Should non-Democrats really support Net-Neutrality?

[SidFwuff]

You want to hand over power to a different entity, because as it is, you don't agree with the powers that be that have the control.

What happens when ISPs start censoring in the same way, and you really have zero options, because you can't choose another provider?

According to the video in the OP linked, it's a threat. If Youtube doesn't stop taking down ISIS videos, for example, then they have nothing to lose and might as well piss off Google by turning the power over to the ISPs.

Sure, Youtube will continue to refuse to allow ISIS videos even if the net neutrality is gone, but at least Youtube will get less traffic then and Google will be hurt financially.

[Cthulhu 2020]

Does anyone get the impression that the thread did not go as the OP planned?

It's pretty easy to derail hypocrites.

[TwistedSkull]

The problem arises that if you don't have net neutrality Google Facebook ect. just pay the ISP's so nothing will change for them. But the small sites will be down throttled to oblivion. Including those small conservative website.

If you are conservative, it would also be counterproductive for you to not support net neutrality.

[A dot Ham]

Anyone that uses the internet should support net neutrality.

The internet is not something you can be "driven from".

http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...hlight=godaddy

I'm not sure that's entirely true, and the big players are definitely doing what they can to make pariahs out of content they deem inappropriate.

[Halicia]

I've lived in countries where the internet is treated as a utility, I don't understand why its not treated this way in the US. (well, except for $$)

[Elegiac]

I've lived in countries where the internet is treated as a utility, I don't understand why its not treated this way in the US. (well, except for $$)

Answered your own question. That and a lot of Americans don't like paying for anything government related.

[Cthulhu 2020]

I agree with that, but nobody will ever break them up.

Trump sure as shit won't do it, and the Democrats won't while Silicon Valley continues to ply them with cash and obviously the promise of an internet curated to their advantage.

Just tell Trump that Muslims use the internet. And that Silicon Valley is full of coastal elites who pour money into George Soros and other Jewish interests, along with Democrats.

He'll shut that shit down in no time. He's a very gullible person when it comes to blaming things on Muslims and Democrats.

But then again, so is someone else in this thread.

[JohnBrown1917]

"Private corporations should do what ever they want, unless I don't like it, then it is a problem."

Its totez fine for them to also refuse services to those darn gay homosexuals, but when they refuse it to Nazis? Reeeeeeeeee

[GennGreymane]

Its totez fine for them to also refuse services to those darn gay homosexuals, but when they refuse it to Nazis? Reeeeeeeeee

Dont give theo credit. They are simply using Tenn's style atm.

[Theodarzna]

Then i think you have even more reasons to support net neutrality.

Now take google. You don't like them. Right now you can go to other, smaller companies that provide the same functions. Net Neutrality guarantees that no company can use its power to get more or less infrastructure-availability than anyone else. It doesn't matter if you're a multi billion dollar company, or a little garage shop.

Without Net Neutrality, Google could make deals with all the providers in your area to slow down anyone except themselves, therefore denying you any other option than Google.

Following your own logic, if you think what Google is doing is wrong, should make you an even stauncher supporter of net neutrality.

That is assuming other smaller companies do not share the same view, considering the culture of Silicon Valley and the "People talk" rhetoric there is no Other platforms, especially if you want to get a message to the masses.

An ISP also can be switched to. If yours throttles to much get a new one or start a new one. Your logic is also Anti-Net Neutrality.

- - - Updated - - -

Psst maybe take a hint then. Why would advertisers give two shits about your political ideology or why would google when their main goal is the bottom line? Make whatever is you call yourself more appealing to the public, make it marketable and boom there you go. Or do you really think tech giants wouldn't go full Nazi lovers if thats where the money was?

Peoples goals are whatever they like. I am also not required to endorse NN because a coordinated mob has decided to censor the internet anyway.

- - - Updated - - -

You want to hand over power to a different entity, because as it is, you don't agree with the powers that be that have the control.

What happens when ISPs start censoring in the same way, and you really have zero options, because you can't choose another provider?

Power to private companies, yes?

[JohnBrown1917]

Perhaps some anti-discrimination laws whould be nice to have in place to ensure that google/facebook/youtube cannot deny their services to people based on political opinion.

Ye, no, you should be allowed to refuse services to Nazis, hardcore fundamentalist christian/Muslims and etc...
Becease that is just what we need, special treatment for wanting to commit genocide.

[Theodarzna]

I'm arguing differently.

I'm not a conservative though

Well you argue at the very least a consistent "What google does is wrong"

[SidFwuff]

That's literally not at all what the "manifesto" said, and I am also not talking about google firing that guy. This has nothing to do with that.

