A day in the life of Net Neutrality

[ClosedCaption]

I never said throttling couldn't happen. I asked you to explain it to me. You couldn't.

Doesnt change the fact that it has happened now does it?

If you believe so, you have to prove it's a deliberate measure and not problems.

I showed it was deliberate

And it still doesn't say they have been, plan to or are currently blocking or discriminating.

I showed that they did it.

Your new stance is "Yabut its a good thing tho"

 

[ClosedCaption]

I never said throttling couldn't happen. I asked you to explain it to me. You couldn't.

Throttling absolutely happens. The question is "so what?" Welfare for NetFlix just isn't high on my priority list. They can pay for more bandwidth and raise their prices a few pennies to recoup the costs.

NetFlix transitioned from a disk based to a streaming service, they saved on DVD costs, redirecting those costs to purchase expanded bandwidth is a legitimate business expense.

But this isnt about only Netflix this is about should the internet stay the way it is or should the companies be allowed to block competing websites and charge ANYONE (not just Netflix) to pay for faster delivery of their websites.

Currently all websites, from blogs to NBC is offered on the same level playing field.

This has been told to you before but your act remains the same

 

[ClosedCaption]

Actually it kind of does. It's a decent comparison.

If you want your mail faster, you pay more.

if you want your mail in the same tote as everyone else, you dont.

If you want your internet faster you pay more.

if you don't you dont.

Can the Post Office slow down someone elses package? No...No comparison there.

They most certainly can. Are you saying mail doesn't get put in the wrong place and takes longer to hit the mailbox.

Can you elaborate how a backbone or an ISP can slow the connection from one individual in order to give it to someone else. Can you elaborate on that for me?

Thanks

So here you'll see that Takeastep back believed that slowing down another site is akin to losing a package. Which its not,

And you'll see that Takeastep also didnt know (or understand maybe?) how an ISP can slow down a site.

But NOW....4 pages later Takeastep will tell you that this:

I knew it was purposefully done in the first place. It's been going on in one form or another for..wait for it..the invention of the internet.

He knew it happened all along Except he thought it was like losing a package which it aint. Its been happening since the invention of the internet! Except Takea didnt know it could happen or how it works....Hell, Takea cant even show when this happened before in the past... But he knew all about it. Double hell..Takea wants you to believe that since it happened before its all good...it aint

Either he was lying about the package comparison being valid or he didnt know shit about it in the first place

 

[Kosh]

Actually it kind of does. It's a decent comparison.

If you want your mail faster, you pay more.

if you want your mail in the same tote as everyone else, you dont.

If you want your internet faster you pay more.

if you don't you dont.

Can the Post Office slow down someone elses package? No...No comparison there.

They most certainly can. Are you saying mail doesn't get put in the wrong place and takes longer to hit the mailbox.

Can you elaborate how a backbone or an ISP can slow the connection from one individual in order to give it to someone else. Can you elaborate on that for me?

Thanks

So here you'll see that Takeastep back believed that slowing down another site is akin to losing a package. Which its not,

And you'll see that Takeastep also didnt know (or understand maybe?) how an ISP can slow down a site.

But NOW....4 pages later Takeastep will tell you that this:

I knew it was purposefully done in the first place. It's been going on in one form or another for..wait for it..the invention of the internet.

He knew it happened all along Except he thought it was like losing a package which it aint. Its been happening since the invention of the internet! Except Takea didnt know it could happen or how it works....Hell, Takea cant even show when this happened before in the past... But he knew all about it. Double hell..Takea wants you to believe that since it happened before its all good...it aint

Either he was lying about the package comparison being valid or he didnt know shit about it in the first place

here is a hint for all you far left posters that will support anything that comes down the pipe..

Look into who actually owns and operates the "internet" lines in the US..

The results may shock you!

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Actually it kind of does. It's a decent comparison.

If you want your mail faster, you pay more.

if you want your mail in the same tote as everyone else, you dont.

If you want your internet faster you pay more.

if you don't you dont.

Can the Post Office slow down someone elses package? No...No comparison there.

They most certainly can. Are you saying mail doesn't get put in the wrong place and takes longer to hit the mailbox.

Can you elaborate how a backbone or an ISP can slow the connection from one individual in order to give it to someone else. Can you elaborate on that for me?

Thanks

So here you'll see that Takeastep back believed that slowing down another site is akin to losing a package. Which its not,

And you'll see that Takeastep also didnt know (or understand maybe?) how an ISP can slow down a site.

But NOW....4 pages later Takeastep will tell you that this:

I knew it was purposefully done in the first place. It's been going on in one form or another for..wait for it..the invention of the internet.

He knew it happened all along Except he thought it was like losing a package which it aint. Its been happening since the invention of the internet! Except Takea didnt know it could happen or how it works....Hell, Takea cant even show when this happened before in the past... But he knew all about it. Double hell..Takea wants you to believe that since it happened before its all good...it aint

Either he was lying about the package comparison being valid or he didnt know shit about it in the first place

So you can not distinguish between a question and a belief? Is that what you're left holding onto? You're own dick?

 

[ClosedCaption]

Actually it kind of does. It's a decent comparison.

If you want your mail faster, you pay more.

if you want your mail in the same tote as everyone else, you dont.

If you want your internet faster you pay more.

if you don't you dont.

Can the Post Office slow down someone elses package? No...No comparison there.

They most certainly can. Are you saying mail doesn't get put in the wrong place and takes longer to hit the mailbox.

Can you elaborate how a backbone or an ISP can slow the connection from one individual in order to give it to someone else. Can you elaborate on that for me?

Thanks

So here you'll see that Takeastep back believed that slowing down another site is akin to losing a package. Which its not,

And you'll see that Takeastep also didnt know (or understand maybe?) how an ISP can slow down a site.

But NOW....4 pages later Takeastep will tell you that this:

I knew it was purposefully done in the first place. It's been going on in one form or another for..wait for it..the invention of the internet.

He knew it happened all along Except he thought it was like losing a package which it aint. Its been happening since the invention of the internet! Except Takea didnt know it could happen or how it works....Hell, Takea cant even show when this happened before in the past... But he knew all about it. Double hell..Takea wants you to believe that since it happened before its all good...it aint

Either he was lying about the package comparison being valid or he didnt know shit about it in the first place

So you can not distinguish between a question and a belief? Is that what you're left holding onto? You're own dick?

Question are asked because one doesnt know...you didnt....you thought slowing down internet speeds was like losing a package and now you know all about it

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Actually it kind of does. It's a decent comparison.

If you want your mail faster, you pay more.

if you want your mail in the same tote as everyone else, you dont.

If you want your internet faster you pay more.

if you don't you dont.

Can the Post Office slow down someone elses package? No...No comparison there.

They most certainly can. Are you saying mail doesn't get put in the wrong place and takes longer to hit the mailbox.

Can you elaborate how a backbone or an ISP can slow the connection from one individual in order to give it to someone else. Can you elaborate on that for me?

Thanks

So here you'll see that Takeastep back believed that slowing down another site is akin to losing a package. Which its not,

And you'll see that Takeastep also didnt know (or understand maybe?) how an ISP can slow down a site.

But NOW....4 pages later Takeastep will tell you that this:

I knew it was purposefully done in the first place. It's been going on in one form or another for..wait for it..the invention of the internet.

He knew it happened all along Except he thought it was like losing a package which it aint. Its been happening since the invention of the internet! Except Takea didnt know it could happen or how it works....Hell, Takea cant even show when this happened before in the past... But he knew all about it. Double hell..Takea wants you to believe that since it happened before its all good...it aint

Either he was lying about the package comparison being valid or he didnt know shit about it in the first place

So you can not distinguish between a question and a belief? Is that what you're left holding onto? You're own dick?

Question are asked because one doesnt know...you didnt....you thought slowing down internet speeds was like losing a package and now you know all about it

Questions are asked because one doesn't know?

Never been to college, I gather. oh well. I told you. I know WAY more about this than you and your butthurt over comcast ******* up your nightly netflix.

You're just another pigeon with no argument and straw drawing to accuse me of saying i don't understand for questioning yours.

Good night, Dullard.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Currently all websites, from blogs to NBC is offered on the same level playing field.

not according to you, dude.

 

[ogibillm]

[

You can thank your local government for granting them a monopoly.

