Those greedy remote surgeons and military drone pilots will never get to our free internet now. Let's keep them on their niche telecom networks, and keep the internet for lulcats! A bit is a bit, whether it's for medical consultation or porno!
If you don't like your ISP or what they are doing, complain to them or change ISPs. The only reasons used for regulation, tiered access or blocked content, could be solved by the public themselves - but it's easier to go cry to big brother and let them decide how ISPs operate entirely. A nightmare waiting to unfold.
@Rotroable Over 85% of Comcast subscribers say they have no other cable ISP that gives service in their area. This is no win of the free market - it's just a monopoly. Net neutrality brings competition to the internet.
What a piece of shit deception this is. This makes me furious. I've become ridiculously cynical of government and big business in the past year, and I can't even direct this anger anywhere productive. What the fuck is wrong with everyone that they don't care?
What a horrible bold faced lie you people at AFP are spreading!
Net neutrality IS NOT a government takeover of the internet. It is to keep companies from creating walled gardens and throttling access speeds of sites or services that hasn't paid them for better access!
You should be ashamed! Trying to use fear against people that are uninformed in order to push your agenda through. I hope one day this group will have to answer for their lies.
Ohhhhhh shit, they totally told me the truth. We don't want the government forcing our internet to be a neutral platform where our ISP won't be able regulate what we have access to I mean that is madness!
@Mommaddd1 Yep, that's right. All the people here who have actually done their homework on this issue, and who favor Net Neutrality are actually bloggers being paid by Obama himself.
@Mommaddd1 This issue has been around long before Obama stepped onto the stage. If you think things are bad now with download caps just wait until the service providers are free to decide what sites and services you can and cannot connect to. Net neutrality keeps the internet the way it currently is.
Don't believe me. Do some research. See what Cnet has to say. See what TWIT.TV has to say. Read or listen to what any tech journal has been saying for YEARS about net neutrality.
But other countries that aren't regulating it already will almost certainly follow our lead. In the last year or so, our country has been trying very hard to move past Europe on the leftiness scale, and lead the march toward perfect Marxism. If this pulls through, like it or not, your country will follow suit.
This ignorant video may tricks the idiots that listen to Fox News as if it were the gospel but those tired tricks don't work on the internet. This is nothing more than republicans in bed with the telco lobbyist. AFP wants to kill net neutrality and help big business create a tier payment system for the internet. This is all about money and special interest. Where is all the money the government gave to these companies to create better networks. They can never be allowed to control content.
It's funny, they make it sound like the FCC wants to regulate what's on the internet when they really want to regulate how it's provided - bringing affordable broadband nationwide, preventing ISPs from telling you what content you're allowed to see, and just generally bringing America up to speed with the rest of the world.
There IS an internet takeover going on right now. However, it's by AFP, the corporate interest people who are running these BS ads, paid for by compnies like Comcast. What the FCC is doing now is trying to regain the abilities they had stripped last month in the lawsuit with Comcast, to enforce neutrality and prevent a corporate takeover from monetizing the internet, censoring content, and forming an information monopoly. AFP takes over the internet, then attacks US for tying to take it back.
Yeh... because having private companies regulate our ability to get and share information is better than having the government ensure the cost and access remain at acceptable levels.... This fuckin commercial makes me want to punch the woman that did the voice over
Then the car companies (Who actually MAKE something)
Then health care (who have been screwing us for YEARS)
Now they want your internet.. Who does? The huge media corporations who all of a sudden see that the future of media is no longer in their hands and they don't like it. They want to CHOKE the internet for EVERYONE but THEMSELVES!
IF you can't see that, then you really haven't been paying attention. Stop nonsense like this ad.
All the FCC is doing is securing net neutrality by regulating telecom companies and preventing them from restricting bandwidth of certain individuals, that's all they're doing. They are in NO WAY planning a takeover of the internet.
This is how some conservatives like the AforP twist the truth into something unrecognizable but supports their ideas. It's diabolical.
For a while there, I was uncertain how net neutrality fit into our black and white political system. Thanks "Americans for Prosperity" for transparently slamming Obama('s administration) while delivering your message. Even if he deserved it, I'm not quite sure it was wise to frame your argument this way.
The only time Ive ever seen the FCC powerless to cope was the 1st big gasoline crunch when the national speed limit was mandated to 55mph. CB radios sold by the hundreds of thousands with power boosters exceeding the 5watt limit and allowing speeders to keep an eye on Smokey over 20 miles away. Yeah, tell Washinton to leave the internet alone. Rick
The FCC is a bureaucracy that has the authority to make regulations that have the same impact as laws. They are not elected; for the most part, but rather cater to big business interests. Over the years they have regulated the airwaves for our own good.
You could be right but I also don't want the FCC to get in to make up there mind what your aloud to see and not see that is what I believe this page is for to stop Big brother from nosing any more then he does now ether they will do what they want
wow ... the fact that AFP can use talking points for network neutrality to oppose it is simply amazing. Network neutrality is to ensure that private corporations CANNOT choose what you can and can't see.
The government created the internet. The idea it's "taking over" is silly. The Net neutrality advocates for NO REGULATION on content, and sites. Net neutrality will keep the web free of restrictions as it is NOW. The AFP is funded by ISPs who want to change the internet to a premium tier system - pay more to see more, like cable or satellite television. Net neutrality will charge the FCC with making sure this doesn't happen... not to regulate content.
I signed the form only to protest I don't wish the Fcc to be up in the middle of my internet nice and bland just like tv here in the States they try to tell us what we are aloud to read to watch on tv to listen to on the radio and Now they want to tell us What we are aloud to look up on the internet
@Gomindyourownloser What do you think will happen if this petition goes through? The ISPs will charge you for specific content. For example, want to get onto Youtube? Your ISP will charge you with the "entertainment package", which is another $10 a month you have to pay ON TOP OF the monthly charge you're already paying.
This ad is really stupid. Like I want my internet run by a bunch of whiny, sniveling, blame game playing corporations. Cause that's who's running the show right now, and we the USA are 29 in the world of internet speed. That's just not good enough.
@MeansDarling So you want to have faster internet with content controlled by bureaucrats in the FCC. Obama told students that there was too much information available to them, some of which was questionable. I'm sure he would be happy to eliminate that information that might be confusing to our little minds.
@osteoman100 That's silly. It's not like Obama would be personally in control of the info. It'd be up to an entire pile of people. The new agency could be criminally stupid and corrupt, and they'd do a better job than the private sector has.
Lies. People are wise to you're act, AFP. You neglected to mention Net Neutrality.
As a matter of fact, every single time in the last 50 years a field of business was de-regulated it cause strife for the public; case in point -- banks, insurance, car companies, and health care. Now we have foreclosures, uninsured, high gas prices, and sick people. I would rather have the FCC keep a watchful eye on my ISP, because you're not talking about OUR internet, you're talking about YOUR internet.
Wow this ad is so misleading. The government "takeover" is a law that would force ISPs to recognize net neutrality. Shows you who the teabaggers and the AFP really work for.
@phantomspellchecker Please send me a link where the Americans for Prosperity are proposing any Internet Regulation please. From the video, their call to action is no action. Thanks in advance for your reply.
@glenwoodfin They are not proposing any kind of internet regulation. What AFP is trying to do is prevent the FCC from enforcing net neutrality. And using dirty tactics like good little republicans. Really, for a group of people that scream free speech and personal freedom, AFP seems to do everything they can to stop it when it hurts their financial backers!
Losing your fantastic freedom to do whatever you wish on your computer should be more important to you than the phony remarks about the "corporations." Please, think it through. We've been lied to since this administration has been in office, with its gross takeover of everything. So you want the internet to be owned by the government as a "Utility"???? Wait and watch!
@azbobbieb Control is being wrestled away from us, and it's going to fall into the hands of either Government or the ISP companies.
Considering the track-record of de-regulated big business, it was inevitable that a corporation would try to fuck with us again. The wealthy don't fucking speak for the people, and the last thing I want is for my internet -- my forum -- to be in the care of Wall-Street. I'll give it to the government before I give it to them.
@Silenxer YES I agree I am stuck with the worlds shittiest Cable and internet by no choice OH dear God I fucking Hate COMCAST every time it rains this crappy service
VIDEO FAIL. What a blatant, misleading, boldfaced LIE. Net neutrality means companies like comcast can't decide which sites have to start paying them to not throttle the speed at which they deliver content.
@animateTheLight You are correct. HOWEVER, the F.C.C. has no legislative power to create regulations. They have effectively bypassed congress and made their own laws. This is blatantly unconstitutional. Furthermore, this legislation opens the door for additional government intervention into the internet and internet censorship.
@animateTheLight What makes you think they have the right to tell comcast what to do in the first place? If comcast sucks people can use a different company. If government sucks, it's a much bigger ordeal. It cost maybe, a few extra bucks to switch isps and hundreds or thousands even to leave the country. Besides, throttling is used to manage bandwidth congestion.
My god, I don't think I've ever heard such filthy lies! you know why you have to pay for certain cable and satellite chanels? because your service providers make you, because they arent regulated by the government!
And regulation by the government to prevent them from making money that way will save you money, right?
Wrong. Regulations preventing them from charging for specific channels will force them to raise the overall price. Everyone will be paying more, even those who don't want the extra channels.
Why did they think putting this on the internet was a good idea? People on the internet know what the internet is and, by and large, know that net neutrality is a very good thing. This ad is aimed at angy, bitter old people who don't understand anything about the internet but will get knee-jerk reflexively angry about "big government" so maybe it should just stay on television?
As government regulations go, this is about as benign and pro-consumer as you can get. However, ISPs really, really hate this because it makes their shiny new pipelines slightly less profitable, mainly in the sense that it prevents them from extorting money out of both consumers and content providers to get the same service theyd be entitled to under the service the ISP says its supposed to provide anyway.
Ugh, this is utter bullshit. This is no "takeover", this is just them keeping greedy bastards from preying on the American populace. It basically stops ISPs and telecommunications companies from leeching off of all the little people and stuffing more cash into the pockets of the wealthy.
Second mistake: the US government isn't going to control the internet, it is going to prevent internet service providers from favouring certain internet services and throttling others.
This is only the first step. The government under Obama will never cease to try to expand their power. When they want to take over the content, they will. And people like you will sit around defending them while they do it.
All I heard from this ad are lies, lies and more lies. You people don't know anything at all, everyone who has said this Video is a Fraud are right. You're not helping America, or the World. Your group of people are just making it worse for us all. Stop making slanderous lies. America would of had Fiber Optic and would be paying less for internet back in the 1990's if it wasn't for people like you. You, are nothing but money-hungry greedy liars. The world isn't always about money.
How can anyone watch a video that mentions absolutely no specifics as to what the regulations entail and come out thinking "hey, this is totally not bullshit"...
This ad is a pile of junk, no where do they explain why the FCC is trying to enforce some rules for internet providers, such as tampering with users data and other shady business practices that normal end users do not know about
yet again here is a another corporate back entity trying to use fear as a tool for there own agendas, and these people are truly un-american and only serve the greed and power they desire
Don't forget that the internet was originally the DARPANET, a government-created project, followed by being passed to use as a way of interconnecting universities. Only in 1988 did it become commercially available.
But it rose to where it is now on the shoulders of hackers (the benevolent kind). The government has no claim on it in its current form, so your comment is pointless.
This video? The one you're watching right now? The FCC is the one allowing people like AFP to post their videos that preach lies. The FCC likes the internet staying neutral, and they have no intention of changing that.
There are backup plans in place just in case the telco's get their way, google is buying up dark fiber lines, not to mention, we will find a way to bypass paying the "useless fees", Oh and did you know it doesn't cost cell phone companies a thing to allow text messaging, but they charge you anyway for it.
You can't take over the internet. The internet is a place of great things such as YouTube, several great forums, memes, several gaming sites, LOLcats, and much more.
@TheFelThatFell This post is a little delusional, Big Brother is always watching. Nothing is truly private. Look what regulations they are trying to impose on Craig's list!!!
The most infuriating argument I have seen for this all lies around "morality" whose morality? The right wing old fart fanatics who wanna tell us what we should and shouldn't be doing? That sure as hell isn't my sense of morals, if you ask me, aside the money this is just a blatantly obvious way to try and cut off access from anything like gay related content, porn, certain news sights, movie hosting sights. Anything the "decent" (what a joke) people running this campaign deem "immoral"
Ahh this topic. Go figure the internet is probably the most "free" thing left on this planet, and by that I mean, you can search anything and do anything, web-comics, java games, porn, videos, movies, internet radio, news, forums for any type of interest and the list goes on indefinitely.
Comes as no surprise some fat ass who doesn't have enough gold bouillon to wipe his ass with anymore is looking for a way to milk even more money and effectively gets to control who gets what bandwidth.
Net Neutrality regulations are essential to prevent corporate takeover of the internet. without the regulation, your ISP will decide what pages and internet services you will be allowed to access. they want private and small business pages to cease to exist. and charge the customers extra money for certain services. net neutrality is the way the internet always has been.
THE ABSENCE OF NET NEUTRALITY is the hostile takeover.
Go away you bunch of useless money grubbing bastards. Upgrade your damn infrastructure before Google puts your silly selves so far into a hole that the only way you can get out is by digging all the way through the core of the earth (Not possible if you slept through science class). Let me make this easier. I gladly pay money Google because I enjoy them ideas (1Gb/s at the current trial). You no get money from me.
this is propaganda. What "government" wants to do is to allow for internet to be free to grow WITHOUT THE INTERFERENCE OF INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDERS who want to censor and limit access to content.
bullshit like this is going to ruin the internet for, quite literally, the entire world. small online business will die, people will be out of jobs worldwide.
corporate america, you are the greediest, most disgusting motherfucker i've ever laid my eyes upon, and you make me sick to my stomach.
If you KNEW the levies were still working fine, but could use reinforcement, AND you knew a storm was coming, WOULDN'T YOU WANT THEM TO BE REINFORCED?
If it ain't broke don't fix it right. This net neutrality is maintenance that will ensure the internet is free and open. People change the oil of their cars 5,000 miles. Not because its broken but because it will ensure the car runs smoothly in the future. That is all that net neutrality does.
As much as I am for freedom of speech, being anti net neutrality can be compared to yelling fire in a crowded movie theater. Actually, it's worse. These buffoons need to be beaten down to a pulp with a sack of potatoes. Don't even bother reading any opposing 'viewpoints.' This isnt a debate. A debate implies that both sides have a valid viewpoint. In this case, only one side is correct, the FCC.
