Join the battle for Net Neutrality! Don't let the FCC destroy the internet!

[Ridge]

Next month, the FCC will vote to overturn the Net Neutrality policies that help keep speech on the internet free. If this is overturned, the ISPs will have free reign to carve up the internet and sell it to you in packages like television.

Go here, put in your number, and be connected with your representatives in DC and let them know you want the internet to remain open and free!

https://www.battleforthenet.com/

[Bailey Guns]

Because screw the free market and capitalism, right? This is just another pet project of socialists and progressives. If you think "net neutrality" is a good thing, you're a fool.

[Singlestack]

+1. Couldn't agree more Bailey. Net neutrality is one of the pet projects of leftists to limit free speech.

[roberth]

Because screw the free market and capitalism, right? This is just another pet project of socialists and progressives. If you think "net neutrality" is a good thing, you're a fool.

Thank you!!

If anyone thinks that the gov't will provide better service at lower costs they should take a look at obamacare.

[Bailey Guns]

Exactly. Just like everything else socialist, net neutrality is designed to give everyone the same, crappy level of internet service and destroys incentives for providers to expand and improve infrastructure.

If you're a fan of net neutrality you believe the person who uses the internet to send a few emails and do a little online shopping should pay the same and have the same level of service as the person (or family) that frequently streams music and video and is constantly online. In both cases, one probably is paying for way more than what they need or use and the other doesn't have the option to pay for a higher level of service to meet their needs.

Socialism = making everyone miserable.

On the other hand, Ridge prompted me to email my rep's office to make sure he understands how I feel about this.

[roberth]

Exactly. Just like everything else socialist, net neutrality is designed to give everyone the same, crappy level of internet service and destroys incentives for providers to expand and improve infrastructure.

What country invented the 'net? The good ol' USA, where new ideas flourish if they meet the needs of the people. We have a HUGE national network built by companies meeting the desires of a consumer base (individuals and corporate) with money to spend on it.

Command economies like the USSR/China can't build anything like the 'net because there wasn't a reason to, no profit motive, there is no point to invent anything new because the potential consumers can't buy it anyway so the was no market for it. Inventions don't come out of coercive, restrictive societies unless we're talking about new ways to control people and destroy their hopes and aspirations.

[clodhopper]

What country invented the 'net? The good ol' USA, where new ideas flourish if they meet the needs of the people. We have a HUGE national network built by companies meeting the desires of a consumer base (individuals and corporate) with money to spend on it.

Command economies like the USSR/China can't build anything like the 'net because there wasn't a reason to, no profit motive, there is no point to invent anything new because the potential consumers can't buy it anyway so the was no market for it. Inventions don't come out of coercive, restrictive societies unless we're talking about new ways to control people and destroy their hopes and aspirations.

You do know the internet wasn't created to do all the Kardashian crap it does currently, right?

[CS1983]

I've not found much useful info on either side apart from hyperbolic, swirling invective... but, what I can deduce is basically lack of NN = ability of service providers to effectively engage in throttling or even blocking based on content rather than actual cost of delivery; that the excuse is cost of delivery does not mean that its obvious end game is content irrespective of cost. Similar to what twitter is apparently going to do, where they can suspend or deactivate one's account based on off-platform use, association, and/or behavior.

Violence: You may not make specific threats of violence or wish for the serious physical harm, death, or disease of an individual or group of people. This includes, but is not limited to, threatening or promoting terrorism. You also may not affiliate with organizations that — whether by their own statements or activity both on and off the platform — use or promote violence against civilians to further their causes. We will begin enforcing this rule around affiliation with such organizations on December 18, 2017.

https://support.twitter.com/articles/18311

I really don't see how one can hold to the rather new and novel idea about American ideals (read: Libertarians who are essentially historical revisionists as regards the Founding Fathers' intention) and at the same time oppose Net Neutrality, if NN not being imposed is really about content and not delivery cost.

The expressed fear of the Net Neutrality adherents is essentially that of content being restricted. What do the opponents of it say in order to meet that charge and show it as false?

On the contrary, https://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=229021

[roberth]

You do know the internet wasn't created to do all the Kardashian crap it does currently, right?

Of course I know the origination but that doesn't mean the same entity should manage it now.

[20X11]

I am a FIRM believer in free markets and capitalism. HOWEVER, in certain instances, like Public Utilities (Electricity, Cable TV, and yes even Internet access), companies have been granted monopolies or duopolies in most areas to provide those services. When consumers of electricity for instance are not given a choice on who to buy their power from, some form of regulation is necessary to level out the playing field. This is the case with Internet providers. My only REAL choice for high speed internet access is Comcast. They have a virtual monopoly on the bandwidth I require, and I do not want them determining what content I receive, nor do I want them to have the ability to offer the content they own (NBC, etc) at preferred cost or data rates. Capitalism works on a level playing field, but in this case, there is NOT a level playing field.