Senate bill to reverse net neutrality repeal gains 30th sponsor, ensuring floor vote

[breadisfunny]

Oh boy, we get to hear all the rhetoric again about how many people will die and how the internet will get shut down ect.

oh boy we get to hear all this bullshit hyperbole that serves only as a red herring to distract from the real argument and derail into a meaningless festival of who can post the biggest pile of bullshit.

[Grapemask]

Oh boy, we get to hear all the rhetoric again about how many people will die and how the internet will get shut down ect.

You don't actually have to expand your partisan hackery to include anti-net neutrality. It should be something people on both sides of the aisle can agree to. It certainly was a few years ago, at least to a much larger extent. That says a lot for how much more insane partisan bullshit has gotten in just a few years. I can't imagine why...

I think everyone's positive that this will fail, even the people pushing for it hardest. But the point is that it will put people on record for how they stand. That's going to be very important in the midterms.

- - - Updated - - -

Yeah because they want use 802.22 to cover rural areas with wi-far technology. I know CNN won't tell you this but it's their business to push lies that everyone's internet will slow a crawl which is a total crock of shit. Sorry you don't need gigabit speed for a couple of tractors to do routes in fields. 802.22 covers the speeds the FCC is wanting to issue for this technology. Go find a paper bag and start to breath normally again.

That in itself is a weird twist to change the far reaching-implications of what the FCC is doing. It's the definition of "look at what's happening over here so you don't see what's happening LITERALLY EVERYWHERE ELSE." Just like the Republican reversal of class-action banking legislation was a "hey, you're getting screwed, but at least we're screwing the lawyers, right?" It's weird how the right has exactly one way to spin things.

[RayenDark]

You won't get enough votes for that to happen either. Net neutrality didn't fix anything. I'll even give you an example. During the time of net neutrality a couple of companies started offering better connections to game servers. They created low latency 'fast lanes' by traffic shaping the internet. These companies still operate right now. So why didn't a bill that was supposed to protect against this fail to do so? Want to tell the truth and admit not all traffic is equal even with your useless net neutrality rules supposedly 'protecting' against that?

And my best friend works in Comcast billing. They are already making plans to add an extra charge for things like Netflix access. It's not gonna help anyone but the companies.

[Rukh]

Good news. Hope it doesn't turn into more partisan shit.

How many of the signatures are Republicans?

[shimerra]

Wow, the guys in billing already know corporate’s Strategy. That would mean they provided literature to the call reps. And that would mean it’d be all over reddit. So can you link me to the reddit subthread?

Apparently only call reps work in billing.

[mvaliz]

I think there is a positive and negative to both sides of this issue, I would personally prefer it stays repealed as long as consumer protections are put in place to ensure a fair market place. My problems are with the monopoly called comcast.

Jesus H bananas... THAT WAS WHAT WAS JUST REMOVED!!! Net Neutrality WAS the thing designed to protect consumers against monopolies!

Do you even read what's being voted on!? >_<

[Xeones]

Jesus H bananas... THAT WAS WHAT WAS JUST REMOVED!!! Net Neutrality WAS the thing designed to protect consumers against monopolies!

Do you even read what's being voted on!? >_<

He probably heard the buzz word "regulations" being tossed around by propagandists and thought that was totally different from "consumer protections".

[PosPosPos]

Wow, the guys in billing already know corporate’s Strategy. That would mean they provided literature to the call reps. And that would mean it’d be all over reddit. So can you link me to the reddit subthread?

Why ask for a source you would ignore anyway?

Alt-righters love to just sealion, then ignore the sources they have been given.

[Barnabas]

You don't actually have to expand your partisan hackery to include anti-net neutrality. It should be something people on both sides of the aisle can agree to. It certainly was a few years ago, at least to a much larger extent. That says a lot for how much more insane partisan bullshit has gotten in just a few years. I can't imagine why...

I think everyone's positive that this will fail, even the people pushing for it hardest. But the point is that it will put people on record for how they stand. That's going to be very important in the midterms.

- - - Updated - - -


That in itself is a weird twist to change the far reaching-implications of what the FCC is doing. It's the definition of "look at what's happening over here so you don't see what's happening LITERALLY EVERYWHERE ELSE." Just like the Republican reversal of class-action banking legislation was a "hey, you're getting screwed, but at least we're screwing the lawyers, right?" It's weird how the right has exactly one way to spin things.

Oh sorry facts don't matter more than your conspiracy theories. Right!

- - - Updated - - -

And my best friend works in Comcast billing. They are already making plans to add an extra charge for things like Netflix access. It's not gonna help anyone but the companies.

They've been charging customers for over a year if you signup for netflix through x1. Got anymore wild paranoid stories of how miserable being rid of a useless bill is going to be?

[Blur4stuff]

Whether or not someone in billing knows what the executives are doing, I think we all know that they would love to stick it to netflix and certainly have discussed ways to do it. It would be insane for them to not have drawn up a variety of plans to hurt netflix and increase profit at the expense of customers.

Let's not pretend companies like Comcast don't want to strangle the streaming market. They would love nothing more than to force all cord cutters to start giving them that 50-100 bucks again for TV shows.

It's truly bizarre watching a group of people who usually mistrust the government (especially big government) being so willing to fully trust a huge corporation that has proven time and time again they value profit over quality of service and customer satisfaction.

[Moralgy]

People can try to hope all they want, but republicans control all of the government atm so it is kind of pointless to keep that hope.

- - - Updated - - -

Good news. Hope it doesn't turn into more partisan shit.

It has been a partisan issue for years. The vote will be down party line.

[Deleted]

Good news. Hope it doesn't turn into more partisan shit.

Good luck with that xD

[tyrlaan]

I don’t ignore things that force me to think. Feel free to link the evidence though. Scare tactics are the left’s MO because they can’t intelligently argue anymore.

Meanwhile if you made the mistake of watching the RNC during election year, a picture of America so bleak and terrifying was painted that you might wonder if Mad Max is a documentary.

In other words, I'm calling out your bullshit.

[breadisfunny]

Oh, you think I supported Trump or am against congress passing a net neutrality bill.

based on your posting history yes.

[tyrlaan]

Oh, you think I supported Trump or am against congress passing a net neutrality bill.

Irrelevant. You are slamming "the left" for a tactic that seems a tad more rampant over in GOP land.

Note how I mentioned neither Trump nor Net Neutrality.

I called out a bullshit claim of yours, no more no less. Nice diversion attempt though.

[tyrlaan]

I’m sorry you don’t understand the context of the topic.

Lolwut?

Care to explain to me how calling out a bullshit claim directed at "the left" informs you that I am apparently ignorant of what's being discussed here? In fact, I said nothing about the actual topic at hand so I assume you have mind reading powers?

I also forgot when the DNC had the Khan’s come out to use race as a tactic.

That's a scare tactic now? Please feel free to try to explain that one.

Or how all of you have fell for the lie of any kind of neo Nazi threat in America. More Americans have been shot up by Jihadis than by white supremacist the past 20 years, but the left has only created a boogeyman out of one and made a victim out of the other.

Citations needed. Sans evidence, this is really just another attempt to deflect/divert.

[OnlineSamantha]

Omar Mateen (49), Nidal Hassan (13), Syed Rizwan Farook (14) for a total of 76, versus Dylan Roof (9). That you aren’t aware of this and had the audacity to question its truthfulness shows how successful the left has been convincing you of a false threat. I bet you think more blacks are killed by whites than vice versa. Do you also think less immigrant families are on welfare than the native population too.

I’ll be happy to blast you with some truth to help dispel all the nonsense you heard and just accepted as truth. This folks, is why you should pick up a book. You don’t want to look like a dipshit on the internet, touting your intelligence only to be revealed as ignorant.

Do you have any statistics besides just 3 names? And you said 20 years, so the statistics better cover it. Your last paragraph is pretty funny given that you didn't actually answer the question. I'm sure you're right by the way. 9/11 happened less than 20 years ago, so that's no doubt a big factor in the statistics.

[tyrlaan]

Omar Mateen (49), Nidal Hassan (13), Syed Rizwan Farook (14) for a total of 76, versus Dylan Roof (9).

That you aren’t aware of this and had the audacity to question its truthfulness shows how successful the left has been convincing you of a false threat. I bet you think more blacks are killed by whites than vice versa. Do you also think less immigrant families are on welfare than the native population too.

I’ll be happy to blast you with some truth to help dispel all the nonsense you heard and just accepted as truth. This folks, is why you should pick up a book. You don’t want to look like a dipshit on the internet, touting your intelligence only to be revealed as ignorant.

Wow, so Dylan Roof is the only white supremacist that's killed anyone?

BTW citations generally means something a bit more robust than you typing at me more. Doing something like, I dunno, providing citations, would be more apt.

You keep trying to make a lesson out of me when you are the one who keeps spinning yarns.

I'll give you this much, and only this much. Yes white supremacists have killed less than terrorists like the ones you have listed. However, acting like "brown people" are the real problem is not only naive its also disingenuous. You only get to make your argument if you whittle down white murderers to white supremacists. If you just loop in white people period (which is fair after all since you are trying to loop in "brown people" for the actions of a few), you only need one incident and you've almost beaten the three numbers you provided.

Again however, you keep trying to divert from what I originally called you out on. Ironically, your counterpoints originate from scare tactics fomented by "the right".

[Crissi]

terrorism has nothing to do with net neutrality. Get back on topic

[Jeezy911]

Considering that after Net Neutrality was reversed by that fucking douche from the FCC, that some carriers have reduced their speeds, then yeah, it is already taking effect. You are just ignoring it because it hasn't effected you yet.

This may be the worst issue to take arms against, in reality Net Neutrality will not really affect me or you. I could care less either way because it's just not that big of a deal. Comcast is going to turn down my speed while watching Youtube videos? Holy shit lets riot.