Page 2 of 13

4

Obama speaks for Net Neutrality Nov 10, 2014

bustervic , Nov 10, 2014 :

Your lack of trust with the Gov't and amount of trust in Corporate America is disturbing and clouding your better judgement.

 

Milad , Nov 10, 2014 :

All thanks to net neutrality

 

ultimusrex , Nov 10, 2014 :

If you have paid fast lanes, then, by definition, you have slow lanes. Throughput is throughput, you can't just make it faster, the only reason one "lane" would be faster is because you made the other "lane(s)" slower. It all goes through the same infrastructure.

 

rwoods716 , Nov 10, 2014 :

It's not that I trust corporate America. It's that at least there's a chance at competition there. If Comcast screws over their customers, there's a chance that another ISP can pop up and level the playing field. That can't happen if we hand over control of the Internet to the United States government.

Besides, are you really saying that you trust the government? Don't you remember the last 15 years? Or are you not old enough to remember when they lied about Iraq having WMDs and harboring terrorists? Not old enough to remember 2008 when Obama lied about every promise he made to become President? Who in their right mind would trust a government that has been caught lying over and over and over again? You'd have to be a fool to hand over control of the Internet to them.

 

xuanlongpham , Nov 10, 2014 :

Don't forget that the network costs should be fairly shared between network providers (Telco, Cable provider ...), contents providers (Netflix ...) and services providers (Google ...). Currently, at least in Europe, network providers invest heavily in network infrastructure and don't get any revenues sharing from contents and services providers.

 

ultimusrex , Nov 10, 2014 :

I don't mind the lack of his trust in the Government, but I agree that his trust in big business ever doing the "right" thing without having their hands forced is indeed quite disturbing.

 

carlfrantz , Nov 10, 2014 :

Free speech is the first amendment, not because it was thought up first, but because it is the most important. Why and how would the federal government justify taking away our most important right as a citizen, the cornerstone to our government? You argument has no merit.

 

rwoods716 , Nov 10, 2014 :

You don't seem to quite know how networking works...

They can make certain things faster without slowing down anything else.

 

rwoods716 , Nov 10, 2014 :

Just look around you. We are losing our rights to free speech more and more every day.

 

carlfrantz , Nov 10, 2014 :

Examples?

 

gmarch49 , Nov 10, 2014 :

ultimusrex , Nov 10, 2014 :

What the hell competition are you talking about??!?!! There are TWO cable companies. TWO!!!! And they have segmented themselves to different regions SO THAT they don't have competition with each other! There are many other small companies, but they service areas that the big two won't spend the money to reach, and they service a comparatively tiny number of customers... There are also the wireless service providers, of course, but there's only 3 or 4 of them, really. Where is all this competition you speak of? Comcast and Time Warner already have the country eating out of their hands.

 

toastytoast1234 , Nov 10, 2014 :

You don't seem to quite understand how politics works. Citizens United?

The shitty cable companies (and oil companies, and banks) and their lobbiests already own the government. I don't mean Obama. I don't mean the other assholes. I mean ALL of them.

Campaign finance regulation is a helluva drug.

 

jimberkas , Nov 10, 2014 :

wow, what a weird mixed up thread. I read the news reports on obamas statement about net neutrality, then I saw this post and I'm like "Am I living in bizarro world?"
lots of misinformation. People gonna believe what they want to believe, I guess.
but yes, I would trust the government (who I generally don't trust) over the cable companies.

 

sleepdragonone , Nov 10, 2014 :

you do get a point, man. you're neither Democrat or Republican, are you Independent.....hehe.

 

toastytoast1234 , Nov 10, 2014 :

The US is literally - and I know what that word means - a 3rd world country at this point when it comes to Internet access.

And that's not a good thing.

 

rwoods716 , Nov 10, 2014 :

How about the fact that the NSA is spying on everything we do on the Internet? You know. The NSA. The government organization that's part of the government that you want to give control of the Internet to? Say the wrong thing on the Internet and the cops might show up at your house. It has happened. And now, if you say something that they might label as a terrorist, you don't even get a trial. You just get thrown in jail for the rest of your life. Sure, those are the guys I trust with the Internet...

 

ultimusrex , Nov 10, 2014 :

You also missed my entire point. We don't want to hand the internet over to the Government. But we also don't want to hand it over to the cable companies... We want Net Neutrality, not the Government's screwed up vision of what Net Neutrality should be.

 

carlfrantz , Nov 10, 2014 :

The internet is a finite resource. There are speed limitations, bandwidth limitations. Internet core routers, and distribution routers and switches can only handle so much data. To "speed" someone else up, someone loses. In a 1 terabyte pipe out to the internet, you can't squeeze more than a terabyte out of it. So if your packet isn't one of the Fast lane packets, you will get queued. There is no arguing that. Yeah, you have bottlenecks now too, but my packet and your packet are treated exactly the same. Not so if there isn't net neutrality.

 

rwoods716 , Nov 10, 2014 :

That is what Net Neutrality is! It's government regulation of the Internet. We all want all data to be equal, but you want the government to force them, thus giving them control over what's considered unlawful content. The same government that spies on all Internet traffic, the same government that lied about WMDs and terrorists in Iraq, the same President that lied about every promise he made to get elected.