|William Burns - 2017-03-17 |
Something Obama, Hillary and Trump all agreed on!
"With a federal court upholding his administration’s sweeping net neutrality rules on Tuesday, President Barack Obama is poised to fulfill a promise he made when he first ran for the White House — to use the power of the office to keep the internet a “level playing field” for everyone.
"The decision, if it holds up to an expected appeal by the telecom industry, means Obama has put his stamp on the internet in a way few political figures have. On his watch, the FCC has declared it will ensure equal footing for everyone from high-school coders to the giants of Silicon Valley. The aim: to guarantee every internet user has the chance to speak freely online and shake up the digital economy just as Netflix and Amazon once did."
"Hillary Clinton has indicated support for net neutrality. She gave two thumbs up to FCC chairman Tom Wheeler’s proposal for strong net neutrality rules, though admitted it was only a “foot in the door.” Clinton has expressed concern that regulations could mean stagnant competition among service providers, saying “we’ve got to do more about how we incentivize competition in broadband.” And she’s committed to fighting broadband monopolies, citing Google Fiber in Kansas City as a perfect example of what she wants to see everywhere in the US."
"Donald Trump does not support net neutrality. Actually, he thinks it will lead to the censorship of conservative media. “Obama’s attack on the internet is another top down power grab. Net neutrality is the Fairness Doctrine. Will target conservative media,” he tweeted in 2014."
"William Burns should learn to double-check everything he half-remembers somebody Tweeted to him, because he is as yet too poorly informed to make any positive contribution to democracy."
I'm sure the exact same level of fact checking went into the TPP hysteria.
Bernie busters are going to be the death of us for at least the next 10 years.
Oops, I guess I was wrong about that! He's just pro-war, pro-nafta, pro-tpp, anti-single payer, pro-mass-deportation, pro-prison-industrial-complex, pro-wallstreet, pro-war-on-drugs and mostly-pro-big-oil. I don't know how I made that mistake!
Anti single payer?
|Old_Zircon - 2017-03-17 |
Nobody ever talks about the fact that way back in I don't know, 2009 or 10, when the FCC put out its initial Net Neutrality guidelines, they really only applied to hardwired access points. Wireless access (that's 3g/4g networks and such) aren't legally classified as telephony, and fall under a different, weaker set of guidelines that are far more balanced toward the providers.
Which is how most people access the Internet for personal use most of the time. But I'm sure that's just a coincidence.
2009 or 2010 vs. 2017 -- a lot has changed in terms of how people are accessing the Internet between then and now, and if they were constructing rules with the intention of favoring the providers, they most likely would have not gambled that favoring on expectations of where things would be seven or eight years later.
Blind cynicism has the same problem that blind faith does -- it's blind.
15th -- you are illustrating my point perfectly.
You, and William Burns, and everyone else who has more chromosomes than they know what to do with ... epistemic closure isn't just for right-wing boobs any more.
I'm a closed-minded customer. My life would be so much more enriched if I afforded institutions and politicians the same kindness as everyday people. Did you drop acid at an insurance conference or something? Ohhhhhm
JHMf - that was a Bort original, but it's pretty dull. A much better line comes from C.S. Lewis:
"If you see through everything then everything is transparent. But a wholly transparent world is an invisible world. To ‘see through’ all things is the same as not to see."
15th - does your blind cynicism about all politicians extend to Sanders? If not, why not? Is it because he is mouthing exactly what you already believe and want to hear, without noticing that he himself is the same sort of charlatan he denounces. (I didn't bother with a question mark there because there's really no question about it.)
I preferred Bernie to Clinton. I didn't think he was some savior and I assumed he was full of shit, to just a lesser degree, that's all. Obviously, Clinton has better policies than Republicans and whatever Trump is. People that begrudgingly voted for Clinton just aren't dead inside enough to believe it was anything but a sad, pragmatic compromise.
|memedumpster - 2017-03-17 |
So here's me, reading about how post-liberty Europe wants to force social media companies to censor their users' speech or face millions in fines, and I am all like "dang, if TTIP still existed, those stupid fucking blasphemy laws could be forced off the face of the planet by the corps they are going after. Facebook, Alphabet, the rest, could sanction authoritarian Europe into compliance with basic human decency in the name of their profit motive."
Damned if you sell-out humanity to corporate slavery, damned if you don't, eh, mi amiibo?
Net Neutrality is a corporate focused term, we need a term that also includes our new global social tyranny. I'll take evil based on money all day over that.
I suggest "The Bernie Sanders Tax Plan" as that term. "We're getting Bernie Taxed, you guys, they're just saying they're helping, but are giving less than Mitt Romney."
|John Holmes Motherfucker - 2017-03-17 |
>>>"Donald Trump does not support net neutrality. Actually, he thinks it will lead to the censorship of conservative media. “Obama’s attack on the internet is another top down power grab. Net neutrality is the Fairness Doctrine. Will target conservative media,” he tweeted in 2014."
I don't understand how that is supposed to work, but I know that most right wing trolls seem to think that their rights are being violated if they can't force their shitty opinions and personal attacks into my browser, and onto my websites.
Or he's lying.
|magnesium - 2017-03-17 |
Oh, this administration is going to take away all sorts of things Americans want/need/will die without. Don't worry.
A lot (enough) Americans WANT to take away all sorts of things Americans want/need/will die without.
The one unifying trait of conservatives across the spectrum is the constant need to have their boot on someone's back. In their mind, NOT having someone below you means that you're on the bottom. Keeping others below you is top priority, even if it doesn't mean improving your own situation.
|SolRo - 2017-03-18 |
TL:DR; because Trump doesn't give a shit/know anything and put a corporate shill in charge of the FCC
| Register or login To Post a Comment|