This ad is complete and utter bullshit. Anybody who believes this ad is a tool. This isn't about the Government "regulating" (OH! SCARY WORD!) the internet, it's about mandating that the ISP providers to continue to allow everybody to have fair access to the internet. The ISPs, on the other hand, want to do the opposite. They want to "charge for the privilege" of havin greater bandwidth so a site like Bing loads faster than Google thus forcing Google to either pay or die.
for anyone who is against the FCC and it's attempts at Net-Neutrality...the FCC is the reason we had that "explosive growth" it wasn't until a few years agao that the ISP's got control of the internet and they've been slowly choking it to death with bandwidth caps and cutting people off who they say use too much (ie: Gamers) forcing them to pay more for something they should already have. This is not a conservative vs. liberal issue it's people vs. big corporations and the FCC protects the ppl
@mrjonnewman You say that like it was something intelligent.
buzzardiful is right- THERE IS NO "FCC TAKEOVER OF THE INTERNET"! The only takeover being attempted is by Big Telcos and ISPs who want to extort a piece of the action from successful websites. It's like setting up a private tollgate on a neighborhood street.
We NEED Net Neutrality enforced to STOP Big Telcos legalizing this highway robbery! The FCC is the right tool for the job.
The worst part of it all is that you people have ZERO understanding of history combined with human nature. There is a reason that history shows repeatedly one collapse of power after another and the rise of dictatorships and it ain't 'cause folks had too much freedom, people. Power slowly, gradually becomes more and more concentrated into the hands of a few. Will it happen overnight? Don't be preposterous. It never does. But it surely does eventually. Read a history book sometime.
@lilroo2 The worst part is that YOU have ZERO understanding of this issue! This video is a complete fraud! The FCC is NOT "taking over the internet."
.
The FCC is considering legislation that will STOP Big Telco from charging bribes to big users like Google, YouTube, Facebook, etc.
.
Consider learning the background on an issue before you jerk your knees into the bottom of the nearest table, mkay? Otherwise, you're 'being preposterous.'
@buzzardiful Actually, I have read up on the issue. And that's why I don't care for it. "Charging bribes to big users"? Do please cite examples of what companies are currently employing such a practice and what sites are currently being blocked. Besides, umm isn't concern about "big companies" supposed to be a right-wing issue?
@buzzardiful "The FCC is considering legislation". No, they are not. They "considered" legislation already. And that was shot down by the Supreme Court. You know, because, like, the concept was unconstitutional and all. Which is why they want it made into a public utility. Good grief, Charlie Brown.
@lilroo2 If you're a regular internet user and not a corporate shill, you will be in favor of Net Neutrality. Allowing Big Telco to control who can send what is NOT in the best interest of the public!
Search Google for "Save the internet" for the whole story.
@cooeeecobber I've done a stretch or two of tech support. I know the internet. I know about different connections, providers, sites, etc. What I also know is history and human nature. Some here are apparently too short-sighted or self-centered to know or care about those two.
@LROpwnsmoonhoaxers@LROpwnsmoonhoaxers I ask you again to cite present (not past) examples of carriers doing this. Again, I have used Comcast, EarthLink, Bellsouth, and Mediacom and not once experienced myself or known anyone (and do please remember I've done several years of internet tech support, so that's A LOT of customers I've spoken to) who has expereienced this. I am well aware of the "principle" of Net Neutrality. I am asking you for widespread examples of the need for it.
@lilroo2 My internet provider has refused to provide the service that we are paying for. For the past few years, we've been fighting with them, because they won't do anything about the fact that there are too many customers for the node that's supposed to provide us with our broadband service. They are controlling how much internet access we have by refusing to update their system. Meanwhile, folks in other parts of town with fewer users are able to get what they're paying for.
@bintalshamsa Let us be clear about our definitions first. I say this because I believe I may be familiar with your problem. Please understand first that I am not looking to be inflammatory but what you are facing, you must understand, is not an issue that net neutrality even could fix. You said that your provider is refusing the service you pay for. Does this mean you have absolutely no internet access? That you have a connection, but it is not at the advertised speed?
@lilroo2 That you are limited as to what sites you can access or when? What type of connection do you have (cable, DSL, etc.)? If it is cable there are certain limitations because of the way and cost the lines run, you may have to either live within or consider another provider of a different service. For example, cable is city/county specific. Cable providers (I think annually) bid on cities and those cities are free to choose who they want to have.
That would be an issue perhaps then to take up with your local government, not the provider. In the situation of cable, as in NYC, if you live in a high rise, you must understand that the connection enters the establishment at a set point and is shared by everyone in the complex. Unfortunately, if everyone uses the internet and especially if they do so at the same time, everyone's speed will be reduced as they are all using the same connection.
Having said that, there is usually a minimum guaranteed speed. Do you not get at least that? You need to understand before you support legislation of the sort in question that even THAT would NOT fix your problem because what you are dealing with is the physical limitations of a specific type of connection regardless of the provider. For example, should your current (if you are on cable) provider should lose the bid next time, the new one is not likely to come in and replace the entire
replace the entire infrastructure. Sure, they will likely fix problem spots but those are still different from what you may be experiencing. DSL is slightly more flexible regarding connection speeds but even then you have potential issues with internal and external wiring (which is a telco issue) despite the best efforts of the internet provider. In fact, most likely, if the issue is internal wiring, you would pay the cost to have it fixed whereas the telco would fix external wiring issues.
But w/DSL, unlike cable, the connection runs directly from the node to your house and is not split with your neighbor. Satellite is by far the worst type of broadband connection. Your download speed (might) be decent but your upload speed will forever be slow because you upload over a LAN line (remember dial-up access?). Every single time you tell your browser to go to a website, the request is sent to the provider over a LAN line. The site is sent back to you through the satellite connection.
Because you said node, I will assume you have a cable connection. My suggestion to you then is to see what your guaranteed minimum is (be prepared to be disappointed). If you are not getting at least that, you have a legitimate complaint according even to your provider. If you do not, you may want to consider taking the issue up with your local government or perhaps getting the people also on your node to file a civil suit.
You must understand that broadband is generally considered a "best effort" service. Given the physical limitations of connection types, no matter if the federal government or your current provider gives it to you, that may simply be how it is. But here's the deciding factor, if you push for the fed to give it to you, well, have you ever been to the DMV? If that is your idea of efficient... I can't do much to change your mind. DSL has come a long way. Perhaps you could consider that.
Well, now with that kind of thinking, since we're all going to die eventually...
Seriously? You then think our wonderful federal government should preemptively take care of each and every single problem that ever even possibly could happen? You do understand that is essentially the position you posit. For whatever seen or unforeseen problem that anyone for any reason could possibly encounter, we should have the government there to take care of us. That's what you want?
Well, now with that kind of thinking, since we're all going to die eventually...
Seriously? You then think our wonderful federal government should preemptively take care of each and every single problem that ever even possibly could happen? You do understand that is essentially the position you posit. For whatever seen or unforeseen problem that anyone for any reason could possibly encounter, we should have the government there to take care of us. That's what you want?
Well, now with that kind of thinking, since we're all going to die eventually...
Seriously? You then think our wonderful federal government should preemptively take care of each and every single problem that ever even possibly could happen? You do understand that is essentially the position you posit. For whatever seen or unforeseen problem that anyone for any reason could possibly encounter, we should have the government there to take care of us. That's what you want?
No it isn't. Don't be so simple-minded. There is a readily established history regardless of make, model, country, or driver or, heck, just combustible engines in general that shows the need for oil changes. Stop being witless. Next "argument" please.
No it isn't. Don't be so simple-minded. There is a readily established history regardless of make, model, country, or driver or, heck, just combustible engines in general that shows the need for oil change. Stop being witless and naive. Next "argument" please.
Besides umm, no one has yet proposed government mandated oil changes have they? UH OH! Golly gosh gee, they left that up to... the consumers! Now how 'bout that?
Sadly, like usual, you people have the power already without legislation. A provider give you a bum rap? Get another one. Enough customers do that and the market will respond. That's how it works. I know cable doesn't work the same as DSL or (heaven forbid) satellite, but the fact is, you have options. Stop being so weak-willed and utilize them. What do you do if Nike makes a shoddy shoe? Do you demand that all shoes be regulated? No, you don't. You find one you like.
I am truly amazed by all the people claiming net neutrality to be necessary or beneficial. Tell me something, when was the last time you were punked by your providing not because of something you were doing? What's that, you say? Never or almost never? I've had Earthlink, Comcast, Bellsouth, and Mediacom and not once been refused content or access or had bandwidth limited and certainly never charged for it (beyond my monthly fee). So, yeah, you tell me what was the problem again?
@LROpwnsmoonhoaxers "What we have NOW is Net Neutrality, so of course you haven't run into problems yet!" Please, please do tell me how this makes sense. If we "already have it" why... the need for legislation of an FCC takeover? And you say I don't understand the issue?
Hahahaha. Right-wing populism in a nutshell.
Debatist 3 months ago
Those greedy remote surgeons and military drone pilots will never get to our free internet now. Let's keep them on their niche telecom networks, and keep the internet for lulcats! A bit is a bit, whether it's for medical consultation or porno!
shmeebegek1 9 months ago
If you don't like your ISP or what they are doing, complain to them or change ISPs. The only reasons used for regulation, tiered access or blocked content, could be solved by the public themselves - but it's easier to go cry to big brother and let them decide how ISPs operate entirely. A nightmare waiting to unfold.
Rotroable 1 year ago
@Rotroable Over 85% of Comcast subscribers say they have no other cable ISP that gives service in their area. This is no win of the free market - it's just a monopoly. Net neutrality brings competition to the internet.
SXtheKitsune 1 year ago
What a piece of shit deception this is. This makes me furious. I've become ridiculously cynical of government and big business in the past year, and I can't even direct this anger anywhere productive. What the fuck is wrong with everyone that they don't care?
patcconnolly 1 year ago
You lie!!!!
mrjonnewman 1 year ago
Oh, and I forgot: In before they disable comments on the video!
andreo 1 year ago
What a horrible bold faced lie you people at AFP are spreading!
Net neutrality IS NOT a government takeover of the internet. It is to keep companies from creating walled gardens and throttling access speeds of sites or services that hasn't paid them for better access!
You should be ashamed! Trying to use fear against people that are uninformed in order to push your agenda through. I hope one day this group will have to answer for their lies.
andreo 1 year ago
Ohhhhhh shit, they totally told me the truth. We don't want the government forcing our internet to be a neutral platform where our ISP won't be able regulate what we have access to I mean that is madness!
runMKJ 1 year ago
Government must retore and protect the Constitution and keep their hands out of the private life of the people.
space912 1 year ago
@EidSeimmoc Allow me to repost your comment, which you removed like the slimy piece of shit coward you are! help center | e-mail options | report spam
EidSeimmoc has replied to your comment on AFP - Dominoes - Stop the Internet Takeover:
@phantomspellchecker How would you like a fresh bullet in your head? You fucking commie prick.
Obama's a fucking cock sucking fascist and you support his fucking dictator agenda.
If only I knew where you lived, you'd be dead right now, you cunt.
phantomspellchecker 1 year ago
Open the door to the government and pretty soon they take it over. Stop the takeover of the internet NOW!
canditaylor68 1 year ago
This ad is not misleading.
This is a takeover by the governent FCC of the internet. and declaring it a public utility, like electric, gas , water and sewage services.
Obama has sent his paid bloggers to fight the truth from getting out.
Americans need to unite against this attack on very freedoms.
Mommaddd1 1 year ago
@Mommaddd1 Yep, that's right. All the people here who have actually done their homework on this issue, and who favor Net Neutrality are actually bloggers being paid by Obama himself.
Do you realize how stupid you people sound?
Guest4000 1 year ago
@Mommaddd1 This issue has been around long before Obama stepped onto the stage. If you think things are bad now with download caps just wait until the service providers are free to decide what sites and services you can and cannot connect to. Net neutrality keeps the internet the way it currently is.
Don't believe me. Do some research. See what Cnet has to say. See what TWIT.TV has to say. Read or listen to what any tech journal has been saying for YEARS about net neutrality.
andreo 1 year ago
That would just be for the US so I don't care. They can't regulate the other country internet.
WolvesSoulZ 1 year ago
@WolvesSoulZ
But other countries that aren't regulating it already will almost certainly follow our lead. In the last year or so, our country has been trying very hard to move past Europe on the leftiness scale, and lead the march toward perfect Marxism. If this pulls through, like it or not, your country will follow suit.
nlolinder 1 year ago
I am a top scientist of some kind and I can tell you that it's perfectly safe to go ahead and insert the sample now gordon
spishak7 1 year ago
This ignorant video may tricks the idiots that listen to Fox News as if it were the gospel but those tired tricks don't work on the internet. This is nothing more than republicans in bed with the telco lobbyist. AFP wants to kill net neutrality and help big business create a tier payment system for the internet. This is all about money and special interest. Where is all the money the government gave to these companies to create better networks. They can never be allowed to control content.
methodhack 1 year ago
It's funny, they make it sound like the FCC wants to regulate what's on the internet when they really want to regulate how it's provided - bringing affordable broadband nationwide, preventing ISPs from telling you what content you're allowed to see, and just generally bringing America up to speed with the rest of the world.
horkenfrosten 1 year ago
You're actually bringing this unadulterated horse shit here? Wow, that just takes balls.
Fuck you.
cugamer 1 year ago
American's for Prosperity who created this video are against Net Neutrality. I don't know why several commenters are saying they are for it.
AmericansForProsperity org/050710-whats-wrong-net-neutrality
You'll have to add the dot before org.
glenwoodfin 1 year ago
This ad paid for by corporate interest who want to control the internet and charge you though the nose to use it.
TarisQuickpaw 1 year ago 4
There IS an internet takeover going on right now. However, it's by AFP, the corporate interest people who are running these BS ads, paid for by compnies like Comcast. What the FCC is doing now is trying to regain the abilities they had stripped last month in the lawsuit with Comcast, to enforce neutrality and prevent a corporate takeover from monetizing the internet, censoring content, and forming an information monopoly. AFP takes over the internet, then attacks US for tying to take it back.
MM1E 1 year ago 3
Next thing you know it's gonna be "Don't regulate people driving because the American Economy needs it, so Get Rid of ALL the traffic lights"
Sakamachi25 1 year ago
FUD.
gthing32 1 year ago
@l2izwan Of course it does. AFP is paid for by corporate interests, and founded by corporate chairpersons and CEO's.
AFP knows very well that net neutrality, what we have now, is an UNregulated internet.
They want internet regulation. By corporations.
onlyAerik 1 year ago 5
Yeh... because having private companies regulate our ability to get and share information is better than having the government ensure the cost and access remain at acceptable levels.... This fuckin commercial makes me want to punch the woman that did the voice over
Tarlacon 1 year ago
First... The banks screwed us all.