Considering Google and co. are being accused of being too liberal and it's been brought up already, this very much has something to do with this. Net neutrality is being leveraged as a tool to force Google to be less liberal.


As for the manifesto itself, did you not read it? He links to several articles and opinion pieces, including Wikipedia's article on Neuroticism and states that women are more susceptible to mood disorders, anxiety and stress- and that's likely why they complain more on Google's Googlegeist. He states that women are, due to biology, unable to lead and are too timid to ask for raises (which is why the wage gap exists).

He concludes that to accommodate women at Google, the work environment must become much less stressful and Google should, instead, not fight biology and simply place women "on the front end" (I.e, public relations).

[Dug]

Peoples goals are whatever they like. I am also not required to endorse NN because a coordinated mob has decided to censor the internet anyway.

The coordinated mob as you call it is simply market forces at work. Why is it their fault that your ideology doesn't sell? Also endorse what you want, I don't give a shit. NN is probably dead anyways and when it is I'm sure you'll scour some random articles that smugly take credit for it as I'm sure this great topic of yours isn't an original thought. Simply more self serving wank from some youtuber.

[Theodarzna]

Ye, no, you should be allowed to refuse services to Nazis, hardcore fundamentalist christian/Muslims and etc...
Becease that is just what we need, special treatment for wanting to commit genocide.

Considering to some anything to the right of Chairman Mao is a Nazi, I think first you need a better metric and second you need to ask why all those people should still support an Open Internet your committed to driving them off of.

- - - Updated - - -

The coordinated mob as you call it is simply market forces at work. Why is it their fault that your ideology doesn't sell?

Yeah? Market forces, like ISP's charging a price for using their networks they own and maintain and websites paying what they are worth.

You cannot say "I'm for the FREE MERKEETS!" with one breath but then say "These private companies have to be regulated so everyone can equally use their series of tubes" with the other.

[JohnBrown1917]

So is this another thread about google not wanting to host the daily stormer? I though you right wing types liked the free market so much?

[Pannonian]

That is assuming other smaller companies do not share the same view, considering the culture of Silicon Valley and the "People talk" rhetoric there is no Other platforms, especially if you want to get a message to the masses.

An ISP also can be switched to. If yours throttles to much get a new one or start a new one. Your logic is also Anti-Net Neutrality.

- - - Updated - - -



Peoples goals are whatever they like. I am also not required to endorse NN because a coordinated mob has decided to censor the internet anyway.

Several questions:

1. How is my stance anti net-neutrality? I'm speaking about what is commonly referred to as net-neutrality. If you're speaking about a truly neutral internet not censored by anyone - that's something different, but i'm talking not about that, but the specific term used in legal documents. I just want to make clear what we talk about.

2. ISPs: Net-neutrality is specifically targeted at areas where you don't have any other options. I live in the city. I can choose between 7 different ISPs. My parents living out of city don't have this luxury. If their ISP wants to sell netflix as separate package, they'd have no choice. That's the reason for all of this.

3. Yeah, maybe other smaller companies do the same, but at this point I'd ask myself the question: If no company exists that wants to profit of my views, they got to be in a very very small minority in our society, because i can see people make shit out of nearly anything.

According to the UN access to the internet is a basic human right. So i think that's another strong argument for that. If they think that access to an unbiased search engine is a basic human right too, then maybe we can talk about google, but it doesn't really matter in the context of net neutrality.

[GennGreymane]

Remember when everyone hated the cable companies and still do? What happened to that? Oh right.

[JohnBrown1917]

Considering to some anything to the right of Chairman Mao is a Nazi, I think first you need a better metric and second you need to ask why all those people should still support an Open Internet your committed to driving them off of.
.

I'm talking about actual nazis, like the daily stormer site or those at the unite the right rally.

[Yvaelle]

From a practical perspective if Censorship is assured either way,

You are either censored by blue haired harpies or bottomless amoral greed. Idk, I cannot really see a difference from a practical day to day perspective.

You are proposing to legalize that behaviour. If Google or Facebook changes your search outcomes or your wall feed to give you more liberal results - that's an ethically dubious grey zone in the currently non-existent laws relating to information services.

What you are proposing, is that if the CEO of Comcast decrees that the only news shall be that which Alex Jones speaks, he is legally allowed to deny access to all other portions of the internet, to ensure his customers only have access to Alex Jones. If his stocks crash as a result, his board fires him, and a new CEO is appointed - who decides all news shall be Jezebel: that is legally permissible within the laws you are supporting.

Instead of protecting people from what you perceive as bias either way - you are codifying it in law, blessing this type of manipulation, and decreeing that ISPs shall control the flow (or cessation) of all information on the internet.