• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

The open internet ends today!

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Rubycon said:
Oh yeah men do that and I know.
I used to be fairly bad myself particularly around complex machinery and (glub!) computers.

I then had a friend that had an African Grey (parrot) and because of my colorful metaphors the bird would spew them when someone would open a laptop nearby! :$

Think Dottie Hinkle and Beverly Sutphin in Serial Mom type cursing. :whiste:

Apparently the guys/dudes treat their porn like their own "junk". Taking that away sounds like serious business. Just plastering it all over the net is bad. Keep it under control. I mean how would you feel if every (guy) had to walk around in public with his junk hanging out, swinging back and forth but the women had to be completely covered up? Ok that's ridiculous but you get the idea... (the women may not mind but how often do you hear of spam with naked Brad Pitt pics?) 😛
Click to expand...

Women covered up is a bad idea, that's all i have to say on the subject of that... 😛

I suppose that since i can't reach all that many pages and the blocking works very well here i don't see porn everywhere, if i did i'd get bored with it i suppose.
 
Passed. This keep the internet open, allows providers to use reasonable network management to ensure all applications have top performance and bans any anti-competitive behavior.
 
spidey07 said:
Passed. This keep the internet open, allows providers to use reasonable network management to ensure all applications have top performance and bans any anti-competitive behavior.
Click to expand...

I have one simple rule. If you are for it, its bad for internet customers like me.
 
Throckmorton said:
My head is spinning. Are Republicans for or against net neutrality?
Click to expand...
It depends on the definition of net neutrality. Apparently everyone likes to twist it around for what they think it should mean. To some it means the networks can discriminate and manage traffic, to others it doesn't.
 
Throckmorton said:
The Fox News spin is mind boggling. They make it sound like net neutrality is somehow a bad thing http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...et-regulation-plan-despite-economic-warnings/
Click to expand...
So we are adopting a ban on unreasonable discrimination.


So, for example, the order rules make clear that broadband providers can engage in “reasonable network management”
Click to expand...


What is considered reasonable and unreasonable though?? And who gets to decide? This is very important.

From OT. That's potential problem with it. Without seeing the full regulation it's hard to say what can happen.
 
Fox is arguing that net neutrality is bad because it's "government regulation for a problem that doesn't exist". It's partisan anti-consumer BS.
 
The providers get to decide. Afterall we spent the money to build the network and we ARE going to do what is necessary to provide top quality service to all our customers. The providers are the ones that get to decide what is reasonable, as well they should be. It's their network, they paid for it and they have millions of customers to take care of for a next generation Internet experience.
 
Throckmorton said:
If it's a problem that doesn't exist, then why do you care about net neutrality regulations?

It's like saying "I don't murder anybody but I oppose laws against murders because it's a problem that doesn't exist".
Click to expand...

Because I need to make sure the FCC doesn't send the internet back to the dark ages and prevent me from advancing it.
 
Throckmorton said:
If it's a problem that doesn't exist, then why do you care about net neutrality regulations?

It's like saying "I don't murder anybody but I oppose laws against murders because it's a problem that doesn't exist".
Click to expand...

Logic fail.

The regulations that some want passed to "fix" the problem that doesn't exist will cause providers to have to deal with other issues that also don't currently exist.
 
How are they going to enforce these rules the FCC plans on passing, and how much extra in FCC Internet Usage Tax will you be paying for said enforcement.

Yes, You will pay for anything the government does one way or another.

On a side note, the USA could block all internet traffic coming into the USA and Leaving, but do we really want this?

How will I get the recipe for C4 and directions for making my pipe bombs, Says the terrorist nearest you.

I was growing Castor Bean Plants in my back yard this year. They look really nice when they bloom at over 6 foot tall. This is the plant they make Ricin from. They are also suppose to repel misquitos.

Just dont block my free interent TV and Movies.
 
Last edited:
That BBC article linked is the only one I've seen that says paid-for prioritization would be legal. Every other article (Fox, CNN, etc) states that paid prioritization was explicitly pointed out as "unreasonable network management" and thus prohibited.
 
piasabird said:
How are they going to enforce these rules the FCC plans on passing, and how much extra in FCC Internet Usage Tax will you be paying for said enforcement.

Yes, You will pay for anything the government does one way or another.

On a side note, the USA could block all internet traffic coming into the USA and Leaving, but do we really want this?

How will I get the recipe for C4 and directions for making my pipe bombs, Says the terrorist nearest you.

I was growing Castor Bean Plants in my back yard this year. They look really nice when they bloom at over 6 foot tall. This is the plant they make Ricin from. They are also suppose to repel misquitos.

Just dont block my free interent TV and Movies.
Click to expand...
Finally someone is starting to touch on the core of the matter. It's more government intervention. Like we need more of that. It has great potential to not end well.

I'm guessing, if Congress upholds this ruling, that some more agencies will need to be formed. These agencies will need to be funded. With agencies comes lobbyists. Then, sometime in the near future these agencies will reach a point where they must actually do something to justify their existence. I'm thinking there's a good possibility we may not like what they come up with.

The FCC decision was a vote between Democrats and Republicans on the FCC board. Three Democrats and two Republicans. So, this is a political decision. Someday the power may shift. Someday the board may become overweighted to an even greater degree favoring one party. Someday we might have a "crisis".

Think ahead kiddies. Quit looking at things in the here and now.
 
Nationalize all ISPs and backbones, it is the only way to ensure free public access to the internet for citizens, since it is our right to be online. We can pay for it by increasing the taxes on the wealthiest of Americans.

Also, once the backbones and ISPs are fully under the control of the people, and not greedy corporations, not only can we ensure net neutrality, but we can also decrease child pornography using special filtering technology once the we (the people) control access to all information.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top