04-20-15 12:12 AM
235 ... 34567 ...
tools
  1. MADBRADNYC's Avatar
    Being that you know what? Seriously?

    You state repeatedly that I have no idea what Net Neutrality is about. So in order to state such claims, you would have to know what's in the bill, correct? Otherwise you are just voicing an opinion. In which you are entitled to, but you're not entitled to say I can't have mine.

    When you actually know what's in there then refute what I have to say. How can you say I'm wrong when you don't know if I am. Aside from your opinion of course.

    So, let us know what's in the bill. Or else your guess is as good as mine. And mine is from historical experience. Unless you can tell me what good has Gov intervention has produced.

    Posted via CB10
    03-26-15 02:19 PM
  2. redlightblinking's Avatar
    Yes. I like it here and served this great country with distinction. That does not mean I like the Gov and what they're trying to do.
    What are they trying to do?

    That's why we have the freedom to speak out against such things.
    Which you are AGAINST. You don't believe in equal access to speak out against "such things" on the internet. You believe that a big company get a stronger voice on the internet than you becaue they can pay the ISP's to let them have priority.

    As I predicted up thread.....this is the part where you contradict your own position.

    And a vote would be nice. Not passage of a bill without scrutiny. You have to pass the bill in order to see what's in the bill after, right?. Lol.
    A vote for what? Passage of what Bill? Do you have any idea what you're talking about?

    And you just keep traveling with all of these things I have nothing to do with or mentioned. That's your narrative, not mine.
    Posted via CB10
    What things? You mean all the things YOU ASKED ABOUT? Like....what has the government ever done for me? etc. etc. etc. ad nasuem?
    playbook_swiper1 likes this.
    03-26-15 02:20 PM
  3. redlightblinking's Avatar
    Being that you know what? Seriously?

    You state repeatedly that I have no idea what Net Neutrality is about. So in order to state such claims, you would have to know what's in the bill, correct? Otherwise you are just voicing an opinion. In which you are entitled to, but you're not entitled to say I can't have mine.

    When you actually know what's in there then refute what I have to say. How can you say I'm wrong when you don't know if I am. Aside from your opinion of course.

    So, let us know what's in the bill. Or else your guess is as good as mine. And mine is from historical experience. Unless you can tell me what good has Gov intervention has produced.

    Posted via CB10


    O. M. G.

    First- THERE IS NO BILL. This is an FCC REGULATION, not a proposed law from congress. NO WONDER you are so clueless.

    Second, I have stated (along with others) OVER AND OVER what Net Neutrality is about. You continue to ignore those posts and go on and on about "freedom", "losing everything you have", etc. etc.
    03-26-15 02:25 PM
  4. MADBRADNYC's Avatar
    What are they trying to do?



    Which you are AGAINST. You don't believe in equal access to speak out against "such things" on the internet. You believe that a big company get a stronger voice on the internet than you becaue they can pay the ISP's to let them have priority.

    As I predicted up thread.....this is the part where you contradict your own position.



    A vote for what? Passage of what Bill? Do you have any idea what you're talking about?



    What things? You mean all the things YOU ASKED ABOUT? Like....what has the government ever done for me? etc. etc. etc. ad nasuem?
    The Gov wants control. That's what they're trying to do. I don't know why you haven't seen me say this already, but, ok.

    I have no issues about anyone speaking out about anything. Why lie? It is the members here that believe I should not have my way, not the other way around. LoL

    I'm not contradicting anything at all. What is up with your narrative you're pushing? I don't believe in Gov regulation of the Internet. Period. Show me the contradiction. Lol

    The same net neutrality bill the FCC is relying on to control ISPs. What are you missing here?

    Posted via CB10
    03-26-15 02:26 PM
  5. gregoftheweb's Avatar
    I've read it.

    And while I am strongly against any regulation vis-a-vis net neutrality the order is very mild in its current implementation. That being said here are some valid points.

    Somebody is in charge. Either you trust the Govt. Bureaucracy (which is made up of people) to make rules and regulations that are good or you trust Corporations (which is made up of people) to make systems and procedures that are good for you. But what tends to happen with a Government Bureaucracy putting regulations in place is then you get big corporations getting expensive Lobbyists involved which just makes the whole thing a mess.

    My opinion is well -- meh -- we've got a miracle system of an internet giving us faster and faster speeds and more and more data and all that year in and year out and we haven't had any issues yet. So...well...what's the point. It wasn't that long ago that 56 K (KILOBITS) modem was all the shizzniggle. and now well it's a biiiiit faster.

    So for me, keeping the government regulation down to a minimum is better, but this specific regulation is not all that ruinous.
    03-26-15 02:29 PM
  6. redlightblinking's Avatar
    The Gov wants control.
    NO... THE ISP's want control. The government is simply trying to regulate their control That's why it's called A REGULATION.

    I have no issues about anyone speaking out about anything. Why lie? It is the members here that believe I should not have my way, not the other way around. LoL
    You many not think you do....but your position is that ....you do. You believe that Netflix gets a stronger voice on the internet than you do because they have more money to bribe the people transmitting your posts to others.

    I'm not contradicting anything at all. What is up with your narrative you're pushing? I don't believe in Gov regulation of the Internet. Period. Show me the contradiction. Lol
    You're contraditing what you said by claiming you want a voice, yet supporting the reduction of your voice. But keep up the Romney nevous laughter....it's perfect to maintain the character you're portraying.

    T

    The same net neutrality bill the FCC is relying on to control ISPs. What are you missing here?

    Posted via CB10
    THERE IS NO BILL.

    Learn how your government works and get back to us.

    WOW.
    03-26-15 02:31 PM
  7. southlander's Avatar
    About what? I think this is a bad thing and just another attempt at control.
    While I do not like the mentioned practices of the telecom stakeholders, I tend to agree this will have unintended consequences. Give a body the authority to regulate and that is certainly what it'll do -- more and more. You can ignore any "promises" you hear coming out of the FCC about what it won't do even though it could...
    03-26-15 02:32 PM
  8. mkelley65's Avatar
    The same exact thing happened here with this bill. It was hidden and enacted and never made public, yet it is to be adhered to.


    Posted via CB10
    The reason you never saw a "Net Neutrality Bill" is because the FCC does not create Bills. Only the House of Representatives can. What the FCC does is rules and regulations. There was no hidden bill. All the rules and regs are posted.

    Open Internet | FCC.gov
    03-26-15 02:56 PM
  9. MADBRADNYC's Avatar
    The reason you never saw a "Net Neutrality Bill" is because the FCC does not create Bills. Only the House of Representatives can. What the FCC does is rules and regulations. There was no hidden bill. All the rules and regs are posted.

    Open Internet | FCC.gov
    Their rulings have to be enforced somehow. That's where their rulings are scrutinized to be lawful to enforce.

    Bills like these. Which ate not passed by the FCC but scrutinized so the FCC has legal basis to do what they do.

    Between 2005 and 2012, five attempts to pass bills in Congress containing net neutrality provisions failed.
    For those that think Neutrality means tiered subcriptions...

    Each sought to prohibit Internet service providers from using various variable pricing models based upon the user's Quality of Service level, described as "tiered" service in the industry and as price discrimination by some economists.
    And lawmakers did draft a bill to stifle the FCC and their takeover. With what? Another bill.

    In January 2015, Republicans presented an HR discussion draft bill that made concessions to net neutrality but prohibited the FCC from enacting any further regulation affecting ISPs
    So their rulings are subject to approval of a bill (law) or else it cannot be enforced.

    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_n..._United_States

    http://arstechnica.com/business/2015...et-neutrality/




    Posted via CB10
    03-26-15 03:00 PM
  10. MADBRADNYC's Avatar
    O. M. G.

    First- THERE IS NO BILL. This is an FCC REGULATION, not a proposed law from congress. NO WONDER you are so clueless.

    Second, I have stated (along with others) OVER AND OVER what Net Neutrality is about. You continue to ignore those posts and go on and on about "freedom", "losing everything you have", etc. etc.
    The proposed law from congress is a bill.

    Posted via CB10
    03-26-15 03:01 PM
  11. mkelley65's Avatar
    Their rulings have to be enforced somehow. That's where their rulings are scrutinized to be lawful to enforce.

    Bills like these. Which ate not passed by the FCC but scrutinized so the FCC has legal basis to do what they do.



    For those that think Neutrality means tiered subcriptions...



    And lawmakers did draft a bill to stifle the FCC and their takeover. With what? Another bill.



    So their rulings are subject to approval of a bill (law) or else it cannot be enforced.

    Net neutrality in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Republicans? ?Internet Freedom Act? would wipe out net neutrality | Ars Technica




    Posted via CB10
    You are wrong and are now just picking nits. You Wit.
    oaknut john likes this.
    03-26-15 03:11 PM
  12. redlightblinking's Avatar
    Their rulings have to be enforced somehow. That's where their rulings are scrutinized to be lawful to enforce.
    WRONG.

    The FCC is an agency of the government that has the authority to enact regulations that are lawful. Learn how your government works.


    Bills like these. Which ate not passed by the FCC but scrutinized so the FCC has legal basis to do what they do.
    Was that some attempt at a sentence?



    For those that think Neutrality means tiered subcriptions...
    YOU thought that. And whatever you're quoting here (it doesn't say where this came from) is simply refereing to SOME OTHER ATTEMPT at legislation that has NOTHING to do with the thread topic you created.

    T
    And lawmakers did draft a bill to stifle the FCC and their takeover. With what? Another bill.
    Great. Thanks for the update. So what? You're so despeately trying to find anything that might be a bill (that you apparently spent about 25 minutes googling) that you're posting anything that is related to a bill. But this is still an FCC regulation.............NOT A BILL.

    So their rulings are subject to approval of a bill (law) or else it cannot be enforced.

    WRONG. Their ruling are just that. They don't need congress.

    Thanks for the links that support what everyone has been saying to you about what Net Neutrality actually is. Perhaps you might read them.
    03-26-15 03:11 PM
  13. redlightblinking's Avatar
    The proposed law from congress is a bill.

    Posted via CB10
    Thanks for the School House Rock recap. BUT.....this Net Neutrality regulation IS NOT A BILL. CONGRESS HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH IT.

    Learn how your government works.
    03-26-15 03:12 PM
  14. Korla_Plankton's Avatar
    I think the government shouldn't limit ISP's freedom to screw us!! The invisible hand will take care of everything! Just sell some more debt to China! Hooray for de-regulation (or even better, lack of regulation in the first place!) Who in their right mind wants a government that governs!?
    03-26-15 03:18 PM
  15. MADBRADNYC's Avatar
    You are wrong and are now just picking nits. You Wit.
    Wow.


    Posted via CB10
    03-26-15 03:21 PM
  16. MADBRADNYC's Avatar
    Thanks for the School House Rock recap. BUT.....this Net Neutrality regulation IS NOT A BILL. CONGRESS HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH IT.

    Learn how your government works.

    OK. I have to agree that being that I'm dealing with multiple people here alone I should have stated that the FCC proposes "rulings" that have to be enforced by a bill (law). So a bill is in the equation. I am responding as quick as I can to all of you, so a bit of slack is in order. Why not? That's all everyone here seems to want is slack to get more of the services that they should get from redistribution. Lol. Simple mistake in book.

    But still no one has any knowledge of what the ruling proposes so how can everyone say I can't have my own opinion on the matter. I mean, if you don't know, how can you say what it does and does not do?

    Posted via CB10
    03-26-15 03:22 PM
  17. MADBRADNYC's Avatar
    My problem is that I don't want to deal with your approved governmental agencies. That is my stance because nothing good can come of it.

    No one can say their light, gas, or water bills have gone down due to Gov interference and regulation. The same will happen with Internet access.

    Posted via CB10
    03-26-15 03:25 PM
  18. mkelley65's Avatar
    My problem is that I don't want to deal with your approved governmental agencies. That is my stance because nothing good can come of it.

    No one can say their light, gas, or water bills have gone down due to Gov interference and regulation. The same will happen with Internet access.

    Posted via CB10
    Actually rates have gone UP because of deregulation. Learn some history.
    03-26-15 03:27 PM
  19. mkelley65's Avatar
    OK. I have to agree that being that I'm dealing with multiple people here alone I should have stated that the FCC proposes "rulings" that have to be enforced by a bill (law). So a bill is in the equation. I am responding as quick as I can to all of you, so a bit of slack is in order. Why not? That's all everyone here seems to want is slack to get more of the services that they should get from redistribution. Lol. Simple mistake in book.

    But still no one has any knowledge of what the ruling proposes so how can everyone say I can't have my own opinion on the matter. I mean, if you don't know, how can you say what it does and does not do?

    Posted via CB10
    Once again here it is:
    Open Internet | FCC.gov
    playbook_swiper1 likes this.
    03-26-15 03:28 PM
  20. redlightblinking's Avatar
    OK. I have to agree that being that I'm dealing with multiple people here alone I should have stated that the FCC proposes "rulings" that have to be enforced by a bill (law).
    STILL WRONG.

    Learn how your government works........regardless of how many other people are telling you this.

    So a bill is in the equation.
    WRONG. There is no bill. There will be no bill. No bill is needed. The regulation IS LAW.

    You've outdone yourself.

    . I am responding as quick as I can to all of you, so a bit of slack is in order.
    Funny, you wen't really quiet there ONLY after having one of the pillars of your argument torn down. You had no problem machine gunning posts just prior to that. I smell the back peddle coming now.........

    Ohat's all everyone here seems to want is slack to get more of the services that they should get from redistribution. Lol. Simple mistake in book.
    And there it is....right back to the crutch: Changing the subject.

    But still no one has any knowledge of what the ruling proposes so how can everyone say I can't have my own opinion on the matter.

    Dude, seriously? It was just posted in a link moments ago. YOU seem to be the only one not understanding it....THUS the reason so many people are informing you of this.

    OI mean, if you don't know, how can you say what it does and does not do?

    Posted via CB10
    We know. I know. I and others have been telling you OVER AND OVER. It's in print for all to see. There is a link to read.

    Learn how your government works.
    playbook_swiper1 likes this.
    03-26-15 03:28 PM
  21. MADBRADNYC's Avatar
    Actually rates have gone UP because of deregulation. Learn some history.
    I don't call breaking up Ma Bell and Considated Edison deregulation. There has been nothing but regulation since then. Remember the anti-trust comments earlier?

    Posted via CB10
    03-26-15 03:30 PM
  22. redlightblinking's Avatar
    My problem is that I don't want to deal with your approved governmental agencies. That is my stance because nothing good can come of it.

    No one can say their light, gas, or water bills have gone down due to Gov interference and regulation. The same will happen with Internet access.

    Posted via CB10
    Actually they can.

    Compared to unregulated providers of services to the home, the local utilities must ask for a rate hike. And thus, this keeps them from freely doing what they want at will. Consequently, their rates have stayed lower.

    Learn how your government works.
    playbook_swiper1 likes this.
    03-26-15 03:31 PM
  23. BCITMike's Avatar
    I hope they will prevail.
    No good can ever come from Gov intervention in the private market, IMO. Fight the power! LoL

    Internet Providers Sue to Kill Net Neutrality

    March 23, 2015 Telecom companies filed a pair of lawsuits Monday in an attempt to reverse the Federal Communications Commission's new net neutrality rules.

    The suits are expected to be the opening shots in a long legal war against the controversial regulations.

    USTelecom, which represents AT&T, Verizon, and other companies, filed its lawsuit in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, while Alamo Broadband, a small Texas-based wireless Internet provider, filed its suit in the U.S. appeals court based in New Orleans.

    "The focus of our legal appeal will be on the FCC's decision to reclassify broadband Internet access service as a public utility service after a decade of amazing innovation and investment under the FCC's previous light-touch approach," Jon Banks, the senior vice president for USTelecom, said in a statement. "As our industry has said many times, we do not block or throttle traffic and FCC rules prohibiting blocking or throttling will not be the focus of our appeal."

    (RELATED: Will the FCC Decide How Much You Pay for Internet?)

    The suits claim the rules are outside the FCC's authority, violate administrative law, and infringe on the companies' constitutional rights.

    An FCC spokesman said the lawsuits, which were filed before the rules have even been formally published in the Federal Register, are "premature and subject to dismissal."

    In their court filings, the Internet providers said they sued early in an "abundance of caution." They are worried that the court might count the 10-day window for legal challenges beginning when the FCC released the text of its decision, instead of when the rules are published in the Federal Register. The FCC's decision includes both new regulations and a "declaratory ruling," which the Internet providers said complicates the issue of when to file the challenges. *

    (RELATED: Republican: Net Neutrality Will "Jeopardize the Open Internet")

    The FCC's rules bar Internet providers from blocking online content, selectively slowing down traffic, or creating any special "fast lanes" for sites that pay more. The supporters argue the rules will ensure that Internet providers can't act as "gatekeepers" and restrict access to online information or services.

    The FCC first enacted net neutrality rules in 2010, but the D.C. Circuit struck them down early last year.

    In an attempt to bolster the chances of the new rules in court, the FCC classified the Internet as a "telecommunications service," which grants the agency broad regulatory powers. But the Internet providers fear the decision has turned them into public utilities and will stifle their industry's growth.*

    Internet Providers Sue to Kill Net Neutrality - NationalJournal.com

    Posted via CB10
    Your second sentence made me stop reading. The government should be for the people, by the people. Corporations are for money, regardless of impact on people.

    There's a reason there's things like environmental agency, of restrictions on mining and drilling. Life takes priority over profits.

    That's just being irrational.

    Posted via CB10
    03-26-15 03:32 PM
  24. redlightblinking's Avatar
    I don't call breaking up Ma Bell and Considated Edison deregulation. There has been nothing but regulation since then. Remember the anti-trust comments earlier?

    Posted via CB10
    Um.... WRONG AGAIN.

    Telecommunications act of 1996 was a massive deregulation of the cable industry. Since then cable rates have quadrupled and only a few cable companies control the entire country.

    Telecommunications Act of 1996 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Learn how your government works.
    03-26-15 03:35 PM
  25. MADBRADNYC's Avatar
    Actually they can.

    Compared to unregulated providers of services to the home, the local utilities must ask for a rate hike. And thus, this keeps them from freely doing what they want at will. Consequently, their rates have stayed lower.

    Learn how your government works.
    What. That same rubber stamp that you guys give to neutrality? Asking at hearings where the whole community shows up against it, and they do it anyway. Like the MTA? That's a joke.

    Posted via CB10
    03-26-15 03:35 PM
235 ... 34567 ...

Similar Threads

  1. Pasting is a joke in BB10
    By trevorcroft in forum BlackBerry 10 OS
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: 04-16-15, 11:53 PM
  2. Why isn't my Playbook is charging?
    By Veida Jane Mendoza in forum BlackBerry PlayBook
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 03-26-15, 12:32 PM
  3. Replies: 13
    Last Post: 03-25-15, 05:37 PM
  4. Where is the voicemail indicator on my BlackBerry Classic?
    By CrackBerry Question in forum BlackBerry Motion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-25-15, 12:06 PM
  5. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-25-15, 10:32 AM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD