https://wccftech.com/net-neutrality-abuses-timeline/
So here is a list of things that happened before net neutrality.
For example 2007 Pearl Jam was censored by AT&T.
2012 At&t blocked FaceTime.
Anyone remember these?
Repeal of Internet Neutrality. How will it affect surfers?
by Fisherman 49 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
faithnomore
So we are clear, there can only be so many R & D on the FCC commission Obama appointed Pia because there has to be a balance.
However Trump appointed him as Chairman.
the guy who pushed through the anti net neutrality stuff is an Obama appointee.
but watch the liberals run around screaming this is a Trump coup...even though he didn't do it.. -
hothabanero
@faithnomore: nope, and I don't care.
Your example only proves we don't need these regulations since the internet worked just fine in 2007.
The market will sort it out; it is always better than unnecessary regulations that Big Companies want to push onto us "for our benefit" (LOL).
If Hillary had won, we would have a bazillion laws on the books against "fake news" == censorship. Thanks god that didn't happen; instead we have FREE internet and LOWER taxes.
-
jws
The internet did not exist just fine until net neutrality. Which said the internet providers couldn't manipulate the market. They had to treat everybody fairly.
Without this, they can slow down sites if they want to. They can block sites if they want to.
Think that's not going to happen? Let's look at things that happened before this. From 2011-2013, AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile, and Verizon blocked mobile wallet sites competing with SoftCard (formerly named Isis). From 2007 to 2009, AT&T forced Apple to block Skype. AT&T was the first one to face a net-neutrality fine for limiting "unlimited" plans by reducing data speed rates.
Ajit Pai used to work for Verizon. He's where he is for one reason. To repeal it to make his corporate masters happy.
Obviously the non-thinking right-wingers love it like Morpheus and Hothabanero. But in today's climate, it might just be the right-wing sites that could be limited or blocked. These are big corporations and they may not tolerate the free speech of hateful sites like Brietbart, neo-nazi sites, etc. Or just right-wing sites in general. Because why? Because they're businesses. Businesses who are trying to sell their products to women, African Americans, Mexicans, the LGBTQ community, etc. Without net neutrality, they can say it hurts their business to give them a voice and poof! They're gone.
Just wait until a company wants to block or slow down Netflix because they have a competing video service. Just like the phone companies did with mobile wallet sites. And now the law says it's legal.
What you should be angry with is these giant corporations being given the power to choose the winners and losers. And despite what people in technology want, they went against it to serve their corporate masters.
-
_Morpheus
you can try to cast labels all you want, lets discuss facts and ideas openly.
The fcc said over and over that rolling back so called net neutrality laws wasnt a move to invite fraud or dishonest competition it was a move to MAKE CONGRESS LEGISLATE.
America isnt supposed to govern via regulation. America governs by laws. The fcc simply toom the position that they wernt entittled to make de facto laws above congress. The congress can and should enact laws that mimic the so called net neutrality laws, but they damn well should do it and not have an unelected agency do it. Let the elected congress who represent the people vote on laws.
-
jws
So what you're saying is net neutrality is a goal to be restored. Just how it came about is your issue?
That's a bit weak.
-
_Morpheus
Also, jws, refering to ajit pai as working for “his corporate masters” is HIGHLY racist and inappropriate! As a man of indian decent it is incredibly insensative to refer to white coprate heads of verizon (lowell mcadams, ceo chief among them) as his “masters” given the oppression of the indian people by the british.
I have to ask you to please remove that comment or at a minimum apologize. I will be PM’ing simon to have him review the remark fo see if it violates posting guidelines given its deeply racists nature.
-
_Morpheus
Yes, jws, the maner in which something is governed does indeed count, thank thor. The ends does not justify the means in our country. The fcc cannot make laws. They are not accountable to the people nor are they elected. Let the congress legislate and be accountable to the voters. If you want dictatorial rule fulltime student can make a hellva pitch for you to move to china or north korea. Im content where i am.
-
jws
I apologize if the term "corporate masters" has offended. I did not see it in the context of race. Most of congress and the senate are slaves to their corporate masters as studies have shown they don't vote with their constituent's wishes, but rather with the wishes of their donors. What do you call that.
And when Ajit Pai leaves the FCC, I'm sure there's going to be an awesome high-paying "thank you" position from Verizon. Or at the very least, he will be a high-paid lobbyist for them.
Perhaps "Corporate bosses" is more appropriate for you? Because he's certainly not working for the interests of the US citizenry.
-
jws
So, Morpheus, you must be SO disappointed with Trump right now and all of his executive orders, right? Because they're not going through the proper channels.
Obama averaged 34.5 executive orders/year. Trump is at 53 and hasn't even completed his first year yet. And Obama issued a few fewer than George W. Bush.