Then Insurance
Then the car companies (Who actually MAKE something)
Then health care (who have been screwing us for YEARS)
Now they want your internet.. Who does? The huge media corporations who all of a sudden see that the future of media is no longer in their hands and they don't like it. They want to CHOKE the internet for EVERYONE but THEMSELVES!
IF you can't see that, then you really haven't been paying attention. Stop nonsense like this ad.
MoJoSB 1 year ago 4
Yes, government, stay off the Internet. But you, too, Telecom companies.
Calledout1987 1 year ago
WOW. complete bs
CBB786 1 year ago 2
Such bullshit propaganda. Way to completely mislead the public about Net Neutrality.
TakunLeon 1 year ago 2
This comercial is just lies and half truths
subjuice 1 year ago 3
This commercial is so full of shit its not even funny
PRmarchinggeek 1 year ago 2
Lies Lies Lies, 200 billion is tax breaks to the phone companies for national broadband since the 90's.. Squander , stolen, etc...
packetscan 1 year ago 3
The one time the government tries to do something that is actually in our interest and people are - of course - against it.
Enjoy your fat paychecks, sell-outs.
HeadoftheHydra 1 year ago 5
*facepalm*
All the FCC is doing is securing net neutrality by regulating telecom companies and preventing them from restricting bandwidth of certain individuals, that's all they're doing. They are in NO WAY planning a takeover of the internet.
This is how some conservatives like the AforP twist the truth into something unrecognizable but supports their ideas. It's diabolical.
Idude893 1 year ago 3
For a while there, I was uncertain how net neutrality fit into our black and white political system. Thanks "Americans for Prosperity" for transparently slamming Obama('s administration) while delivering your message. Even if he deserved it, I'm not quite sure it was wise to frame your argument this way.
Vilatan 1 year ago
The only time Ive ever seen the FCC powerless to cope was the 1st big gasoline crunch when the national speed limit was mandated to 55mph. CB radios sold by the hundreds of thousands with power boosters exceeding the 5watt limit and allowing speeders to keep an eye on Smokey over 20 miles away. Yeah, tell Washinton to leave the internet alone. Rick
fxRicky 1 year ago
The FCC is a bureaucracy that has the authority to make regulations that have the same impact as laws. They are not elected; for the most part, but rather cater to big business interests. Over the years they have regulated the airwaves for our own good.
fxRicky 1 year ago
You could be right but I also don't want the FCC to get in to make up there mind what your aloud to see and not see that is what I believe this page is for to stop Big brother from nosing any more then he does now ether they will do what they want
IDK
Gomindyourownloser 1 year ago
wow ... the fact that AFP can use talking points for network neutrality to oppose it is simply amazing. Network neutrality is to ensure that private corporations CANNOT choose what you can and can't see.
hutchic1 1 year ago 2
The government created the internet. The idea it's "taking over" is silly. The Net neutrality advocates for NO REGULATION on content, and sites. Net neutrality will keep the web free of restrictions as it is NOW. The AFP is funded by ISPs who want to change the internet to a premium tier system - pay more to see more, like cable or satellite television. Net neutrality will charge the FCC with making sure this doesn't happen... not to regulate content.
oenraW 1 year ago 2
The internet isn't broken? That's a lark.
NekoJenn 1 year ago
FUCK YOU "Americans For Prosperity", you and Viacom can burn.
jerkwallace 1 year ago 2
This ad is extremely vague and pandering to the ignorant masses.
killervacuum 1 year ago 2
I signed the form only to protest I don't wish the Fcc to be up in the middle of my internet nice and bland just like tv here in the States they try to tell us what we are aloud to read to watch on tv to listen to on the radio and Now they want to tell us What we are aloud to look up on the internet
Gomindyourownloser 1 year ago
@Gomindyourownloser What do you think will happen if this petition goes through? The ISPs will charge you for specific content. For example, want to get onto Youtube? Your ISP will charge you with the "entertainment package", which is another $10 a month you have to pay ON TOP OF the monthly charge you're already paying.
amaiDT 1 year ago 2
@amaiDT Oh wait your youtube is 20 per month, you view more than 5 videos a month.
packetscan 1 year ago
NO FUCKING THANKS
renyney 1 year ago
This ad is really stupid. Like I want my internet run by a bunch of whiny, sniveling, blame game playing corporations. Cause that's who's running the show right now, and we the USA are 29 in the world of internet speed. That's just not good enough.
MeansDarling 1 year ago 4
@MeansDarling So you want to have faster internet with content controlled by bureaucrats in the FCC. Obama told students that there was too much information available to them, some of which was questionable. I'm sure he would be happy to eliminate that information that might be confusing to our little minds.
osteoman100 1 year ago
@osteoman100 That's silly. It's not like Obama would be personally in control of the info. It'd be up to an entire pile of people. The new agency could be criminally stupid and corrupt, and they'd do a better job than the private sector has.
MeansDarling 1 year ago
Lies. People are wise to you're act, AFP. You neglected to mention Net Neutrality.
As a matter of fact, every single time in the last 50 years a field of business was de-regulated it cause strife for the public; case in point -- banks, insurance, car companies, and health care. Now we have foreclosures, uninsured, high gas prices, and sick people. I would rather have the FCC keep a watchful eye on my ISP, because you're not talking about OUR internet, you're talking about YOUR internet.
HappyFaceSticker 1 year ago 5
This advertisement is absolute, total, 100% contrived lies.
defstoner18 1 year ago 7
this ad is complete bullsh#t
ESX888 1 year ago 6
Wow this ad is so misleading. The government "takeover" is a law that would force ISPs to recognize net neutrality. Shows you who the teabaggers and the AFP really work for.
phantomspellchecker 1 year ago 18
@phantomspellchecker Please send me a link where the Americans for Prosperity are proposing any Internet Regulation please. From the video, their call to action is no action. Thanks in advance for your reply.
glenwoodfin 1 year ago
@glenwoodfin They are not proposing any kind of internet regulation. What AFP is trying to do is prevent the FCC from enforcing net neutrality. And using dirty tactics like good little republicans. Really, for a group of people that scream free speech and personal freedom, AFP seems to do everything they can to stop it when it hurts their financial backers!
phantomspellchecker 1 year ago 2
Losing your fantastic freedom to do whatever you wish on your computer should be more important to you than the phony remarks about the "corporations." Please, think it through. We've been lied to since this administration has been in office, with its gross takeover of everything. So you want the internet to be owned by the government as a "Utility"???? Wait and watch!
azbobbieb 1 year ago
@azbobbieb Control is being wrestled away from us, and it's going to fall into the hands of either Government or the ISP companies.
Considering the track-record of de-regulated big business, it was inevitable that a corporation would try to fuck with us again. The wealthy don't fucking speak for the people, and the last thing I want is for my internet -- my forum -- to be in the care of Wall-Street. I'll give it to the government before I give it to them.
HappyFaceSticker 1 year ago 5
fuck YOU comcast
Silenxer 1 year ago 6
@Silenxer YES I agree I am stuck with the worlds shittiest Cable and internet by no choice OH dear God I fucking Hate COMCAST every time it rains this crappy service
breaks up
Gomindyourownloser 1 year ago
lol. So wait, stopping net neutrality will save the internet and ensure its continued growth? How stupid do they think people are?
Everything about this scare-tactic advertisement makes me sick.
