WaGuns.org

kf7mjf wrote:. . . You know the story of DARPANET right? . . .

The consensus of useful idiots has settled the DARPANET hoax - military-industrial corporations didn't build that; Al Gore invented the internet.

Yep, for sure.
http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp

The fact that Comcast was strongly against this is reason enough for me to support it.

lunacite wrote:The fact that Comcast was strongly against this is reason enough for me to support it.

Just like the fact that Obama was strongly in favor is reason enough for me to oppose it!

I'm waiting to see if it's not discriminating against packet origin(good thing) or if it's more than that.

DocNugent wrote:Just like the fact that Obama was strongly in favor is reason enough for me to oppose it!

This covers everything that bastard has ever done and is planning to do.

Wow this thread has a bunch of randomness in it. I'm a tech guy, always have been. I'll try to clear up some misunderstandings here.

Net Neutrality is the idea that nobody gets to regulate the internet. Nobody gets to fuck it up, including the government. It was pushed by the American people and specifically a whole shitload of highly technical people because Comcast and Verizon were fucking it up. They want to turn the internet into cable TV, where you subscribe to packages of content. They want to be the gatekeepers of content, not "just another internet connection." They want to control what websites you can visit, how fast each page will load. They want to blackmail google into paying extra so that www.google.com loads faster than www.bing.com. They already blackmailed Netflix into paying them money so Netflix would work. Comcast HATES Netflix, because they are competition for their own cable tv service. So they intentionally broke the internet.

Net Neutrality is a good thing for the human species. It allows people to communicate freely. It doesn't allow a corporation to violate your rights to speech. It doesn't allow Comcast to say "we don't support the 2nd amendment and gun rights, so we blocked www.waguns.org. If you disagree and think net neutrality is a bad thing, you are insane and there is no reason to speak with you.

Does the FCC plan, declaring internet providers are regulated under Title II, accomplish this? We don't know yet. Of the FCC's 332 page "plan", 8 pages of it is "Law" or "Regulation". The other 324 pages are response to the publics comments that were sent in. I sent in a comment asking for Net Neutrality legislation. Those 8 pages haven't been released for public review yet. Until they are released, and until the lawyers at a unbiased place like the EFF have a chance to read them, we won't know what they actually accomplish. Until Verizon files their lawsuit or Netflix files a lawsuit, we won't know if the laws accomplish Net Neutrality.

Why did the FCC have to do this? They already tried to keep the internet open by declaring ISP's were providing "Information services". This pissed Verizon off so they sued, and the supreme court said "FCC, you can't tell them they can't fuck up the internet because you didn't apply title II to them. You don't have the right to tell them they can't do what they were doing." So then Verizon was free to fuck shit up, which they did. So the FCC just applied Title II to them. Right now the large ISP's HATE Verizon. Verizon fucked up the good thing they had going by trying to go too far, and got bitch-slapped because of it.

What else could have happened instead? Congress, which is supposed to create laws, could have written some laws. Given the Republicans control both the House and the Senate, they could have easily written up laws that accomplish the goals of Net Neutrality, while ensuring the rest of the "government" couldn't fuck up the internet. Why didn't they? I would venture to guess because they are pawns of the corporations that want to fuck up the internet, mainly Comcast, Charter, Verizon etc, but that's just my speculation.

Hopefully the FCC's 8 pages of legislation are good, fair, and just. Hopefully it basically says "The internet must remain free and open, nobody can screw it up." The worst thing possible is if the nutjobs in the world try to use it to regulate the content on the internet, like banning pornography, cursing, and gun websites. Fuck those crazy asshats.

snozzberries wrote:Wow this thread has a bunch of randomness in it. I'm a tech guy, always have been. I'll try to clear up some misunderstandings here.

Net Neutrality is the idea that nobody gets to regulate the internet. Nobody gets to fuck it up, including the government. It was pushed by the American people and specifically a whole shitload of highly technical people because Comcast and Verizon were fucking it up. They want to turn the internet into cable TV, where you subscribe to packages of content. They want to be the gatekeepers of content, not "just another internet connection." They want to control what websites you can visit, how fast each page will load. They want to blackmail google into paying extra so that http://www.google.com loads faster than http://www.bing.com. They already blackmailed Netflix into paying them money so Netflix would work. Comcast HATES Netflix, because they are competition for their own cable tv service. So they intentionally broke the internet.

