Republicans aim to kill Net Neutrality with final vote in December.

Lightbringer

Active member
Legendary
Joined
Feb 9, 2012
Messages
14,168
Kin
0💸
Kumi
0💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
This is a big deal since it affects everyone who uses the internet and is a restriction of freedom of speech.

For those who are unfamiliar with what Net Neutrality is, here is a small outline:

"Net neutrality is the principle that Internet service providers and governments regulating most of the Internet must treat all data on the Internet the same, and not discriminate or charge differentially by user, content, website, platform, application, type of attached equipment, or method of communication."




What is Net Neutrality?

Net Neutrality is the internet’s guiding principle: It preserves our right to communicate freely online.

Net Neutrality means an internet that enables and protects free speech. It means that ISPs should provide us with open networks — and shouldn’t block or discriminate against any applications or content that ride over those networks. Just as your phone company shouldn’t decide who you call and what you say on that call, your ISP shouldn’t interfere with the content you view or post online.

Without Net Neutrality, cable and phone companies could carve the internet into fast and slow lanes. An ISP could slow down its competitors’ content or block political opinions it disagreed with. ISPs could charge extra fees to the few content companies that could afford to pay for preferential treatment — relegating everyone else to a slower tier of service. This would destroy the open internet.

What would happen if we lost Net Neutrality?


The internet without Net Neutrality isn’t really the internet. Unlike the open internet that has paved the way for so much innovation and given a platform to people who have historically been shut out, it would become a closed-down network where cable and phone companies call the shots and decide which websites, content or applications succeed.

This would have an enormous impact. Companies like AT&T, Comcast and Verizon would be able to decide who is heard and who isn’t. They’d be able to block websites or content they don’t like or applications that compete with their own offerings.

The consequences would be particularly devastating for marginalized communities media outlets have misrepresented or failed to serve. People of color, the LGBTQ community, indigenous peoples and religious minorities in the United States rely on the open internet to organize, access economic and educational opportunities, and fight back against systemic discrimination.

Without Net Neutrality, how would activists be able to fight oppression? What would happen to social movements like the Movement for Black Lives? How would the next disruptive technology, business or company emerge if internet service providers only let incumbents succeed?


"The head of the Federal Communications Commission is set to unveil plans next week for a final vote to reverse a landmark 2015 net neutrality order barring the blocking or slowing of web content, two people briefed on the plans said.

In May, the FCC voted 2-1 to advance Republican FCC Chairman Ajit Pai’s plan to withdraw the former Obama administration’s order reclassifying internet service providers as if they were utilities. Pai now plans to hold a final vote on the proposal at the FCC’s Dec. 14 meeting, the people said, and roll out details of the plans next week.

Pai asked in May for public comment on whether the FCC has authority or should keep any regulations limiting internet providers’ ability to block, throttle or offer “fast lanes” to some websites, known as “paid prioritization.” Several industry officials told Reuters they expect Pai to drop those specific legal requirements but retain some transparency requirements under the order.”




 

Dreckerplayer

Active member
Elite
Joined
Mar 9, 2012
Messages
7,323
Kin
26💸
Kumi
0💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
Freedom of speech.
You need my validation?Such an insecurity.

Sad, I don't say what I want to say because of some right called "freedom of speech",I don't need it as some excuse or trump card.Nor do I need a rule or law to tell me that I'm allowed to say what I want,cause who's gonna stop me? That's the difference between you and me, you need the approval of someone else.

It doesn't matter what I say, I can't actually stop him from saying what he wants to say, not sure what the point of announcing the obvious...however, I can address a show off whenever I feel like, just to let him know. I have that freedom of doing so.

Simple case of "cause and affect"...I'd be passive, if I listened to you.

Anways, carry on with what you do...cause you guys will certainly try to pick a fight with a monster.And this could've went a nice way, but then I noticed the spite and instigation...god, poor character.

There's a difference between saying something to "address" versus saying something to be spiteful and vindictive...
 
Last edited:

Clown World

Bonbibonkers' bf
Regular
Joined
Jul 14, 2017
Messages
540
Kin
0💸
Kumi
7💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
Disgusting, even modern day conservatives really are cucks, although i highly suspect it is the boomer generation and gen x, not millenials that are pushing this.
 

Fountain

Active member
Elite
Joined
Nov 16, 2012
Messages
5,416
Kin
13💸
Kumi
0💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
Awards
My agenda? You mean being in favor of Net Neutrality? You just said you were in favor of it, so it's your agenda too.

How is this story disingenuous? Is it not happening?
I would've given you a pass, but given your history, the fact that you posted yet another article that you found wich tries to depict republicans in such bad light, and the fact that you wrote this >

The consequences would be particularly devastating for marginalized communities media outlets have misrepresented or failed to serve. People of color, the LGBTQ community, indigenous peoples and religious minorities in the United States rely on the open internet to organize, access economic and educational opportunities, and fight back against systemic discrimination.

Without Net Neutrality, how would activists be able to fight oppression? What would happen to social movements like the Movement for Black Lives? How would the next disruptive technology, business or company emerge if internet service providers only let incumbents succeed?
I would say your real agenda clearly shows.

You have proven that you are pro anti-conservatives, anti-guns, think blacks are oppressed, and republicans are Nazis. In essence, you fill in the stereotype of what people call a "libtard". And here you are pretending that you actually posted this thread because you care about net neutrality when in reality you don't care about it any more than you care about forcing your political views upon everyone on this website. Plus, you can't say you're for net neutrality when you support groups that try to shut down freedom of speech.

Make up your mind. I don't care about your belives but don't be such a disigenuous hypocrite.
 

Lightbringer

Active member
Legendary
Joined
Feb 9, 2012
Messages
14,168
Kin
0💸
Kumi
0💴
Trait Points
0⚔️
I would've given you a pass, but given your history, the fact that you posted yet another article that you found wich tries to depict republicans in such bad light, and the fact that you wrote this >



I would say your real agenda clearly shows.

You have proven that you are pro anti-conservatives, anti-guns, think blacks are oppressed, and republicans are Nazis. In essence, you fill in the stereotype of what people call a "libtard". And here you are pretending that you actually posted this thread because you care about net neutrality when in reality you don't care about it any more than you care about forcing your political views upon everyone on this website. Plus, you can't say you're for net neutrality when you support groups that try to shut down freedom of speech.

Make up your mind. I don't care about your belives but don't be such a disigenuous hypocrite.
Lmao. Yet Republicans consistently are the ones to push for fascist legislation that restricts people's freedoms, hurts the environment, discriminates against minorities, cut funding to social programs such as education and health, make tax cuts that benefit only the rich and hurt everyone else, and yield support from Nazis, White Supremacists, and Confederates.

But it's no surprise to me that you're on their side since you're a Nazi apologist.

It's hilarious how even when it comes to Net Neutrality, you still bend over for Republicans and try to attack me out of spite. I'm sorry I made you this salty. I think you need to step outside and get some fresh air before you burst a vein.
 
Last edited:
Top