the internet being a public utility doesn't really give the government any "power" over it

i love how his slippery slope argument re govt "control" over the net is terrible but were foolish chicken littles if we dont think telecoms should play favorites with websites and content providers

further who the fuck its the third alternative? swansonet local ethernet cable in now in as many as five pawnee homes

I was not making that statement in reference to NN. I'd like to think the size 100 statement I DID make about NN makes it clear that I don't think NN is about "government power" or "government control". I think I've made it clear that I think it is about picking one section of big business type elites instead of a different section of big business type elites.

But again, everyone here seems to want to have the asinine (and largely pointless) government vs. business argument. I just want to discuss things for what they are.

I'm glad to discuss what *is*. Tell me what I'm missing.

where in the thread is anybody arguing this? seems like you're arguing with a bunch a strawmen for the sake of arguing

and hes still losing that argument lol

:erm: Half the thread is framed around the idea of state vs. capitalism, govt. vs. business, etc.

So after several pages of various red herring arguments, does anyone actually want to address some of the questions I have asked. I'd like to think that I've asked them in good faith:

hate to speak for those quoted but i think they were mocking the non-argument this is a "government" vs. business issue at all, which like 99.9% of anti-NN advocates are making this out to be. so its not like it isn't germane to the discussion and people in this thread are rehashing tired anti-capitalism platitudes or anything

anyway

well.. who exactly would they pay? the ISPs? the ISPs aren't delivering a service to netflix, youtube et al, they're delivering it to us, if that's what you're getting at

well you're right if bandwith hogs were to be "taxed" it wouldn't necessarily lead to throttling, dividing and discriminating users into fast and slow lanes ect, but the FCC allowing ISPs to not recognize the internet as a public utility could lead to that, thus NN advocates

lets play devil's advocate and say you're right and NN supporters are delirious in their worries. is that good reason to go ahead and make these worries i'lllegally possible to come into fruition, however remote that possibility may be? most people people thought critics of the glass-steagall repeal were whack jobs for thinking it'd cause a financial crisis somewhere down the line. in retrospect was that repeal a good idea, because the possible problems were just "speculation"? ... "it probably wouldn't happen" is a really weak argument, as you don't have a strong case as to why there shouldn't be NN either.

you can't superimpose "y'know guys, both sides are in the wrong here" to every issue, as you are wont to do in like every thread. its intellectually lazy

so what you're asking is that why shouldn't netflix be punished for its success? i'll let you answer that one Anarchocapitalist Man!

this shows you don't have a good grasp on the issue, making it not worth answering because i'd have to get out a chalkboard and venn diagrams or something

trying to convince you of anything is a waste of time

again, teach YOU something. it's not about netflix "hogging" bandwidth (lol wut in the first place) it's about the idea that you as an independent person, on an independent blog with an independent business are now having to deal with varying speeds of internet access TO YOUR SITE based on what you have or haven't paid several of the least trusted and most hated companies in the entire country. timewarner and comcast are probably hated and mistrusted more than haliburton or wells fargo.

now this whole anarcho proto commubitarian theoretical whatever the shit we can't even comprehend what you think you won't even label it or give us a fuckin checklist because we're just plebs or whatever

besides didn't the us government build all this shit they use in the first place

Thanks for this.

Wasn't Comcast attempting to charge Netflix?

Yes, but "could lead to that" is just repeating a bad argument. Why? Based on what evidence?

You are just flipping the burden of proof. I don't need a make a case "as to why there shouldn't be NN". I am asking people who want a new law to explain the justification - so far I have gotten "could lead to ____" (see above) ad nauseam.

This is a separate point, but yes, sometimes I say this and I'm being lazy. Sometimes, however, it's demanding that people show their reasoning and evidence - which is hardly lazy. In this thread, I think I've shown genuine enthusiasm to have a discussion. I'm grateful that you are reciprocating.

oh my god seriously fuck you

Can we all discuss how dumb this post is

No, it doesn't come across as condescending. It is condescending. And as evidenced by your ignorance on display in this thread, you're in no place to condescend.

Anarcho-Capitalist Man would be the most unhelpful superhero ever

He flies by literally lifting himself up by his bootstraps

and he figures you should have made better choices if you didnt want to be in this mess and by helping you out hell make you dependent on him

wll the idea that the burden is on us to educate him is just fucking amazing

Lesson learned.

What lesson is that? That you shouldn't deign to dignify us with your presence or

lets hope so

This is not happening. I am just not sure that it makes sense to do the work to construct sincere questions without much reciprocation of sincere responses.

eulogy and trots are the worst at that. any slightly differing opinion = "troll" or "contrarian"

Again, I don't think I've ever said that about you or him. I totally believe you both believe the things you post.

Look at mayf being a contrarian again

the issue was that jc was asking us to inform him

Sorry guys, it's been years since I could get back on the internet. Once they repealed net neutrality, I couldn't afford to access the internet anymore. And when I could get on it was only loading

one
word
at
a
time

Shit, this post alone costs $50 on Comcast's new "pay as you post" model.

So I just wanted to say that I was wrong; I should have listened to all the now totally validated doomsday predictions people made on Netphoria.

It only took five years of waiting to bask in that sweet, sweet vindication.

ok

If you make enough doomsday predictions eventually all of them will be correct.