Net Neutrality is a good thing for the human species. It allows people to communicate freely. It doesn't allow a corporation to violate your rights to speech. It doesn't allow Comcast to say "we don't support the 2nd amendment and gun rights, so we blocked http://www.waguns.org. If you disagree and think net neutrality is a bad thing, you are insane and there is no reason to speak with you.

Does the FCC plan, declaring internet providers are regulated under Title II, accomplish this? We don't know yet. Of the FCC's 332 page "plan", 8 pages of it is "Law" or "Regulation". The other 324 pages are response to the publics comments that were sent in. I sent in a comment asking for Net Neutrality legislation. Those 8 pages haven't been released for public review yet. Until they are released, and until the lawyers at a unbiased place like the EFF have a chance to read them, we won't know what they actually accomplish. Until Verizon files their lawsuit or Netflix files a lawsuit, we won't know if the laws accomplish Net Neutrality.

Why did the FCC have to do this? They already tried to keep the internet open by declaring ISP's were providing "Information services". This pissed Verizon off so they sued, and the supreme court said "FCC, you can't tell them they can't fuck up the internet because you didn't apply title II to them. You don't have the right to tell them they can't do what they were doing." So then Verizon was free to fuck shit up, which they did. So the FCC just applied Title II to them. Right now the large ISP's HATE Verizon. Verizon fucked up the good thing they had going by trying to go too far, and got bitch-slapped because of it.

What else could have happened instead? Congress, which is supposed to create laws, could have written some laws. Given the Republicans control both the House and the Senate, they could have easily written up laws that accomplish the goals of Net Neutrality, while ensuring the rest of the "government" couldn't fuck up the internet. Why didn't they? I would venture to guess because they are pawns of the corporations that want to fuck up the internet, mainly Comcast, Charter, Verizon etc, but that's just my speculation.

Hopefully the FCC's 8 pages of legislation are good, fair, and just. Hopefully it basically says "The internet must remain free and open, nobody can screw it up." The worst thing possible is if the nutjobs in the world try to use it to regulate the content on the internet, like banning pornography, cursing, and gun websites. Fuck those crazy asshats.

Fail... no tinfoil and too much fact ...

Also, needs more anti Obama rant. 1/10, too rational, will be ignored by most.

snozzberries wrote:
Hopefully the FCC's 8 pages of legislation are good, fair, and just. Hopefully it basically says "The internet must remain free and open, nobody can screw it up."

So why not let us take a peek then?

http://motherboard.vice.com/read/fcc-co ... ased-today

Because the Republican commissioners are holding it up.

Pablo wrote:

snozzberries wrote:
Hopefully the FCC's 8 pages of legislation are good, fair, and just. Hopefully it basically says "The internet must remain free and open, nobody can screw it up."

So why not let us take a peek then?

I read today that it's the GOP members of the FCC that are holding up release of the document (in an attempt to show their displeasure with it, they're refusing to send in their comments, which delays publication). Seems odd if that's true that the Demoncrats haven't said a word about it.

DocNugent wrote:

Pablo wrote:

snozzberries wrote:
Hopefully the FCC's 8 pages of legislation are good, fair, and just. Hopefully it basically says "The internet must remain free and open, nobody can screw it up."

So why not let us take a peek then?

I read today that it's the GOP members of the FCC that are holding up release of the document (in an attempt to show their displeasure with it, they're refusing to send in their comments, which delays publication). Seems odd if that's true that the Demoncrats haven't said a word about it.

lots of money involved here... literally this will bite into the planned windfall by comcast and other ISP's...

do you think they limit lobbying to one side? they pay both sides to try and win no matter what....

the republicans just happen to like their lobbyists better...

make no mistake this is not about the "people" but it's about big business getting a spanking for trying to take all the toys away for themselves and leaving scraps for the poor consumer...

let's stop arguing about the technicalities of the ruling, there's a time for that... let's argue about net neutrality as a whole...

XDM9cWA wrote:. . .let's stop arguing about the technicalities of the ruling, there's a time for that... let's argue about net neutrality as a whole...

Can't do that intelligently without the text.