Page 10 of 23 FirstFirst ... 6789101112131420 ... LastLast
Results 226 to 250 of 554
  1. #226
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,514
    succinctly presenting Ajit Pai's Big Lie:

    Over twenty years ago, President Clinton and a Republican Congress established the policy of the United States

    “to preserve the vibrant and compe ive free market that presently exists for the Internet . . . unfettered by Federal or State regulation.”

    For decades, Commission policies encouraged broadband deployment and the development of the Internet.

    That ended two years ago.

    In 2015, the Commission imposed heavy-handed, utility-style regulation on Internet service providers (ISPs).

    Since then, broadband investment has fallen for two years in a row—

    the first time that that’s happened outside a recession in the Internet era.

    And new services have been delayed or scuttled by a regulatory environment that stifles innovation.

    You might think that the "Big Lie" is the idea that the 2015 rules killed investment. And that is a lie.

    Actual evidence from financial reports has proven that completely false repeatedly.

    But, that's a smaller lie here.

    Ajit Pai's Big Lie is the idea that gutting all net neutrality protections is somehow returning FCC policy to the way things were two years ago, and that "for decades" the FCC kept out of this debate.

    All of that is wrong.

    And, unlike the other lie concerning investment -- where Pai and others can fiddle with numbers to make his claims look right --

    Ajit Pai knows that the Big Lie is false.

    Pai likes to point back to the Telecommunications Act of 1996 as his starting point in claiming that the internet is free from regulations, and

    suggests that things just changed with the 2015 FCC order.

    But he literally knows this is wrong.

    First of all, for all his talk of using 1996 as the starting date to show "decades" of supposedly unchanged FCC positions on this,

    he conveniently leaves out that the FCC didn't actually classify cable broadband as an information service... until 2002.

    That's from the FCC's own announcement about it.

    And this was fought out in court, eventually leading to the Brand X Supreme Court ruling in 2005 that said the FCC had the right to determine if broadband was an information service or a telco service (which is why the 2015 order has been upheld).


    And, even then, telco (i.e., DSL) based broadband was still classified under le II.

    It was only in 2005 that the FCC officially reclassified telco-based broadband as an information service, rather than a le II covered telco service.

    This move actually stripped broadband of the one feature that had created the most compe ive markets: the requirement to share their lines.


    So, as a starting point, the idea that there's been a consistent policy position from 1996 until 2015 is simply wrong.

    The FCC itself changed the classification of broadband providers in 2002 and again in 2005.

    https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20...-big-lie.shtml



  2. #227
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,514
    FCC WANTS TO KILL NET NEUTRALITY. CONGRESS WILL PAY THE PRICE


    an unprecedented giveaway to big broadband providers and a danger to the internet.

    The move would mean the FCC would have almost no oversight authority over broadband providers like Comcast, Verizon, and AT&T.

    never in those companies’ most feverish dreams did they expect an FCC chair would propose to

    demolish all net neutrality protections and allow ISPs to extract tolls from every business in the country.

    Even industry analysts

    who expected the reclassification of broadband providers from le II common carriers to le I information services


    were stunned.

    Following Pai’s announcement, independent cable analyst Craig Moffett sent out an email to investors en led

    "Shock and Awe and Net Neutrality,"
    writing,

    “We've known since the election that the FCC would reverse le II.

    But we never expected
    this.

    Yesterday’s FCC Draft Order on Net Neutrality went much further than we ever could've imagined in not only

    reversing le II, but in

    dismantling virtually all of the important tenets of net neutrality itself.”

    Enforcement will be left to the Federal Trade Commission,

    an agency that’s never enforced open internet rules and has no ability to formulate its own.

    The FTC won’t even be able to protect consumers against most net neutrality violations after the fact, and

    nor will it be able to protect consumers against greedy broadband providers.
    https://www.wired.com/story/fcc-wants-to-kill-net-neutrality-congress-will-pay-the-price/

    America is ed harder and deeper and remains even more un able.


    Last edited by boutons_deux; 12-03-2017 at 09:58 PM.

  3. #228
    Got Woke? DMC's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Post Count
    90,829
    excellent discussion ITT

    same here lol

  4. #229
    You have no idea UZER's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Post Count
    9,572
    Oh no...my snap chat.

    People are so addicted to their FB, Snapchat, Netflix. If you don't like the charges then don't pay the fee. You have a voice, it's your wallet. If they feel the pinch, it'll change. The problem is people are so addicted to that stuff they'll pay whatever fees because they need to show people what they're eating for lunch.

    I love Spurs talk, but the minute there is a fee involved, it's adios.

  5. #230
    Veteran Xevious's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Post Count
    4,928
    Oh no...my snap chat.

    People are so addicted to their FB, Snapchat, Netflix. If you don't like the charges then don't pay the fee. You have a voice, it's your wallet. If they feel the pinch, it'll change. The problem is people are so addicted to that stuff they'll pay whatever fees because they need to show people what they're eating for lunch.

    I love Spurs talk, but the minute there is a fee involved, it's adios.
    I stream all of my television. Giving these monopoly cable companies/ISPs free reign to throttle speeds and mark up streaming services, so that they can sell you one of their own ty cable tv packages is good for nobody.

  6. #231
    🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆 ElNono's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Post Count
    152,607
    Oh no...my snap chat.

    People are so addicted to their FB, Snapchat, Netflix. If you don't like the charges then don't pay the fee. You have a voice, it's your wallet. If they feel the pinch, it'll change. The problem is people are so addicted to that stuff they'll pay whatever fees because they need to show people what they're eating for lunch.

    I love Spurs talk, but the minute there is a fee involved, it's adios.
    But that is one of the problems, realistically people will consume, and if the ISP get to dictate that the fee for their services is $5 and Netflix is $20, then Netflix is getting screwed and not by their own volition. On a complete free market view, it increases the barrier to entry.

    The other problem is that for certain things, the internet has become ubiquitous. Getting a job, doing research, education, updating critical software, even 'free' public library internet access, etc etc etc. There's an obvious state interest in "access".

    Again, if we're being realistic, the internet's scope in everybody's daily lives is huge, and it's only gonna get bigger. Just like charity won't do for world hunger, a boycott ain't doing to address this.

    This thing will be short-lived, IMO.

  7. #232
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,514
    This thing will be short-lived, IMO.
    It won't be touched until the Dems control Congress and WH. By that distant time, the Internet oligarchy will have so ed up Internet and fleeced Americans for $Bs, undoing oligarchy's Internet will be nearly impossible. The only pressure would come from Internet users and the oligarchy ALWAYS ignores them.

    ATTsucks.com, VersizonSucks.com, etc my not even be accessible. Political sites, blogs, etc could all be slowed to unusability.

    They will turn the water temp slowly not to upset us frogs.

  8. #233
    🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆 ElNono's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Post Count
    152,607
    It won't be touched until the Dems control Congress and WH. By that distant time, the Internet oligarchy will have so ed up Internet and fleeced Americans for $Bs, undoing oligarchy's Internet will be nearly impossible. The only pressure would come from Internet users and the oligarchy ALWAYS ignores them.

    ATTsucks.com, VersizonSucks.com, etc my not even be accessible. Political sites, blogs, etc could all be slowed to unusability.

    They will turn the water temp slowly not to upset us frogs.
    Only need the executive. And the world isn't ending

  9. #234
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,514
    Only need the executive. And the world isn't ending
    nope, iike Fed judges, the FCC commissioners are approved by the Senate.

    the "world" will get more expensive ASAP, which is exactly why the oligarchy has been pushing for and is ecstatic about a non-neutral internet which Pai has made more non-neutral than they expected.

    net non-neutrality is actually a privatization strategy, exactly like rentier Capitalists have purchased and controlled "deregulated/privatized" essential utilities like water and electricity to extract rent.
    Last edited by boutons_deux; 12-05-2017 at 07:09 AM.

  10. #235
    Savvy Veteran spurraider21's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Post Count
    96,027
    Elimination of net neutrality will be short lived imo, most people don’t know what the it does or how it would affect them. Once they experience price hikes and barriers first hand, it will become a populist issue, which it only is right now if you’re in the reddit generation and keep up with internet stuff

  11. #236
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,514
    it will become a populist issue
    the "populus" is ignored by politicians who toil away as s exclusively for the oligarchy.

  12. #237
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,514
    Already seriously cutting into cable tv revenues, here's what BigInternet is after, losing cable TV revenues, so getting it back, and more, over ed up Internet.

    40 Percent of America Will Cut the Cord by 2030, New Report Predicts

    A new market analysis predicts the slow death march of pay TV will continue.

    the fact that anybody still pays for traditional cable TV baffles me, but 85 percent of US households still do.

    That tide is slowly turning, however, and by 2030, as many as 40 percent of Americans will have cut the cord, according to predictions in a new report by market analyst TDG Research.


    The writing has been on the wall for some time, TDG, a boutique consulting firm focused on the future of TV, wrote in the report.

    After the recession, many Americans were looking to cut unnecessary expenses, which kicked off a trend of cord cutting.

    Coupled with the rise of digital streaming services like Netflix and Hulu, these trends contributed to traditional pay TV’s decline, something TDG predicted back in 2010.


    https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/a...study-cable-tv




  13. #238
    Veteran SpursforSix's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Post Count
    21,158
    Already seriously cutting into cable tv revenues, here's what BigInternet is after, losing cable TV revenues, so getting it back, and more, over ed up Internet.

    40 Percent of America Will Cut the Cord by 2030, New Report Predicts

    A new market analysis predicts the slow death march of pay TV will continue.

    the fact that anybody still pays for traditional cable TV baffles me, but 85 percent of US households still do.

    That tide is slowly turning, however, and by 2030, as many as 40 percent of Americans will have cut the cord, according to predictions in a new report by market analyst TDG Research.


    The writing has been on the wall for some time, TDG, a boutique consulting firm focused on the future of TV, wrote in the report.

    After the recession, many Americans were looking to cut unnecessary expenses, which kicked off a trend of cord cutting.

    Coupled with the rise of digital streaming services like Netflix and Hulu, these trends contributed to traditional pay TV’s decline, something TDG predicted back in 2010.


    https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/a...study-cable-tv



    Don't worry boots. Some company will still find a way to stick it to Human Americans.

  14. #239
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,514
    Ajit Pai Doesn't Want You Talking About Court Ruling That Undermines His Bogus Claim That The FTC Will Protect Consumers

    the goal is to gut FCC authority over broadband ISPs,

    then shovel any remaining, piddly authority to an FTC

    that's not only
    ill-equipped to handle it,

    but is currently engaged in a
    lawsuit with AT&T that could dismantle its authority over large ISPs entirely.

    That FTC lawsuit was filed against AT&T after the company lied about throttling its wireless customers as part of an effort to drive unlimited customers to more expensive plans.

    Lower courts sided with AT&T's creative argument that the very le II common carrier FCC classification AT&T has been fighting tooth and nail against on the net neutrality front -- exempted it from the FTC's jurisdiction.

    Last year, the FTC argued that should this ruling stand, it could let any company with a common carrier component (inhereted or acquired) dodge FTC oversight:

    "The panel’s ruling creates an enforcement gap that would leave no federal agency able to protect millions of consumers across the country from unfair or deceptive practices or obtain redress on their behalf.

    Many companies provide both common-carrier and non-common-carrier services—not just telephone companies like AT&T, but also cable companies like Comcast, technology companies like Google, and energy companies like ExxonMobil (which operate common carrier oil pipelines).

    Companies that are not common carriers today may gain that status by offering new services or through corporate acquisitions.

    For example, AOL and Yahoo, which are not common carriers, are (or soon will be) owned by Verizon.

    The panel’s ruling calls into question the FTC’s ability to protect consumers from unlawful practices by such companies in any of their lines of business."

    So again, that's the FTC warning that the AT&T court case could leave it rudderless in any attempt to protect consumers.

    Odd, given that Ajit Pai and his FCC staffers have been promising everyone that the

    FTC (which was already under-funded, over-extended, and lacked rulemaking capabilities)

    was the superior option

    when it comes to protecting consumers and compe ion (you can hear former FCC boss Tom Wheeler talk about how this promise is bunk here).

    https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20...onsumers.shtml


  15. #240
    Veteran SpursforSix's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Post Count
    21,158
    Ajit Pai Doesn't Want You Talking About Court Ruling That Undermines His Bogus Claim That The FTC Will Protect Consumers

    the goal is to gut FCC authority over broadband ISPs,

    then shovel any remaining, piddly authority to an FTC

    that's not only
    ill-equipped to handle it,

    but is currently engaged in a
    lawsuit with AT&T that could dismantle its authority over large ISPs entirely.

    That FTC lawsuit was filed against AT&T after the company lied about throttling its wireless customers as part of an effort to drive unlimited customers to more expensive plans.

    Lower courts sided with AT&T's creative argument that the very le II common carrier FCC classification AT&T has been fighting tooth and nail against on the net neutrality front -- exempted it from the FTC's jurisdiction.

    Last year, the FTC argued that should this ruling stand, it could let any company with a common carrier component (inhereted or acquired) dodge FTC oversight:

    "The panel’s ruling creates an enforcement gap that would leave no federal agency able to protect millions of consumers across the country from unfair or deceptive practices or obtain redress on their behalf.

    Many companies provide both common-carrier and non-common-carrier services—not just telephone companies like AT&T, but also cable companies like Comcast, technology companies like Google, and energy companies like ExxonMobil (which operate common carrier oil pipelines).

    Companies that are not common carriers today may gain that status by offering new services or through corporate acquisitions.

    For example, AOL and Yahoo, which are not common carriers, are (or soon will be) owned by Verizon.

    The panel’s ruling calls into question the FTC’s ability to protect consumers from unlawful practices by such companies in any of their lines of business."

    So again, that's the FTC warning that the AT&T court case could leave it rudderless in any attempt to protect consumers.

    Odd, given that Ajit Pai and his FCC staffers have been promising everyone that the FTC (which was already under-funded, over-extended, and lacked rulemaking capabilities) was the superior option

    when it comes to protecting consumers and compe ion (you can hear former FCC boss Tom Wheeler talk about how this promise is bunk here).

    https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20...onsumers.shtml




  16. #241
    Hans Brix??? Oh no!!!! Kim Jong-il's Avatar
    My Team
    Los Angeles Clippers
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Post Count
    1,165
    Elimination of net neutrality will be short lived imo, most people don’t know what the it does or how it would affect them. Once they experience price hikes and barriers first hand, it will become a populist issue, which it only is right now if you’re in the reddit generation and keep up with internet stuff
    At this point I never doubt Republicans’ ability to convince their cons uents that every last dildo being thrust up their ass is good for them.

  17. #242
    Take the fcking keys away baseline bum's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Post Count
    93,160
    At this point I never doubt Republicans’ ability to convince their cons uents that every last dildo being thrust up their ass is good for them.
    No when a child molester is getting elected to uphold decent southern values.

  18. #243
    ( •_•)>⌐■-■ (⌐■_■) AaronY's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Post Count
    8,287

  19. #244
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,514
    Expect a LOT more predatory like this once FCC/FTC kill their power to stop it

    Code injection: A new low for ISPs
    Beyond underhanded, Comcast and other carriers are inserting their own ads and notifications into their customers’ data streams

    https://www.infoworld.com/article/29...-low-isps.html

    How many Ms of people will be suckered by a (Comcast) ad saying "you need a new modem" ?

    Repugs UP everything they touch, as paid by the oligarchy, for the oligarchy's profit.





  20. #245
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,514
    So Verizon is gonna get back $2.5B from ads on streamed NFL games, or do they have another non-net-neutrality Pai-in-your-face revenue plan?

    Streaming an NFL game is about 3 hours? that's lot of bandwidth. how about data caps and/or pay-per-view?

    Verizon, NFL agree to new 5-year deal worth nearly $2.5 billion

    http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/21737823
    Last edited by boutons_deux; 12-11-2017 at 12:15 PM.

  21. #246
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Post Count
    43,429
    Check out those comments.

    http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...y-on-thursday/

    Stupid sons of es.

  22. #247
    Savvy Veteran spurraider21's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Post Count
    96,027
    Elimination of net neutrality will be short lived imo, most people don’t know what the it does or how it would affect them. Once they experience price hikes and barriers first hand, it will become a populist issue, which it only is right now if you’re in the reddit generation and keep up with internet stuff
    yup. like i said, people dont even know what NN is or how its actually likely to effect them. they'll repeal it, people will feel the effect, and their will be a wave of support to bring it back

    i hope

  23. #248
    MVP
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Post Count
    21,348
    yup. like i said, people dont even know what NN is or how its actually likely to effect them. they'll repeal it, people will feel the effect, and their will be a wave of support to bring it back

    i hope
    They just mad cause "thanks obama".

  24. #249
    Veteran Xevious's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Post Count
    4,928
    It's that "if Obama had anything to do with it" mentality. Trump supporters would be pro-choice if Obama was pro-life, etc.

  25. #250
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,514
    the formality of killing net neutrality is today, followed by probably months of nothing happening due to multiple law suits

    Ajit Pai Thinks You're Stupid Enough to Buy This Crap [Update: One of the 7 Things Is Dancing With a Pizzagater]




    The plan is immensely unpopular, even with Republicans. This type of situation would typically call for a charm offensive, though Pai has apparently decided to resort to his time-honored tactic of being incredibly condescending instead.

    Pai urged the country to understand that even if he succeeds in his plan to let ISPs strangle the rest of the internet to death, they’ll let us continue to take selfies and other stupid bull .

    “You can still drive memes right into the ground,” Pai added before breaking into a literal Harlem Shake segment. Astute viewers may remember that this was an intolerable meme from all the way back in 2013 which has not grown any less intolerable in the intervening four years.





    All of these claims on what users “will still be able to do” are actually questionable,

    seeing as under Pai’s plan, ISPs could easily hit up their customers with crushing fees to let them access any of these services at reasonable speeds—

    particularly those binge-watching streaming services he claims to love so much.


    Strangely, Pai didn’t mention torrenting, one of the applications of the internet he believes ISPs should be able to turn off entirely to save on bandwidth.

    whether they’re going to be able to do so on fair terms or arcane, extortionate ones dictated entirely by a handful of ultra-wealthy service providers.

    one of the Daily Caller employees that danced alongside Pai in the video seems to be a proponent of Pizzagate, the infamous and completely baseless internet conspiracy theory claiming prominent Washington, D.C. Democrats were running a child sex trafficking ring out of a local pizza restaurant.

    The woman in question, Daily Caller video producer Martina Markota, appears to the right of Pai during the Harlem Shake portion of the video.

    https://gizmodo.com/ajit-pai-thinks-...+%28Gizmodo%29

    There's only one reason to kill net neutrality, and that's for the BigISP to fleece customers for more profits, increasing their ROI on the network investments.

    Pai, like all Repugs, KNOWS most Americans are stupid and ignorant as , so they can tell them stupid, ignorant LIES for-profit, on ALL issues, and not be held accountable.
    Last edited by boutons_deux; 12-14-2017 at 09:27 AM.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •