F.C.C. Repeals Net Neutrality Rules on the USA

[Navonod]

Just going to leave this here.

Spoiler

 

[SoslanVanWieren]

The US is the 3rd largest portion of all internet users. The world will be affected. Why do you think gbatemp staff care about it. Look how many of us there are here.

alot of websites are also based in the us so no matter where you live smaller sites based in the us will still be slowed down.

 

[FAST6191]

They didn't do this prior to 2015 and the cases of throttling that was found with AT&T a few years back was called out. Also it has to do with the fact with being contrarian because people and sites were shilling for this so hard all over the internet

Bandwidth demands are only increasing (it seems everybody and their mother has discovered streaming videos in all its glory) so I doubt that would hold. Equally we have seen all sorts of underhanded things in other communications mediums over the decades. Equally if it was going to be a thing they did anyway then why not enshrine it in law? No change at the end of the day after all.

People and sites were plumping for it because it is generally considered a good idea (I still fail to see how a general tenet of treat all traffic neutrally over your backbones and delivery is a bad thing). I am still open to hearing how them being as they were was impeding the march of progress however.

 

[igpltv]

Now let's watch Pai make a total ass of himself.

 

[YeezusWalks]

there's the flame war... was wondering where it was... But it's here now!

 

[deinonychus71]

I'll wait to see the actual implications before being too toxic about it.

However something for sure, there should have been a public hearing in this case. It made enough noise for it to happen. Plus some senators were barely respectful to these people, while claiming this repel is for the people...

But I'm not surprised. The US is barely a democracy, where the left wing is completely absent/demonized in profit of the right wing (democrats) and extreme right (republicans).

As long as companies like Comcast won't have competitors in some regions, they'll be able to pull whatever shit they want, add whatever lines of code they want to your sites, and all those criticizing governement regulations and defending outdated constitutions will be kings.

 

[MaverickWellington]

I'll wait to see the actual implications before being too toxic about it.

However something for sure, there should have been a public hearing in this case. It made enough noise for it to happen. Plus some senators were barely respectful to these people, while claiming this repel is for the people...

But I'm not surprised. The US is barely a democracy, where the left wing is completely absent/demonized in profit of the right wing (democrats) and extreme right (republicans).

As long as companies like Comcast won't have competitors in some regions, they'll be able to pull whatever shit they want, add whatever lines of code they want to your sites, and all those criticizing governement regulations and defending outdated constitutions will be kings.

There wasn't a public hearing because the public, as hard as it is of a pill to swallow, is just not informed enough to make rational decisions on the topic, or in the debate. We've had bomb threats, people threatening to kill Pai, and so on. I don't know about you but I personally don't trust these kinds of people to make any arguments for me, or against me. I'd rather take my chances with my congressman.

 

[Navonod]

There wasn't a public hearing because the public, as hard as it is of a pill to swallow, is just not informed enough to make rational decisions on the topic, or in the debate. We've had bomb threats, people threatening to kill Pai, and so on. I don't know about you but I personally don't trust these kinds of people to make any arguments for me, or against me. I'd rather take my chances with my congressman.

Those are empty threats. Besides that I haven't seen you make a "good" argument either. I wouldn't put to much trust in our congressman. That's stupid. You're still letting people argue for you.

 

[TotalInsanity4]

There wasn't a public hearing because the public, as hard as it is of a pill to swallow, is just not informed enough to make rational decisions on the topic, or in the debate. We've had bomb threats, people threatening to kill Pai, and so on. I don't know about you but I personally don't trust these kinds of people to make any arguments for me, or against me. I'd rather take my chances with my congressman.

Wouldn't a public hearing, where the council could acknowledge misconceptions and defend their bill, be the most effective way of combating public misconception?

 

[MaverickWellington]

Those are empty threats. Besides that I haven't seen you make a "good" argument either. I wouldn't put to much trust in our congressman. That's stupid. You're still letting people argue for you.

"I haven't seen you make a good argument"
said to the guy who said he would trust his Congressman to handle that shit for me. Yes. Thank you for establishing what I said.

I'm gonna put the trust in the people whose job it is to handle this kind of retarded legal jargon while I sit back and enjoy my video games. I wouldn't trust him to manage my base in C&C Generals, and he wouldn't trust me to represent my state. I don't see what the issue with this is. I'm one person, and my personal needs may align with the needs of the people, but they do not define it. I think it'd be more stupid to pretend I myself as a singular person am fit to decide for millions of people based solely on my personal preferences and not the arguments presented. Fuck that.

 

[dpad_5678]

 

[MaverickWellington]

Wouldn't a public hearing, where the council could acknowledge misconceptions and defend their bill, be the most effective way of combating public misconception?

Given this thread and the other thread, not at all. Public debate demonstrates one's level of brainwashing, it does not always undo it. As Razorfist put it, you're not going to ever undo 2+ years of bullshit in five minutes.

 

[Navonod]

"I haven't seen you make a good argument"
said to the guy who said he would trust his Congressman to handle that shit for me. Yes. Thank you for establishing what I said.

I'm gonna put the trust in the people whose job it is to handle this kind of retarded legal jargon while I sit back and enjoy my video games. I wouldn't trust him to manage my base in C&C Generals, and he wouldn't trust me to represent my state. I don't see what the issue with this is. I'm one person, and my personal needs may align with the needs of the people, but they do not define it. I think it'd be more stupid to pretend I myself as a singular person am fit to decide for millions of people based solely on my personal preferences and not the arguments presented. Fuck that.

If you were sitting back enjoying video games you wouldn't be here arguing about Net Neutrality and about who's right and who's wrong. lol

 

[TotalInsanity4]

Given this thread and the other thread, not at all. Public debate demonstrates one's level of brainwashing, it does not always undo it. As Razorfist put it, you're not going to ever undo 2+ years of bullshit in five minutes.

I've never seen a decent public hearing that didn't last a few hours at least.

I mean I get what you're saying, but I feel like the lack of public involvement when there was so much focus on this particular topic is part of what fueled the situation in the first place

 

[HamBone41801]

did anyone ever make the "list of dicks thread"? I've got a few names for it.

 

[KingVamp]

In this case, just because the general public might be a bit misinformed, doesn't make repealing Net Neutrality right.

Then there's the people who keep trying to make this a "liberal" issue when even some people from the opposing side disagree with the repeal.

 

[Bladexdsl]

petrol might be expensive, electricity, water, meat and gas prices are sky rocketing...but hey we can download and do whatever the fuck we want on the internet our ISP's do't give a shit as long as they get their subscriber $. now if you'll excuse me i have to go download the new star wars movie off usenet

 

[deinonychus71]

There wasn't a public hearing because the public, as hard as it is of a pill to swallow, is just not informed enough to make rational decisions on the topic, or in the debate. We've had bomb threats, people threatening to kill Pai, and so on. I don't know about you but I personally don't trust these kinds of people to make any arguments for me, or against me. I'd rather take my chances with my congressman.

You can not use the stupidity of a minority to completely shut off everyone of a debate by insinuating everyone is just as bad. It's dishonest. That's not how it works in a civilized world. Same wise, That there are a minority of feminist extremists does not mean that feminism in general isn't a cause worth fighting for.

Also, It doesn't matter whether the public is well informed or not. They work for the people. If they think the "people" are wrong, they confront some of them (the loudest, respectful voices) and debate with them, and yes, potentially debunk misconceptions.
But mocking them? No. I'm sorry. By principle, they won't get my support for that.

If they're that confident in their cause, they should have no problem debunking misconceptions.
Honestly? Even after watching the session (part of it, I was at work), I don't see what are the benefits for me, but I do see some potential issues.
I'm obviously not alone in this case. They kept saying they're doing it for the people, but have yet to convince "us" of the benefits of the repeal. And mocking people won't help making it look like it's not yet another attempt at screwing with Obama's legacy for the sake of it.

 

[the_randomizer]

Well, I'm done with this shit, ciao.

 

[WeedZ]

@MaverickWellington you are the perfect example for you're arguement. But you're still wrong. If a representative is making a decision against the wishes of the majority of his constituents, he's not really a representative, is he?