Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

Morning Legal Briefs

View
5 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 ] Older >

5. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Dec 24, 2010, 01:38 Nucas
 
the republican party represents corporate self interest; fox news convinces the public their interests are actually served by voting in favor of actions that serve those ends, often at public expense. it's a beautiful cycle of corruption. see: inbred 'conservatives' making less than 20,000 dollars who live in trailers voting against "obamacare".  
Avatar 49584
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
4. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Dec 23, 2010, 16:20 Cutter
 
Is there no limit to Republican whoremongering?
 
Avatar 25394
 
"Bye weeks? Bronko Nagurski didn't get no bye weeks, and now he's deadů Well, maybe they're a good thing." - Moe
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
3. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Dec 23, 2010, 14:29 Draugr
 
Creston wrote on Dec 23, 2010, 12:09:
All Net Neutrality has to do is two things :

1) Prohibit carriers from speed-discriminating based on content. (the very HEART of the word Net Neutrality.)

2) Prohibit carriers from erecting toll booths based on content preference. Ie, the "if you want Youtube, you gotta pay 20 bucks a month for it" deal.

Carriers whine and bitch that #2 will "stifle innovation", but it doesn't do anything like that. They are still free to offer their own versions of Youtube and iTunes and whatever. But then they'd have to compete on quality, which they don't want to do; they'd much rather "compete" by making their site load quickly, and by switching all Youtube traffic to a 19k2 baud modem. And that is fucking horseshit.

This was all the FCC needed to do.

Creston

Couldn't agree more. Sadly, that really wouldn't benefiet corporations, and lord knows the lobbying on the other side would be nothing compared to it, so naturally the spin machine comes out so suckers can complain about all the wrong stuff once again. People love telling narratives about how the government needs to be less involved, this shows exactly why we need government with that capability, but of course all we'll hear about it

"OUR POOR BUSINESSES, WE SHOULD BE LETTING THEM GIVE IT TO US UP THE TAILPIPE. OTHERWISE IT WILL STIFLE INNOVATION THEY MIGHT GO TO SOME SHIT-HOLE COUNTRY WHERE THEY DO GET TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF OTHERS."
If thats the case, good riddance I say.

This is an example of why having capable government is a good idea, and not just a government that protects business interests, which is what some would like to think is the governments job.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
2. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Dec 23, 2010, 13:36 Wallshadows
 
Most pirated and the highest grossing film of all time?

Wait...
 
Avatar 50040
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
1. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Dec 23, 2010, 12:09 Creston
 
All Net Neutrality has to do is two things :

1) Prohibit carriers from speed-discriminating based on content. (the very HEART of the word Net Neutrality.)

2) Prohibit carriers from erecting toll booths based on content preference. Ie, the "if you want Youtube, you gotta pay 20 bucks a month for it" deal.

Carriers whine and bitch that #2 will "stifle innovation", but it doesn't do anything like that. They are still free to offer their own versions of Youtube and iTunes and whatever. But then they'd have to compete on quality, which they don't want to do; they'd much rather "compete" by making their site load quickly, and by switching all Youtube traffic to a 19k2 baud modem. And that is fucking horseshit.

This was all the FCC needed to do.

Creston
 
Avatar 15604
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
5 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo