Google Fiber will put them all out of business as soon as it spreads throughout the country.
I'm not sure how anyone could be happy with the ruling. It is really bad for the consumer.
You would have to ask Dalbuc. He seems to be the most informed one. Only person I have seen that thinks this is a good thing. I can't blame an old guy for being behind on technology I guess.
I'm not sure how anyone could be happy with the ruling. It is really bad for the consumer.
Sadly, short being an idiot like Cute this isn't a bad ruling. The ruling says nothing about net neutrality. The ruling was about if the FCC had the authority to determine the technical architecture of the internet. The FCC was trying to claim broad powers to determine the underlying structure of the web. They masked it for fools and morons like Cute into a neutrality stand and let the lapdogs of the big content providers at the EFF run interference. It had nothing to do with that. Had they won they could have changed the "neutral" rules whenever they wanted just like any other government body can change their regulatory practices because no one was ruling on neutrality . The ruling the FCC had out there dictated network level design and controls on the internet specifically allowing certain methods of network optimization but leaving no wiggle room for future development or change. All that happened here was a fight over rather big government or big business was going to control how content flowed on the internet.
I'm not sure how anyone could be happy with the ruling. It is really bad for the consumer.
Sadly, short being an idiot like Cute this isn't a bad ruling. The ruling says nothing about net neutrality. The ruling was about if the FCC had the authority to determine the technical architecture of the internet. The FCC was trying to claim broad powers to determine the underlying structure of the web. They masked it for fools and morons like Cute into a neutrality stand and let the lapdogs of the big content providers at the EFF run interference. It had nothing to do with that. Had they won they could have changed the "neutral" rules whenever they wanted just like any other government body can change their regulatory practices because no one was ruling on neutrality . The ruling the FCC had out there dictated network level design and controls on the internet specifically allowing certain methods of network optimization but leaving no wiggle room for future development or change. All that happened here was a fight over rather big government or big business was going to control how content flowed on the internet.
Bottom line...some of us will PAY more in the future. If you think that there will be reduced rates you're a bigger idiot than I would have ever guessed. Consider you a good/great poster. They will never LOWER rates...it will start at status quo and then go higher. I could be wrong but I doubt that some people will be seeing LOWER rates. Care to bet on that part of the equation?
Except for that whole part where they didn't but you are so wrapped up in the rhetoric and not reality it is just plain not even worth wasting time with you. I hope to god you are an idiot teen or college kid and not an adult because your rantings sound like that.
Right, so you're telling me everyone is uninformed and you know more than those people? You should be a billionaire. You're so uninformed. You're like a government and cooperate sheep.
I find the irony of you calling other people "government sheep" when you are championing the government takeover of the nation's internet access.Net neutrality has NOTHING to do with ensuring "equal access".It has EVERYTHING to do with the FCC claiming the authority to regulate the internet. It's not about the FCC protecting you from throttling, it's about the FCC saying they have the authority to decide who and what gets throttled.Net neutrality wasn't a simple law being passed by congress, it was and "administrative law" created by a government agency. A simple claim to power they don't have.You are beyond naïve on this. All the things that you think they would protect you from would become MORE likely, not less. And when they happened they would have nothing to do with consumers or economics or market forces, they would be based on the greased palm and political power. The backlash against a true throttling without net neutrality would be immense, and there would be some kind of action taken. Once net neutrality comes in, then it is sanctioned by the government, and any backlash would go nowhere, because the media never makes the government the bad guy, unless it is a republican thing, which this is not.After watching the NSA and the IRS stomp all over the constitution and engage in blatant partisan political attacks, watching the federal government destroy the healthcare system through the Obamacare takeover, what could possibly go wrong with allowing yet another government takeover?YOU are the government sheep. Baaa Baaa Baaa
