Ted Cruz goes full retard: Net Neutrality is Obamacare for Internet

[fskimospy]

Yup. Really stupid people. Cars were once thought to be a luxury, not a necessity. Same with electricity and phone. Let's see ol' Biffy live without those today. If the people back then hadn't had the government step in they would have been left behind while the rest of the country flourished. My grandparents (both sides) lived on and operated farms back then. They praised FDR for bringing power and phone services into their lives.

Biffy needs to stop believing politicians when they say that government can't so something like this because history shows that they can and they did so successfully. It's his politicians who have failed him, not the government.

I always find it odd that conservatives simultaneously fetishize the constitution AND argue that the US government is uniquely incompetent compared to other governments. If that's the case, it sounds like the constitution sucks because it has made a government that sucks.

Odd to love a document so much that has led to a government you hate so much.

 

[BoberFett]

Well I just checked the latest dungeon masters guide and in Libertopia the magical "Utility Easements of Holding" can support 100's of cables in the same place.

Strawmen and hyperbole from Democrat fuckstains such as yourself sure get old quickly.

 

[BoberFett]

I always find it odd that conservatives simultaneously fetishize the constitution AND argue that the US government is uniquely incompetent compared to other governments. If that's the case, it sounds like the constitution sucks because it has made a government that sucks.

Odd to love a document so much that has led to a government you hate so much.

I'm sure that has nothing to do with the fact that the Constitution has been stretched beyond any reasonable understanding of it's intent when power hungry pricks in Washington feel it was politically expedient.

And don't bother trying to tell me the Commerce Clause hasn't been abused in your usual condescending tone. Any reasonable person can see that it has, and only a political hack would defend the federal usurpation of power based on the fact that a butterfly farting in the woods could cause a stock market crash, therefore the feds can control the sale of silk.

 

[Paratus]

I have one box on the side of my house, to change from Comcast to Uverse or vice versa would require unplugging one ethernet connector and plugging in the other ethernet connector.

I have two boxes in the side of my house. One for Verizon and one for Comcast. I also have a Comcast cable box sticking out of my backyard in my utility easement along with a power transformer from the power company.

I am not going to have a cable box from COX, Charter, Time Warner,etc.

I get my power from from multiple companies through a single line, I don't see why Internet has to be different.

 

[fskimospy]

I'm sure that has nothing to do with the fact that the Constitution has been stretched beyond any reasonable understanding of it's intent when power hungry pricks in Washington feel it was politically expedient.

And don't bother trying to tell me the Commerce Clause hasn't been abused in your usual condescending tone. Any reasonable person can see that it has, and only a political hack would defend the federal usurpation of power based on the fact that a butterfly farting in the woods could cause a stock market crash, therefore the feds can control the sale of silk.

Wait, so your argument is that the U.S. government is uniquely incompetent because we haven't enforced a restriction that many other countries don't have at all stringently enough?

I'm confused.

 

[fskimospy]

I have two boxes in the side of my house. One for Verizon and one for Comcast. I also have a Comcast cable box sticking out of my backyard in my utility easement along with a power transformer from the power company.

I am not going to have a cable box from COX, Charter, Time Warner,etc.

I get my power from from multiple companies through a single line, I don't see why Internet has to be different.

Not to mention that running five separate fiber networks under densely populated places is not going to happen.

 

[Paratus]

Strawmen and hyperbole from Democrat fuckstains such as yourself sure get old quickly.

Damn Bober you got a turd crosswise this morning?

If my admittedly over the top post pissed you off i'll refraise.

Home internet, (Google wireless not withstanding), currently requires cables. I'm not aware of any of the major ISPs being required to share their cables with other major ISPs. So if we removed all the government regulations as Ducati suggested and we assume that spurs competition how do I get that competition at my house?

Running 3 more cables to every home to have competition makes no sense. I don't want 3 more cables run to my home nor have 3 more boxes in my utility easement.

Cables Internet has huge physical barriers to entry that have nothing to do with telecommunication regulations.

I can pick from at least 15 power providers and I don't have 15 different grids serving my house, Internet competition should be the same.

 

[xBiffx]

You wrote the lessons from other places apply here. If you meant something else, please clarify.

No I didn't, you did.

Gotcha, so your argument is that the US government is uniquely inept.

See what I mean.

Continue trying to argue against something I never said. Enjoy yourself.

 

[doubledeluxe]

Sorry but I've been in the middle of nowhere near the north pole and still had broadband access and 4g.

If we wanted proper internet we would have it.

Where we fail is having multiple companies creating multiple networks rather than just running the same cable and sharing it.

 

[fskimospy]

No I didn't, you did.

So please clarify.

See what I mean.

Continue trying to argue against something I never said. Enjoy yourself.

If the US government is not less capable than the British Parliament then kindly explain why the distinction matters.

I'm just trying to understand what your argument even is. You appear to be trying to cover up how nonsensical it is by being vague.

 

[xBiffx]

So please clarify.



If the US government is not less capable than the British Parliament then kindly explain why the distinction matters.

I'm just trying to understand what your argument even is. You appear to be trying to cover up how nonsensical it is by being vague.

I'm not comparing apples to oranges and trying to determine which is better at driving a car. Sorry, not gonna do it.

 

[fskimospy]

I'm not comparing apples to oranges and trying to determine which is better at driving a car. Sorry, not gonna do it.

Is your argument that policy effects cannot be compared between countries? I would hope not, as that would be a position at odds with a lot of empirical evidence. If not, what is your argument? Please be as specific as possible.

I've asked you repeatedly to clarify your position. Not sure why that's so hard.

 

[xBiffx]

Is your argument that policy effects cannot be compared between countries? I would hope not, as that would be a position at odds with a lot of empirical evidence. If not, what is your argument? Please be as specific as possible.

I've asked you repeatedly to clarify your position. Not sure why that's so hard.

No, you are having a hard time accepting my position. You already know what it is. My OP on the subject was non ambiguous. Don't like it, fine. We'll agree to disagree then. Not sure why that's so hard.

I fully understand your position although I don't agree with it. But its OK because I can keep on living with the realization that we don't agree and aren't going to change that or fix everything here.

 

[fskimospy]

No, you are having a hard time accepting my position. You already know what it is. My OP on the subject was non ambiguous. Don't like it, fine. We'll agree to disagree then. Not sure why that's so hard.

I fully understand your position although I don't agree with it. But its OK because I can keep on living with the realization that we don't agree and aren't going to change that or fix everything here.

I do not fully understand your position. Please explain it.

 

[xBiffx]

I do not fully understand your position. Please explain it.

You've understood enough apparently to comment on it numerous times and tell me how wrong I am. Why would anyone want to subject themselves to more of the same?

 

[Engineer]

I do not fully understand your position. Please explain it.

I told you. You're wasting your time, lol!

 

[fskimospy]

You've understood enough apparently to comment on it numerous times and tell me how wrong I am. Why would anyone want to subject themselves to more of the same?

You claimed I was misrepresenting your position. As I did not intend to do that, it's clear that I did not fully understand what your position was.

I would like to remedy that so again, please fully explain your position.

 

[xBiffx]

I told you. You're wasting your time, lol!

You, on the other hand, have made exemplary use of yours. :whiste:

 

[piasabird]

What will happen is the government will just write a bunch of legislation to control the minions and the Cable TV industry would probably write the legislation so they can continue to control the little people and make billions off of poor people. The Internet works fine without the government.

 

[theeedude]

What will happen is the government will just write a bunch of legislation to control the minions and the Cable TV industry would probably write the legislation so they can continue to control the little people and make billions off of poor people. The Internet works fine without the government.

Government created the internet.

 

[doubledeluxe]

Looking at data from the OECD

Average internet speed is 10.5 Mbps
We rank 30/33 for the most expensive internet above 45Mbps

Deregulate the internet. Allow the ISP's to stiffle competition. And now they're really trying to go the extra mile. Woohoo!

 

[frostedflakes]

You actually can already get fiber depending on where you live, they are installing right now. Couple friends already have it, and I see crews out there installing daily. I just have to wait for my neighborhood.

Funny thing is where I live there's actually a local rural electric coop that recently started offering FTTH up to 100Mbps outside city limits. Inside the city however it's a different (municipal) power company and fastest option we have here is 50Mbps cable that costs more than the 100Mbps outside the city lol.

There are a lot of municipalities and utilities/coops starting to roll out FTTH, it's pretty exciting times. Plus Google's getting into the game now and will hopefully light a fire up under the incumbent cablecos/telcos and/or encourage others to throw their hat in the ring as well. It's not as dark of a picture for broadband in the US as some people try to paint IMO.

so right now

you pay for Comcast internet

you pay for Netflix

Comcast charges Netflix for consuming bandwidth, the bandwidth you aalready paid for

Netflix in reponse raises your rate

so you are paying for the bandwidth twice, and Comcast is getting paid for it 3 times, while providing it once


Comcast charges me 55 bucks a month for bandwidth, they shouldn't they try and charge the other end of my connections for it..

if you cant see why this is an assault on the internet, then I cannot help you.

Except Comcast/Netflix thing isn't even a net neutrality issue. Have to hand it to Netflix, though, they've done an excellent job of spinning a complicated and difficult to understand issue to the less informed public to make themselves look like the victim and Comcast look like the bad guy. When in reality it just boils down to Netflix trying to take advantage of peering arrangements (where conventionally both parties send/receive relatively equal amounts of data, nobody charges anybody and everyone benefits and is happy; one party doesn't dump a ton more traffic on the other and then expect to not have to pay for the interconnect).

http://www.cnet.com/news/comcast-vs-netflix-is-this-really-about-net-neutrality/

 

[BoomerD]

Funny thing is where I live there's actually a local rural electric coop that recently started offering FTTH up to 100Mbps outside city limits. Inside the city however it's a different (municipal) power company and fastest option we have here is 50Mbps cable that costs more than the 100Mbps outside the city lol.

There are a lot of municipalities and utilities/coops starting to roll out FTTH, it's pretty exciting times. Plus Google's getting into the game now and will hopefully light a fire up under the incumbent cablecos/telcos and/or encourage others to throw their hat in the ring as well. It's not as dark of a picture for broadband in the US as some people try to paint IMO.


Except Comcast/Netflix thing isn't even a net neutrality issue. Have to hand it to Netflix, though, they've done an excellent job of spinning a complicated and difficult to understand issue to the less informed public to make themselves look like the victim and Comcast look like the bad guy. When in reality it just boils down to Netflix trying to take advantage of peering arrangements (where conventionally both parties send/receive relatively equal amounts of data, nobody charges anybody and everyone benefits and is happy; one party doesn't dump a ton more traffic on the other and then expect to not have to pay for the interconnect).

http://www.cnet.com/news/comcast-vs-netflix-is-this-really-about-net-neutrality/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f99PcP0aFNE

 

[michal1980]

Sorry but I've been in the middle of nowhere near the north pole and still had broadband access and 4g.

If we wanted proper internet we would have it.

Where we fail is having multiple companies creating multiple networks rather than just running the same cable and sharing it.

We dont even allow that because of government.

 

[doubledeluxe]

We dont even allow that because of government.

We deregulated. Government has allowed the ISP's do pretty much do what they want.