Internet Slowdown Day


#1

Well, i figured, this should be an issue you and i should be consigned about, i think people need to be aware Net neutrality


#2

The sponsorship industry and the over whelming power that derives from it (based on money determining everything and everything being for the benefit of the moneyed class) has realized that if they don’t break the internet in a fundamental way sponsorship will eventually go away. They desperately want to reinforce the ability to interrupt us at will in an uninterrupted way in order to make sure that we are locked out of and info enclosed by all available working media. Its utter garbage, when we get through beating them we need to make their business models, i.e., cable illegal for being a threat to the continued existence of humanity. They and their stance amount to monarchical bullshit. If they get their way they will talk about how the cable system that replaced the net proved the net and open systems were just not cost effect. Cost effective for whom?!


#3

Just FYI, I do not share your hatred of advertising. Take care when assuming others do too, as your post is quite presumptuous.


#4

IMO, the only way we can have true net neutrality is when one set of data is indistinguishable from another. Otherwise, there will always be some law or rule that middle men will levy.

Safe network will help to bring this about!


#5

I don’t think it has much of anything to do with advertizing. There are companies with a stake in that on either side of this issue. The telecoms just would prefer to double charge for service if they can get away with it.


#6

I think as long as humans continues to breath on this planet called Earth, Classism is a fight that will continue to be fought.


#7

It’s an awful idea. It’s like if a truckstop owner asked his (truck driver) customers to complain to the road owner about “expensive” fares for trucks because if those fares were cheaper he’d get more business from truck drivers.

The idea is beyond ridiculous. If you want net neutrality, start a telco/ISP and provide all you can eat access to everyone. Let’s see how long you’ll stay in business.


#8

I advice you do your research well. How Net Neutrality Works


#9

From the video:

“If my message comes slooowly and your message comes quickly and directly, who’s gonna be hurt”?

That is laughable!
Noone will be hurt. Your message got across faster but you were inconvenienced for it by paying more. And I love that because you - the premium user - create the incentive for the telco to deploy ever faster infrastructure. I piggy back on the rich/premium users. Like in the 90’s when ISPs used to charge for dial-up ($0.X per minute) and few years later it became completely free because the investment got deprecated and the service was simply provided for marketing purpose.

More (or most) importantly, unless the telco/ISP is your own, you have no business telling people what to do with their property.


#10

well, is it that you are getting it all wrong or you are just trolling or you are one of the cooperate entities, i can provide you more clips so you really get what it’s about

you might check this maybe that will help


#11

These are state created monopolies. We could just as easily convert them back to raw state funded infrastructure. When it comes to communication we don’t have to put up with arbitrary demands for profit or collusion. A privatized roadway system would have been incredibly stupid. Big firms and the public owned markets they operate in are the creations of regulatory bodies and under these conditions we get to tell them exactly what to do, including reminding them that they are not entitled to a profit- despite some corrupt supreme court rulings in the States that tried to establish that were- at least in the EU and with the Pirate Party in particular they are clear there is no entitlement to profit even as a trade of for strident regulatory oversight. In the states telcos and cable are under performing dogs that are the laughing stock of the world.

What do we get in exchange for the profit of these firms? I’d say the profit mechanism in there markets is broken and we can treat them accordingly. Take rail road in the states. Town was there first but private rail road lets bubba types park idling locomotives behind people’s houses and smoke them out. Now a judge could injunct that behavior as they do speeding locomotives but generally we are up against stupid arguments where rail CEOs can argue to their captured federal regulatory body that it would be bad for profit- as if that mattered! That sort of stuff should get the CEO life in prison but that’s the uselessness of profit in many instances.

Taking your argument though there should be nothing wrong if we can find a way to cut telcos and cable out of the loop with better technology cheaper tech. Nothing entitles them to a profit or a right to exist. And just as those firms try to bribe municipalities to block municipal internet, municipalities and even states and regional blocks can simply outlaw the scam business models of firms like Comcast, and replace them with municipal versions. The time where business gets to wag the dog has to come to an end, the better rule is business responds to public demands or it is put to death. That is called society, the converse is totalitarian. Yank the charters on a few big firms and liquidate their assets for the public coffers and that would send a message. When Obama summarily fired the GM CEO that was a message but it was much too subtle. The idea of capital flight is laughable, just taxing it on its way out stops that nonsense.


#12

Thanks but I’ve had enough.

Shouldn’t you be arguing for the cancellation of the State, then?

I see - the solution to the supposed criminal collusion between the State and political entrepreneurs is more State! And dictatorship of the proletariat, preferably.

My conclusion is: There’s none so blind as those who will not see.
I suppose you feel the same way about me, so I’m leaving this topic.


#13

“dictatorship of the proletariat” Curious that it was other elites that killed Socrates for his pointing out their hypocrisy with his questions. And in response ironically Plato prescribes a Republic to give more power to the same hypocrites his teacher was attempting to school. I don’t think that was lost on Aristotle.

Seems that poverty and its stigma are an equal opportunity experience. Emerge from the wrong set of hips with the wrong vibes/genes or shape or colors and you’re in for a bad ride. Why not have solutions like the ones John Rawls was suggesting? The system elites want for others should be the same system they want for themselves and that’s just a start.


#14

As we’re going off topic talking of Socrates and me mentioning Chris Hitchens in another thread, I think this gives me a chance to go even further off topic and post a tribute to Chris mentioning Socrates…
Sorry mods, won’t do it again…just couldn’t resist…lol