what you want) internet means that if it's suddenly regulated, people will literally shit bricks.
Obligatory picture for net neutrality discussion:
[img]http://www.collegebeing.com/uploads/2008/03/net-neutrality.jpg[/img]
Naturally, I'm completely for net neutrality. Keep the tubes free (or as they are currently, anyways).
[QUOTE=Gmod4ever;24229931]Obligatory picture for net neutrality discussion:
[img_thumb]http://www.collegebeing.com/uploads/2008/03/net-neutrality.jpg[/img_thumb]
Naturally, I'm completely for net neutrality. Keep the tubes free (or as they are currently, anyways).[/QUOTE]
That picture makes me die a little inside, every time I read it, because I can see it happening.
I feel a pain in my chest every time I see that picture.
If the Government tries to control the internet, then we revert to the 21st amendment, although they pretty much have control over that amendment.
Also rule 34 will disappear if the government takes control. :ohdear:
[QUOTE=sonicrjk;24224743]There shouldn't be anyone against net neutrality.[/QUOTE]
[editline]12:18AM[/editline]
thread music
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cZC67wXUTs[/media]
[QUOTE=sonicrjk;24224743]There shouldn't be anyone against net neutrality.[/QUOTE]
So if no one is against net neutrality, that means we are all a part of a single party that controls the internet.
We can't win this war.
I haven't read anything but I saw insane clown posse on the way down, so this is not relevant.
-snip-
[url]www.savetheinternet.com[/url] is very helpful, signed it, and I pray that Net Neutrality becomes the law.
[QUOTE=xxsetshotxx;24231342]I haven't read anything but I saw insane clown posse on the way down, so this is not relevant.[/QUOTE]
That's because you're a dumbass. Read the motherfucking thread. That's what forums are for, this ain't a chat room.
Honestly, let's reason a little.
Who are the ones cought for drug dealing? Small dealers.
Who are the ones cought for internet scam? Small scammers.
So on...
What's the point of net survelliance? finding terrorsits and pedos?
Pedos aren't dumb enough to google for "10 years old toddler", those who do are just too dumb to be worth mentionning.
Terrorists won't google "how 2 keel teh pope", they got their own networks and their own ways of encrypting their communications.
Sooo.. what's the point of it? Well, I know this sounds conspirationist, but look at countries such as china and iran and tunisia and all those internet black holes. That's the dreamland of a governement, and the heaven of a corp.
And no, to those who think that there will be an offer in this style "10$ for cheap internets. 100$ for free internets" that will never happen. Why? if sending an sms costs 25c to you, no matter which provider you use, it doesnt really mean that the sms costs 25c to them. simply that they agreed to keep the price aroudn that level, even though it could be much cheaper.
Hope I made some sense.
I just wish people would stop using net neutrality as an excuse to be misanthropic assholes. For example, just look at our news section. Everyone just laughs at news of teenagers being killed by buses.
[QUOTE=vagrant;24249112]I just wish people would stop using net neutrality as an excuse to be misanthropic assholes. For example, just look at our news section. Everyone just laughs at news of teenagers being killed by buses.[/QUOTE]
Yes, being restricted to 100 websites is infinitely better than BEING FORCED TO READ a few comments on a forum.
[QUOTE=Ali Legend;24249150]Yes, being restricted to 100 websites is infinitely better than BEING FORCED TO READ a few comments on a forum.[/QUOTE]
Stupidest thing I've read all day. When the fuck did I ever say I wanted there to be 100 websites? Or that I don't support net neutrality?
[QUOTE=vagrant;24249293]Stupidest thing I've read all day. When the fuck did I ever say I wanted there to be 100 websites? Or that I don't support net neutrality?[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=vagrant;24249112]I am against net neutrality. Having a limited number of websites to visit at a high speed is much better than an unlimited amount of websites to visit at variable (and often slow) speeds.[/QUOTE]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
