Trump kills net neutrality


#41

California demands to have Obama’s internet back. Is the southern half of the state still burning? Let’s hope.


#42

Repealing net neutrality allows for virtual hit lists. Imagine a service where you can pay to block someone else’s internet access. Then the only way in which they can regain their access is by paying more than was paid against them. This could just continue until the user was bankrupt or they gave up on their internet use.

This will of course inevitably create greater discrepancy between the economic classes. It could also be used against political dissidents. Say anyone who protests for BLM gets a $200 Comcast bounty and anyone who supports universal Healthcare gets a $500 Comcast bounty. I wonder if that is actually Trump’s ultimate goal with this decision. Complete and utter power over those who oppose him.

I think we need to hit the Republicans with a preliminary strike. Hopefully we can garner enough support to wipe out the internet access of the top officials. Unfortunately they’ll be able to cycle through aids to basically act as internet surrogates, but targeting each new aid as they appear will at least disrupt their organization. Of course, we’ll also need to keep a fund to outpay the bounties set against our own politicians. We’ll have to be strategic and only outbid based on some function of the bounty against them and their political capital. Our eventual goal of course will be to gain the necessary political clout to restore net neutrality and bring back peace to the land. There’s a long road ahead, but if we’re smart we’ll emerge victorious.


#43

Rather than complain about net neutrally where a business can make themselves successful by forcing an ISP to fork out for more capacity, you should be 1) yelling at local government who keep a lock on who occupies the last mile of telecom… and 2) be prepared for far more road congestion as competitors come in to break a government imposed monopoly. Who know, if we just let business fix this problem without government stumbling blocks, you just might see a whole new variation of Internet possibilities… Remember AT&T wouldn’t guarantee a messily 2.4kbs over its long haul before MCI showed up… and it didn’t take long for that to increase quietly to 56k… Government held telecom back in the US … decades…


#44

Is it possible to compete with current ISP’s as entrepreneurs?


#45

Ahhh , CNN speak again !!:laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing:
Overall, the 48 percent of voters familiar with the plan who support it is greater than the 37 percent who oppose it. Fifteen percent have no opinion about the proposal.
For now, the partisan split favors the GOP. More than three-quarters of Republicans, 78 percent, approve of the tax plan, while a smaller share of Democratic voters, 65 percent, disapprove. Independent voters are split: 38 percent approve, and 38 percent disapprove. Just numbers Stevie John the non-partisan .:wink::wink: :laughing::laughing::laughing:


#46

No, but just like the breakup of AT&T, you can blame states and local communities for only allowing select competitors in their areas… well that and the big competitors playing paddycake with government. The only thing that will take it to these companies is a disruptive technology that avoids the last mile… and gets the blessing of government… of course Net Neutrality has little to do with ISP’s competing with each other but the ‘fair access’ laws created that tied their hands sure did make companies like NetFlix a bundle…


#47

Baloney , no one wanted it to begin with, and now everyone wants it to stay? Your kidding right? It only benefit big corps.


#48

And we the small individual user will see our online speed crawl to a halt as large broadband purchasers like Netflix and other who employ streaming techniques will commandeer the online spectrum.


#49

Yea sure …


#50

If you were talking to me, I guess I need some detail to understand your comment