J0cked 1 year ago 8
VIDEO FAIL. What a blatant, misleading, boldfaced LIE. Net neutrality means companies like comcast can't decide which sites have to start paying them to not throttle the speed at which they deliver content.
animateTheLight 1 year ago 23
Where are you connecting this video and Americans for Prosperity to Net Neutrality?@animateTheLight
glenwoodfin 1 year ago
@animateTheLight
In the end, there is no real answer but to remove brick by brick the capitalist system itself, rebuilding the entire society on socialist principles.
Robert W. McChesney, founder of Free Press, that holds influence on the FCC.
Tell me why these people are any better.
LtSurge659 1 year ago
@animateTheLight You are correct. HOWEVER, the F.C.C. has no legislative power to create regulations. They have effectively bypassed congress and made their own laws. This is blatantly unconstitutional. Furthermore, this legislation opens the door for additional government intervention into the internet and internet censorship.
ebrake 1 year ago
@animateTheLight What makes you think they have the right to tell comcast what to do in the first place? If comcast sucks people can use a different company. If government sucks, it's a much bigger ordeal. It cost maybe, a few extra bucks to switch isps and hundreds or thousands even to leave the country. Besides, throttling is used to manage bandwidth congestion.
OnyxMass 10 months ago
fuck you comcast
sakansas 1 year ago 5
hopefully AforP lives up to american ideals and keeps comments open so people can use free speech to show how this ad is entirely wrong.
will they silence dissent to push their agenda, or live up to the ideals america was founded on?
GrandTheftAmish 1 year ago 3
My god, I don't think I've ever heard such filthy lies! you know why you have to pay for certain cable and satellite chanels? because your service providers make you, because they arent regulated by the government!
hydra046 1 year ago 3
@hydra046
And regulation by the government to prevent them from making money that way will save you money, right?
Wrong. Regulations preventing them from charging for specific channels will force them to raise the overall price. Everyone will be paying more, even those who don't want the extra channels.
nlolinder 1 year ago
Wow, this is incredibly misleading. Took me quite a while to catch on what they were actually saying.
Eruonen 1 year ago 2
What a load of horse.
MattTheSpratt 1 year ago
Why did they think putting this on the internet was a good idea? People on the internet know what the internet is and, by and large, know that net neutrality is a very good thing. This ad is aimed at angy, bitter old people who don't understand anything about the internet but will get knee-jerk reflexively angry about "big government" so maybe it should just stay on television?
amaetk 1 year ago 4
PS - Americans for Prosperity are huge lobbyists, they're not some kind of group of concerned citizens. What bullshit!
ovresmot 1 year ago 6
As government regulations go, this is about as benign and pro-consumer as you can get. However, ISPs really, really hate this because it makes their shiny new pipelines slightly less profitable, mainly in the sense that it prevents them from extorting money out of both consumers and content providers to get the same service theyd be entitled to under the service the ISP says its supposed to provide anyway.
ovresmot 1 year ago 2
Ugh, this is utter bullshit. This is no "takeover", this is just them keeping greedy bastards from preying on the American populace. It basically stops ISPs and telecommunications companies from leeching off of all the little people and stuffing more cash into the pockets of the wealthy.
BlizzardtheWolf97 1 year ago
hahaha look at this stupid propaganda
cheesewithcrackers 1 year ago
Flagged as spam, under misleading content.
FloodTheInternet 1 year ago
First mistake: it's called the inTernet!
Second mistake: the US government isn't going to control the internet, it is going to prevent internet service providers from favouring certain internet services and throttling others.
AFP, I am disapoint [sic]
Escmymind 1 year ago
@Escmymind
This is only the first step. The government under Obama will never cease to try to expand their power. When they want to take over the content, they will. And people like you will sit around defending them while they do it.
nlolinder 1 year ago
what a crock of shit
GlitchyTechnicals 1 year ago
All I heard from this ad are lies, lies and more lies. You people don't know anything at all, everyone who has said this Video is a Fraud are right. You're not helping America, or the World. Your group of people are just making it worse for us all. Stop making slanderous lies. America would of had Fiber Optic and would be paying less for internet back in the 1990's if it wasn't for people like you. You, are nothing but money-hungry greedy liars. The world isn't always about money.
DragonVideos 1 year ago
Fucking scum balls.
RubberRoss 1 year ago
@RubberRoss The fuck? XD
Mrjarrett1 6 months ago
BULL FUCKING HORSESHIT
nausea767 1 year ago
Wow, one big propaganda ad full of lies, deceit and fear mongering and somehow it gets 29 likes?
God bless America!
Seriously though, go choke down a big bag of dicks, you worms.
devil238 1 year ago 2
So. Full. Of SHIT. Goddamn.
How can anyone watch a video that mentions absolutely no specifics as to what the regulations entail and come out thinking "hey, this is totally not bullshit"...
Xander77Ru 1 year ago 2
This ad is a pile of junk, no where do they explain why the FCC is trying to enforce some rules for internet providers, such as tampering with users data and other shady business practices that normal end users do not know about
yet again here is a another corporate back entity trying to use fear as a tool for there own agendas, and these people are truly un-american and only serve the greed and power they desire
SlimDan22 1 year ago 4
Don't forget that the internet was originally the DARPANET, a government-created project, followed by being passed to use as a way of interconnecting universities. Only in 1988 did it become commercially available.
jeffzyxx 1 year ago 2
@jeffzyxx
But it rose to where it is now on the shoulders of hackers (the benevolent kind). The government has no claim on it in its current form, so your comment is pointless.
nlolinder 1 year ago
BULLSHIT
glgrifxtrm 1 year ago
This video? The one you're watching right now? The FCC is the one allowing people like AFP to post their videos that preach lies. The FCC likes the internet staying neutral, and they have no intention of changing that.
drakken9141 1 year ago 5
Worst video on the internet.
OreoTheWolf 1 year ago 2
I'm very happy to see how everyone sees this commercial as complete bull
OmgAFox 1 year ago 3
@OmgAFox Very many people are, you can be sure of that
nightwing36s 1 year ago
There are backup plans in place just in case the telco's get their way, google is buying up dark fiber lines, not to mention, we will find a way to bypass paying the "useless fees", Oh and did you know it doesn't cost cell phone companies a thing to allow text messaging, but they charge you anyway for it.
Lazztehfox 1 year ago 3
The FCC is there to stop YOU from taking over the fucking internet.
Dookon229 1 year ago 2
You can't take over the internet. The internet is a place of great things such as YouTube, several great forums, memes, several gaming sites, LOLcats, and much more.
This is a place of freedom!
TheFelThatFell 1 year ago 2
@TheFelThatFell This post is a little delusional, Big Brother is always watching. Nothing is truly private. Look what regulations they are trying to impose on Craig's list!!!
sugarmam49 1 year ago
The most infuriating argument I have seen for this all lies around "morality" whose morality? The right wing old fart fanatics who wanna tell us what we should and shouldn't be doing? That sure as hell isn't my sense of morals, if you ask me, aside the money this is just a blatantly obvious way to try and cut off access from anything like gay related content, porn, certain news sights, movie hosting sights. Anything the "decent" (what a joke) people running this campaign deem "immoral"
drakewingfire 1 year ago 2
Ahh this topic. Go figure the internet is probably the most "free" thing left on this planet, and by that I mean, you can search anything and do anything, web-comics, java games, porn, videos, movies, internet radio, news, forums for any type of interest and the list goes on indefinitely.
Comes as no surprise some fat ass who doesn't have enough gold bouillon to wipe his ass with anymore is looking for a way to milk even more money and effectively gets to control who gets what bandwidth.
drakewingfire 1 year ago
Net Neutrality regulations are essential to prevent corporate takeover of the internet. without the regulation, your ISP will decide what pages and internet services you will be allowed to access. they want private and small business pages to cease to exist. and charge the customers extra money for certain services. net neutrality is the way the internet always has been.
THE ABSENCE OF NET NEUTRALITY is the hostile takeover.
pedro1492 1 year ago
DONT TAKE MAH TUBES! D:
MintSauce42 1 year ago
lol FAIL
GGtheRipper 1 year ago
Go away you bunch of useless money grubbing bastards. Upgrade your damn infrastructure before Google puts your silly selves so far into a hole that the only way you can get out is by digging all the way through the core of the earth (Not possible if you slept through science class). Let me make this easier. I gladly pay money Google because I enjoy them ideas (1Gb/s at the current trial). You no get money from me.
squadexodus 1 year ago
BTW, guys. FLAG THIS AND THIS CHANNEL'S VIDEOS AS SPAM/MISLEADING AND DISLIKE.
khesed 1 year ago
@khesed As much as I'd like to flag it, we're better off leaving it - it's such blantantly obvious lies that it hurts its cause!
nightwing36s 1 year ago
this is propaganda. What "government" wants to do is to allow for internet to be free to grow WITHOUT THE INTERFERENCE OF INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDERS who want to censor and limit access to content.
khesed 1 year ago
This reminds me of Skynet.
RctInfinity 1 year ago
bullshit like this is going to ruin the internet for, quite literally, the entire world. small online business will die, people will be out of jobs worldwide.
corporate america, you are the greediest, most disgusting motherfucker i've ever laid my eyes upon, and you make me sick to my stomach.
nsrrenard 1 year ago 14
@nsrrenard Amen!!
SlimDan22 1 year ago
@nsrrenard This is absolutely correct
nightwing36s 1 year ago
What a bunch of fucktards!
En19m471k 1 year ago
Your current fail does not amuse me.
To equate this with Katrina:
If you KNEW the levies were still working fine, but could use reinforcement, AND you knew a storm was coming, WOULDN'T YOU WANT THEM TO BE REINFORCED?
Net Neutrality is reinforcement, not a fix.
Idiot.
therealfriday13th 1 year ago
BULL FRICKEN HORSE SHIT
Prounounced 1 year ago
bull fucking shit.
leethedster 1 year ago
If it ain't broke don't fix it right. This net neutrality is maintenance that will ensure the internet is free and open. People change the oil of their cars 5,000 miles. Not because its broken but because it will ensure the car runs smoothly in the future. That is all that net neutrality does.
rcota91 1 year ago
Its always about greed! All you have to do is follow the money!
HUJUism 1 year ago
DISINGENIOUS FUCKING ASSHOLES
veccio 1 year ago
this add is a piece of crap.
dtwinky 1 year ago
ITS DA LIBERAL AGENDA
EVERYONE FEAR
BudgetAirsofter 1 year ago
WOW this is terrible. Corporations are the enemy.
Jmccain1881 1 year ago
As much as I am for freedom of speech, being anti net neutrality can be compared to yelling fire in a crowded movie theater. Actually, it's worse. These buffoons need to be beaten down to a pulp with a sack of potatoes. Don't even bother reading any opposing 'viewpoints.' This isnt a debate. A debate implies that both sides have a valid viewpoint. In this case, only one side is correct, the FCC.
aminlikestits 1 year ago
Fuckin' Americans.
NordicOten 1 year ago
PROPAGANDA
divad838 1 year ago 3
This ad is complete and utter bullshit. Anybody who believes this ad is a tool. This isn't about the Government "regulating" (OH! SCARY WORD!) the internet, it's about mandating that the ISP providers to continue to allow everybody to have fair access to the internet. The ISPs, on the other hand, want to do the opposite. They want to "charge for the privilege" of havin greater bandwidth so a site like Bing loads faster than Google thus forcing Google to either pay or die.
It's that simple.
Cardboardification 1 year ago
Way to completely misrepresent and lie about what network neutrality is.
dadragonpup 1 year ago
for anyone who is against the FCC and it's attempts at Net-Neutrality...the FCC is the reason we had that "explosive growth" it wasn't until a few years agao that the ISP's got control of the internet and they've been slowly choking it to death with bandwidth caps and cutting people off who they say use too much (ie: Gamers) forcing them to pay more for something they should already have. This is not a conservative vs. liberal issue it's people vs. big corporations and the FCC protects the ppl
HybridMisfit 1 year ago
Lets get rid of the FCC and the rest of the jobba the hut gov't agencies.
popcur 1 year ago
You lie!
mrjonnewman 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mrjonnewman You say that like it was something intelligent.
buzzardiful is right- THERE IS NO "FCC TAKEOVER OF THE INTERNET"! The only takeover being attempted is by Big Telcos and ISPs who want to extort a piece of the action from successful websites. It's like setting up a private tollgate on a neighborhood street.
We NEED Net Neutrality enforced to STOP Big Telcos legalizing this highway robbery! The FCC is the right tool for the job.
cooeeecobber 1 year ago 4
THERE IS NO "FCC TAKEOVER OF THE INTERNET"!
.
Learn the background on this story before you believe the rubbish in this video!
.
See: is (dot) gd (slash) c5gjW
buzzardiful 1 year ago 4
The worst part of it all is that you people have ZERO understanding of history combined with human nature. There is a reason that history shows repeatedly one collapse of power after another and the rise of dictatorships and it ain't 'cause folks had too much freedom, people. Power slowly, gradually becomes more and more concentrated into the hands of a few. Will it happen overnight? Don't be preposterous. It never does. But it surely does eventually. Read a history book sometime.
lilroo2 1 year ago
@lilroo2 The worst part is that YOU have ZERO understanding of this issue! This video is a complete fraud! The FCC is NOT "taking over the internet."
.
The FCC is considering legislation that will STOP Big Telco from charging bribes to big users like Google, YouTube, Facebook, etc.
.
Consider learning the background on an issue before you jerk your knees into the bottom of the nearest table, mkay? Otherwise, you're 'being preposterous.'
buzzardiful 1 year ago 3
@buzzardiful Actually, I have read up on the issue. And that's why I don't care for it. "Charging bribes to big users"? Do please cite examples of what companies are currently employing such a practice and what sites are currently being blocked. Besides, umm isn't concern about "big companies" supposed to be a right-wing issue?
lilroo2 1 year ago
@buzzardiful "The FCC is considering legislation". No, they are not. They "considered" legislation already. And that was shot down by the Supreme Court. You know, because, like, the concept was unconstitutional and all. Which is why they want it made into a public utility. Good grief, Charlie Brown.
lilroo2 1 year ago
@lilroo2 If you're a regular internet user and not a corporate shill, you will be in favor of Net Neutrality. Allowing Big Telco to control who can send what is NOT in the best interest of the public!
Search Google for "Save the internet" for the whole story.
cooeeecobber 1 year ago 2
@cooeeecobber I've done a stretch or two of tech support. I know the internet. I know about different connections, providers, sites, etc. What I also know is history and human nature. Some here are apparently too short-sighted or self-centered to know or care about those two.
lilroo2 1 year ago
@lilroo2 What are you talking about?
The principle of Net Neutrality is simple: All carriers carry all packets without preference or hindrance.
If you know anything about human nature, you understand greed- and that's what the Big Telcos are all about in wanting to get rid of Net Neutrality.
LROpwnsmoonhoaxers 1 year ago 2
@LROpwnsmoonhoaxers @LROpwnsmoonhoaxers I ask you again to cite present (not past) examples of carriers doing this. Again, I have used Comcast, EarthLink, Bellsouth, and Mediacom and not once experienced myself or known anyone (and do please remember I've done several years of internet tech support, so that's A LOT of customers I've spoken to) who has expereienced this. I am well aware of the "principle" of Net Neutrality. I am asking you for widespread examples of the need for it.
lilroo2 1 year ago
@lilroo2 My internet provider has refused to provide the service that we are paying for. For the past few years, we've been fighting with them, because they won't do anything about the fact that there are too many customers for the node that's supposed to provide us with our broadband service. They are controlling how much internet access we have by refusing to update their system. Meanwhile, folks in other parts of town with fewer users are able to get what they're paying for.
bintalshamsa 1 year ago
@bintalshamsa Let us be clear about our definitions first. I say this because I believe I may be familiar with your problem. Please understand first that I am not looking to be inflammatory but what you are facing, you must understand, is not an issue that net neutrality even could fix. You said that your provider is refusing the service you pay for. Does this mean you have absolutely no internet access? That you have a connection, but it is not at the advertised speed?
lilroo2 1 year ago
@lilroo2 That you are limited as to what sites you can access or when? What type of connection do you have (cable, DSL, etc.)? If it is cable there are certain limitations because of the way and cost the lines run, you may have to either live within or consider another provider of a different service. For example, cable is city/county specific. Cable providers (I think annually) bid on cities and those cities are free to choose who they want to have.
lilroo2 1 year ago
That would be an issue perhaps then to take up with your local government, not the provider. In the situation of cable, as in NYC, if you live in a high rise, you must understand that the connection enters the establishment at a set point and is shared by everyone in the complex. Unfortunately, if everyone uses the internet and especially if they do so at the same time, everyone's speed will be reduced as they are all using the same connection.
lilroo2 1 year ago
Having said that, there is usually a minimum guaranteed speed. Do you not get at least that? You need to understand before you support legislation of the sort in question that even THAT would NOT fix your problem because what you are dealing with is the physical limitations of a specific type of connection regardless of the provider. For example, should your current (if you are on cable) provider should lose the bid next time, the new one is not likely to come in and replace the entire
lilroo2 1 year ago
replace the entire infrastructure. Sure, they will likely fix problem spots but those are still different from what you may be experiencing. DSL is slightly more flexible regarding connection speeds but even then you have potential issues with internal and external wiring (which is a telco issue) despite the best efforts of the internet provider. In fact, most likely, if the issue is internal wiring, you would pay the cost to have it fixed whereas the telco would fix external wiring issues.
lilroo2 1 year ago
But w/DSL, unlike cable, the connection runs directly from the node to your house and is not split with your neighbor. Satellite is by far the worst type of broadband connection. Your download speed (might) be decent but your upload speed will forever be slow because you upload over a LAN line (remember dial-up access?). Every single time you tell your browser to go to a website, the request is sent to the provider over a LAN line. The site is sent back to you through the satellite connection.
lilroo2 1 year ago
Because you said node, I will assume you have a cable connection. My suggestion to you then is to see what your guaranteed minimum is (be prepared to be disappointed). If you are not getting at least that, you have a legitimate complaint according even to your provider. If you do not, you may want to consider taking the issue up with your local government or perhaps getting the people also on your node to file a civil suit.
lilroo2 1 year ago
You must understand that broadband is generally considered a "best effort" service. Given the physical limitations of connection types, no matter if the federal government or your current provider gives it to you, that may simply be how it is. But here's the deciding factor, if you push for the fed to give it to you, well, have you ever been to the DMV? If that is your idea of efficient... I can't do much to change your mind. DSL has come a long way. Perhaps you could consider that.
lilroo2 1 year ago
@lilroo2 There are no examples. The idea for the legislation is that there will never be the need for examples.
Saying "let's wait for examples" is akin to saying "Prove to me I really do need to change the oil in my car regularly".
nightwing36s 1 year ago 3
Well, now with that kind of thinking, since we're all going to die eventually...
Seriously? You then think our wonderful federal government should preemptively take care of each and every single problem that ever even possibly could happen? You do understand that is essentially the position you posit. For whatever seen or unforeseen problem that anyone for any reason could possibly encounter, we should have the government there to take care of us. That's what you want?
lilroo2 1 year ago
Well, now with that kind of thinking, since we're all going to die eventually...
Seriously? You then think our wonderful federal government should preemptively take care of each and every single problem that ever even possibly could happen? You do understand that is essentially the position you posit. For whatever seen or unforeseen problem that anyone for any reason could possibly encounter, we should have the government there to take care of us. That's what you want?
lilroo2 1 year ago
Well, now with that kind of thinking, since we're all going to die eventually...
Seriously? You then think our wonderful federal government should preemptively take care of each and every single problem that ever even possibly could happen? You do understand that is essentially the position you posit. For whatever seen or unforeseen problem that anyone for any reason could possibly encounter, we should have the government there to take care of us. That's what you want?
lilroo2 1 year ago
No it isn't. Don't be so simple-minded. There is a readily established history regardless of make, model, country, or driver or, heck, just combustible engines in general that shows the need for oil changes. Stop being witless. Next "argument" please.
lilroo2 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
No it isn't. Don't be so simple-minded. There is a readily established history regardless of make, model, country, or driver or, heck, just combustible engines in general that shows the need for oil change. Stop being witless and naive. Next "argument" please.
lilroo2 1 year ago
Besides umm, no one has yet proposed government mandated oil changes have they? UH OH! Golly gosh gee, they left that up to... the consumers! Now how 'bout that?
lilroo2 1 year ago
Sadly, like usual, you people have the power already without legislation. A provider give you a bum rap? Get another one. Enough customers do that and the market will respond. That's how it works. I know cable doesn't work the same as DSL or (heaven forbid) satellite, but the fact is, you have options. Stop being so weak-willed and utilize them. What do you do if Nike makes a shoddy shoe? Do you demand that all shoes be regulated? No, you don't. You find one you like.
lilroo2 1 year ago
I am truly amazed by all the people claiming net neutrality to be necessary or beneficial. Tell me something, when was the last time you were punked by your providing not because of something you were doing? What's that, you say? Never or almost never? I've had Earthlink, Comcast, Bellsouth, and Mediacom and not once been refused content or access or had bandwidth limited and certainly never charged for it (beyond my monthly fee). So, yeah, you tell me what was the problem again?
lilroo2 1 year ago
@lilroo2 What we have NOW is Net Neutrality, so of course you haven't run into problems yet! It's clear you don't understand the issue!
This fake grassroots gang, "Americans for Prosperity" (not YOUR prosperity, BTW) want FCC to allow Big Telco to force big users to pay bribes.
LROpwnsmoonhoaxers 1 year ago
@LROpwnsmoonhoaxers "What we have NOW is Net Neutrality, so of course you haven't run into problems yet!" Please, please do tell me how this makes sense. If we "already have it" why... the need for legislation of an FCC takeover? And you say I don't understand the issue?
lilroo2 1 year ago 2
@lilroo2 There's NO "FCC TAKEOVER"!
.
What part of that are you not getting?
.
buzzardiful 1 year ago