Media Matters Desperation of the Day

Thanks for helping rocky out. He's too busy checking under the Christmas, I mean Holiday Tree.

quote:

BECK: The next thing I want you to consider is net neutrality -- the FCC over Congress. We told you that Congress was making itself irrelevant. They couldn't get net neutrality through Congress. Well, the FCC is announcing plans next week for regulations that would ban ISPs like Comcast from blocking or favoring content online. This is basically a Fairness Doctrine for the Internet.

Apparently no one at Fox knows what "net neutrality" is all about.

Apparently you have no idea what "net neutrality" is all about.

quote:

Originally posted by ferrellj:
Apparently you have no idea what "net neutrality" is all about.

Sure I do. Beck is a moron. Its simple.

Moron (psychology), disused term for a person with a mental age between 8 and 12, and a common insult for a person considered stupid (or just a generic insult)

Wether you agree with beck or not I don't think he's a moron. Give me your best explanation why we need the government to involve themselves in "net neutrality".

More than likely Rocky is out for Christmas break from school, and has returned home. his mom probably won't let him on the computer until he has eaten all of his vegetables, thus I doubt he will be posting any Huff-n-Puff propaganda this week....haha.

quote:

Originally posted by ferrellj:
Moron (psychology), disused term for a person with a mental age between 8 and 12, and a common insult for a person considered stupid (or just a generic insult)

Wether you agree with beck or not I don't think he's a moron. Give me your best explanation why we need the government to involve themselves in "net neutrality".

I have not bothered to learn about the net neutrality issue, as I expect our leaders will do whatever their campaign contributors tell them too, regardless of my opinion. Beck has no concept of the issue, either.

Well here is a pretty good short overview, along with a video clip . http://www.savetheinternet.com/net-neutrality-101

The question is , do you like the internet like it is , or do you think the content should be censored by large corporations for their financial gain ?

Its not about censorship!!!!!!!!!!

Its about providers like Comcast, Knology, etc. getting to lay on another charge for network throttling of sites.

quote:

I have not bothered to learn about the net neutrality issue,

Then should you be calling someone else a moron on the matter?

From seeweed's article:

The biggest cable and telephone companies would like to charge money for smooth access to Web sites, speed to run applications, and permission to plug in devices. These network giants believe they should be able to charge Web site operators, application providers and device manufacturers for the right to use the network. Those who don't make a deal and pay up will experience discrimination: Their sites won't load as quickly, and their applications and devices won't work as well. Without legal protection, consumers could find that a network operator has blocked the Web site of a competitor, or slowed it down so much that it's unusable.


If you are blocked access to a site by it's competitor, that is censorship.

quote:

Originally posted by JuanHunt:

quote:

Originally posted by ferrellj:
Moron (psychology), disused term for a person with a mental age between 8 and 12, and a common insult for a person considered stupid (or just a generic insult)

Wether you agree with beck or not I don't think he's a moron. Give me your best explanation why we need the government to involve themselves in "net neutrality".

I have not bothered to learn about the net neutrality issue, as I expect our leaders will do whatever their campaign contributors tell them too, regardless of my opinion. Beck has no concept of the issue, either.

Then I don't think you should be calling anyone a moron. Do a little research and then get back with us.

Its not censorship, its a toll. If you want to use Comcasts network, you have to pay extra. Each provider owns their network, independent of the web backbone. Why shouldnt they be able to charge whatever the market will stand???

quote:

Originally posted by JuanHunt:
Its not censorship, its a toll. If you want to use Comcasts network, you have to pay extra. Each provider owns their network, independent of the web backbone. Why shouldnt they be able to charge whatever the market will stand???

So, assuming that Comcast decides to tier service so that say sites like this one are throttled to dialup speed, while access to MSNBC (which they will likely own at that point) is full speed? What if they blocked all other news sites all together, unless you upgraded to the next tier of internet service? It's not like you can go to another company, because most of us only have once choice.

http://www.engadget.com/2010/0...full-interview-with/

Watch the video in that link, the second edited version will give you the gist, but the full 35 minute interview explains the history of it all, what Fox never tells you, and why it matters.

edit: Another link that shows the future of wireless http://www.engadget.com/2010/1...harging-per-service/

quote:

Originally posted by JuanHunt:
Its not censorship, its a toll. If you want to use Comcasts network, you have to pay extra. Each provider owns their network, independent of the web backbone. Why shouldnt they be able to charge whatever the market will stand???

I guess next you will be wanting to charge people for breathing air. Why not charge whatever the market will stand for that, or for clean water ?

There is a good business case to be made for net neutrality:
You or I can start up an on-line retail outlett, and we have the ability to compete with anybody anywhere, like say WalMart.com.
We can charge for our widgets "whatever the market will stand" but we better have something better, or cheaper, to survive, but we can at least give it a try.
But, what if net nutrality went away- Walmart could choke off access to your web site because , believe me, they got more money than you do (and I can say that not knowing who you are).
So, whatever the market can stand - No way. Everything does not have to be market based, access to the internet is one IMHO.

Thats great! Along with net neutrality, I wonder if Congress could include health care neutrality??? How is cable TV service any different than internet service? Why is it necessary to limit the market influence of say Walmart, merely because they have been successful and lot of resources?

Where is the Constitutional justification for equal internet access to all IP adressess?

quote:

Where is the Constitutional justification for equal internet access to all IP adressess?

Where is the constitutional authority for the FCC to block internet access?

Everyone who thinks net neutrality is a "good" thing should read this. Oh, and it's not from Fox news.

http://online.wsj.com/article/...WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop=