T1B

Moving Sale wrote:Nice white flag. Keep on pimping the Trumps of this world and wonder why you have no choice in service providers.

What? I have sever ISP choices. You are dumber than I could ever imagine.

How many?

schmick wrote:If liberals were half as smart as they thought they were they would be able to come up with a better way to argue their side of every subject than just calling the right side dumb.

Unfortunately for you this approach is correct 99 pct of the time.

It doesn't. Your vagina must be sore from the cunt punting I gave you the other day.

I figure that pretty much anyone backing the repeal is a weapons-grade moron. This thread is pure affirmation.

If rich people are for it 88,LS,fatboy,holic and the rest are down for it, as long as "liberals" are against it.
Bunch of fucking retards.

Papa Willie wrote:

Screw_Michigan wrote:It doesn't. Your vagina must be sore from the cunt punting I gave you the other day.

News to me? Where in the fuck did that happen?

Well, duh. In your cunt.

Moving Sale wrote:If rich people are for it 88,LS,fatboy,holic and the rest are down for it, as long as "liberals" are against it.
Bunch of fucking retards.

Reading isn’t easy for you is it.

Do tell.

88 wrote:Nothing to fear. I'm like the FCC, remember. Totally cool.

Yeah, you keep trotting out that line, moron.

I don’t really care one wit about the topic, so I haven’t done any research into the issue, but on the surface of it, seeing as the Left generally is adamantly opposed to what occurred this past week, I am reflexively and instinctively for it until convinced otherwise via sound logic displaying a lack of emotionally charged feelings (see: climate change, gun control, tax reform, healthcare, et al)

Rooster wrote:so I haven’t done any research into the issue

Wholly unsurprising

https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/arti ... ral-report

A core Republican talking point during the net neutrality battle was that, in 2015, President Obama led a government takeover of the internet, and Obama illegally bullied the independent Federal Communications Commission into adopting the rules. In this version of the story, Ajit Pai’s rollback of those rules Thursday is a return to the good old days, before the FCC was forced to adopt rules it never wanted in the first place.

“On express orders from the previous White House, the FCC scrapped the tried-and-true, light touch regulation of the Internet and replaced it with heavy-handed micromanagement,” Pai said Thursday prior to voting to repeal the regulations.

But internal FCC documents obtained by Motherboard using a Freedom of Information Act request show that the independent, nonpartisan FCC Office of Inspector General—acting on orders from Congressional Republicans—investigated the claim that Obama interfered with the FCC’s net neutrality process and found it was nonsense. This Republican narrative of net neutrality as an Obama-led takeover of the internet, then, was wholly refuted by an independent investigation and its findings were not made public prior to Thursday’s vote.

PS, go fuck yourself.

Alright, Screwy, I read your last post and beyond some questionable partisan tomfoolery— which may or may not be as objectionable as you are implying by giving us a link to some site —and don’t see just what the big deal is concerning NN. It’s not like we’re killing unborn babies here or anything. Or placing 1/6th of our economy under the control of Central Planning, err, Congress. Or claiming that tax reform is only going to help those awful rich people and corporations. Or that the seas will rise, the moon will turn blood red, and Wormwood will strike Earth to kill us all if we don’t do something immediately to save those starving polar bears and drowning Bangladeshis.

Whatever. Spoon feed me then. Tell me why my nonchalance about the web is a terrible thing.

Is this what you’re worried about, Screwy?

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2017/12/19/ ... s-say.html

“Alex Hawkins, a spokesperson for xHamster, told Life Site News the repeal would favor the promotion online of a “heteronormative version of sexuality.”

Exactly. Just wait till it takes you half an hour or more to download an 8-minute HD porn video. And Screwball has to pay extra for his Thai ladyboy porn. And Papa Willie's paying through the ass for bestiality.com.

Let's reverse this.

What if they passed a Burger Neutrality Act?

All fast food restaurants would have to serve you what you want........for a set price.

BK dude-welcome to burger king.

me-I'll take the 4 for 4 please. Make it a double whopper w/cheese, large fry, large vanilla shake and uhhhh, fukk, what else does that shithole serve? Fukk it, another double whopper.

BK-uhhhhhh, those items aren't on the 4F4 menu, sir.

me-why the fukk not?

I don't know who made this video, but they have pretty much delivered a roundhouse kick to their own ass that would make screwey proud.

The answer to this stupid fukking video is if a FF restaurant did that, they'd go out of bidness. Remember, not having NN doesn't require providers to act like that. It allows them to do what they want. This stupid fukking video implies that companies automatically will do it.

One other question for any BK franchise owners that might be out there.

What if MS came to your restaurant and said hi, I am hosting the 3th annual international internet board bitch symposium. I would like you to cater it. I'll need 500 whoppers, 500 large fries, 500 diet cokes and a happy meal (for you know who). What kind of deal can you give me?

Would you just bust out the calculator and figure it out using the listed menu price?

No, you wouldn't.

You would give a large customer a discount, just like everybody else in the history of the free market system does. The provider would have to figure out what it cost and how much markup he could get away with to keep you from going across the street to McD's. If you artificially gave him shit service, he'd never come back.

This system works, better than any other system yet devised. There are some cases such as utilities where multiple providers are not practical and there are regulatory systems in place to deal with this. NN doesn't fit into that category, with the possible exception of some rural areas. And those situations can be dealt with using existing regulatory systems run by the FTC, not FCC. NN wanted to have control over everything and put in place an all you can eat, set price policy.

smackaholic wrote:vanilla shake

Racist.

Ok, that got the chuckle out of me this morning. RACK you, smackaholic!

88 wrote:It should be some sort of really great, free thing that everyone gets and no one really pays for, like...

this board.



Thanks to whoever pays the freight.


:wink:

There are about 3 people in this thread who understand net neutrality. This isn't about how fast the Internet is at your home, that is already bifurcated and has been since we stopped using 56k modems and went to broadband technologies. Net neutrality is about ISPs treating all traffic on its network equally AT THE RATE THE CUSTOMER PAID FOR. If you can't understand this simple concept, STFU.

It's also not about forcing all ISPs to charge the same set rates, which dumassaholic seems to think.

smackaholic wrote:I don't know who made this video, but they have pretty much delivered a roundhouse kick to their own ass that would make screwey proud.

Uh...Burger King made the video. So who has just KTOA here?

And of course, as usualm, you're waaayyyy too dense to get the point.

If BK tried this, obviously they'd go out of business, because their customers could go next door to McDonalds, Wendy's, Hardee's or whatever. It's called competition. I'm pretty sure they won't be trying anything like this in any of their stores.

If I don't like the cable ISP service I'm getting from Spectrum I can switch to DSL, which is about 1/10th the speed. Spectrum has an exclusive franchise on the cable service in my area and I don't have a choice. That's called not competition. You get the difference, I assume (maybe I shouldn't).

88 wrote:
What your Burger King video suggests is that the internet ought not to be operated like all other businesses.

You mean like free and open competition?
Which internet service is operated like that?

BSmack wrote:There are about 3 people in this thread who understand net neutrality. This isn't about how fast the Internet is at your home, that is already bifurcated and has been since we stopped using 56k modems and went to broadband technologies. Net neutrality is about ISPs treating all traffic on its network equally AT THE RATE THE CUSTOMER PAID FOR. If you can't understand this simple concept, STFU.

B, I understand your concern. I just think we have different philosophies on how to address it.


I come from a libertarian way of looking at it which is more concerned with the affect of heavy handed gubmint regulators than I am some provider throttling back my HD pronhub feed. Let me worry about the latter. I have a mechanism to deal with it. It’s called firing them.

As I said earlier, if I had the misfortune of being ‘spray’s neighbor and my only choice was billy bob’s ISP/power washing/small engine repair LLC. , NN might be helpful. If NN dealt solely with such situations, it might have merit. But it was for the entire inter web.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Mikey wrote:

88 wrote:
What your Burger King video suggests is that the internet ought not to be operated like all other businesses.

You mean like free and open competition?
Which internet service is operated like that?

Do you not have more than one ISP option?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

smackaholic wrote:Do you not have more than one ISP option?

Most people outside of major cities only have one or two broadband options. In many rural areas the best people can do is single pair dsl at 6Mbps by 1Mbps.

smackaholic wrote:

Mikey wrote:

88 wrote:
What your Burger King video suggests is that the internet ought not to be operated like all other businesses.

You mean like free and open competition?
Which internet service is operated like that?

Do you not have more than one ISP option?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I have Time Warner (Spectrum) cable, which I think offers up to 100 mbps or DSL from AT&T, which maxes out at about 10. Not even sure if I can get DSL. Last time I checked about 10 years ago I was too far from the "central office" and it was not available at my house. My other choice is virtual hotspot over my phone from Sprint, which is not an option.

So once again suckaholic is speaking authoritatively on a subject he knows little about. Shocking.

Goober McTuber wrote:So once again suckaholic is speaking authoritatively on a subject he knows little about. Shocking.

It is the Connecticut in him speaking. He can't comprehend a place where there aren't at least 4 of everything.

BSmack wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote:So once again suckaholic is speaking authoritatively on a subject he knows little about. Shocking.

It is the Connecticut in him speaking. He can't comprehend a place where there aren't at least 4 of everything.

Including four guys named Dre on the corner selling percocets?

88 wrote: you will search for an alternative ISP that does not do that. It is how markets work.

You're not following along very well, are you?

Mikey wrote:

88 wrote: you will search for an alternative ISP that does not do that. It is how markets work.

You're not following along very well, are you?

Leave him alone. He's busy shopping for a cheaper electrical utility.

Not sure what that website is supposed to tell me.

I basically have Time Warner Cable or nothing.

92028

Cox doesn’t serve our area. Like I said, Spectrum has the cable franchise. We don’t have fiber here. The fastest AT&T or Dish available is 10 mbps and I’m not sure we can even get AT&T because the CO is too far away. Last time I checked we could not. 10 is way too slow anyway.

Any more awesome insights?

There's two providers in The Gump.

They're both shit, before and after the repeal.

One of the arguments I have heard against NN is that it discourages the startup of new providers.

Lets say cox is the only ISP in your neighborhood. If they continue to put a kink in your pronhub feed, eventually someone will recognize this disservice and offer an alternative.

I guess a good analogy would be healfcare.

It is highly regulated and for most all of us, our provider is whoeverthefukk our employer says it is.

The result is expensive, sometimes shitty service. And what the fukk can you do about it?

Nothing.

88,

Some website trying to parse providers out by ZIP code is not going to negate the arguments of people actually on the ground.

For example I'm sure if you looked at my ZIP code you would see Greenlight as an option. The problem is is that the people in my ZIP code who get green light are on the other side of the fucking railroad tracks. And there are no plans to put fiber on this side of town. And even on the other side of town the fiber distribution is literally on a block by block basis. The rest of the people in our town who do not have access to the fiber are guaranteed only two options a shitty ass DSL connection that doesn't even meet current standards for broadband or a cable modem connection.

88 wrote:

Mikey wrote:Not sure what that website is supposed to tell me.

I basically have Time Warner Cable or nothing.

92028

Not sure why. Homeowners association requirement or something?

https://internetprovidersbyzip.com/zipcode/92028

If there is a corporate cock to be sucked 88 is always right there to suck it.

88,

Is not about income, it is about density of population, and of usership. The houses on my side of the railroad tracks are more spread out and therefore do not afford the population density that the local fiber company is looking for to maximize their profit.

The houses is on the other side of the tracks, where I used to live, are older turn of the 20th century varieties that were built for immigrant railroad workers who worked at the local New York Central railroad car manufacturing plant. Incomes aren't really that different on either side of the tracks but they can get more out of a block over there. Not for nothing but the county installed the fiber years ago that they're working off of. So my tax dollars already went into that so pardon me if I'd like to actually have some of it for myself.