But there are other ISP's available to him.He just lacks the wits to grasp what an ISP is. If they don't knock on his door and offer him a bundle with TV, phone, and Internet, he doesn't' think they are an ISP.

there really, truly, aren't other isp's available.
not broadband anyhow.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

[

You can thank your local government for granting them a monopoly.

But there are other ISP's available to him.He just lacks the wits to grasp what an ISP is. If they don't knock on his door and offer him a bundle with TV, phone, and Internet, he doesn't' think they are an ISP.

there really, truly, aren't other isp's available.
not broadband anyhow.

That you can afford, S.8.
Choices remain.

 

[ogibillm]

[

You can thank your local government for granting them a monopoly.

But there are other ISP's available to him.He just lacks the wits to grasp what an ISP is. If they don't knock on his door and offer him a bundle with TV, phone, and Internet, he doesn't' think they are an ISP.

there really, truly, aren't other isp's available.
not broadband anyhow.

That you can afford, S.8.
Choices remain.

no, they really don't.

 

[Eric Cartman]

The government initiated and funded the creation of the internet.

Yes and no.

Ethernet was created by Bob Metcalf independent of government, but Cerf and Kahn probably would have never developed TCP/IP outside of government.

DARPANET is widely recognized as the basis of the internet, but IRC and DOORS was around as a competing technology in the private sector.

Ethernet is not the internet.

Government authorities allow for the internet backbone to exist and much of its distribution network just like other utilities or roads. Telecoms have made giant profits from their investments and the governments largess.

Got it. we should give praise to big brother for allowing us to live.

Straw man.

Would we allow other utilities to use extortion as a revenue stream?

So you have no desire to be taken seriously.

I understand.

Maybe this is why you don't seem to understand the issue.

Can you pay to :

1 lower water pressure to a competing car wash?

In California, water districts have done exactly that, in response to the drought.

If we have a data drought your comment might be apt.

2 Dim the lights of a competing retail outlet?

You realize that restaurant actually pay for the electricity they use, right? The is no "electric neutrality" that gives everyone as much as they want.

that isn't what net neutrality does... wow

3 Close a bridge to a competing restaurant?

No.

Please explain why people who normally speak of the greatness of free markets want to let giant corporation stifle competition by manipulating a pseudo-government entity (the internet) that was designed to be common carrier.

What is it in your fevered little brain that you think is happening?

Verizon put a cap on the data that NetFlix sent over their backbone, then demanded that NetFlix pay for usage above that.

Think back to the electricity example, does a manufacturing plant pay the same price for electricity as a residential home?

Why do you think this is?

Again you don't seem understand the issue... the question should be " can manufacture pay the electric company for better service than their competitors."

 

[ClosedCaption]

Questions are asked because one doesn't know?

Never been to college, I gather. oh well. I told you. I know WAY more about this than you and your butthurt over comcast ******* up your nightly netflix.

You're just another pigeon with no argument and straw drawing to accuse me of saying i don't understand for questioning yours.

Good night, Dullard.

Good

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Ethernet is not the internet.

 

[Zoom-boing]

But this isnt about only Netflix this is about should the internet stay the way it is or should the companies be allowed to block competing websites and charge ANYONE (not just Netflix) to pay for faster delivery of their websites.

Currently all websites, from blogs to NBC is offered on the same level playing field.

This has been told to you before but your act remains the same

The two bolded conflict.

Should the internet stay the way it is? Yes, and if some want to charge more for those gobbling up lots and lots of bandwith, no problem.

Currently all websites are offered on the same level playing field. Currently Comcast can charge Netflix more for a faster lane because Netflix gobbles up more bandwith than say, the USMB ... which is not, according to the left, a 'level playing field'.

Why shouldn't those who consume/use much more bandwith pay more for using more?

 

[Kosh]

Questions are asked because one doesn't know?

Never been to college, I gather. oh well. I told you. I know WAY more about this than you and your butthurt over comcast ******* up your nightly netflix.

You're just another pigeon with no argument and straw drawing to accuse me of saying i don't understand for questioning yours.

Good night, Dullard.

Good

 

[HenryBHough]

You

(buffering)

will NOT

(buffering)

notic

(buffering)

e any di

(buffering)

ifference in

(buffering)

the intern

(buffering)

et when g

(buffering)

overnme

(buffering)

nt is re

(buffering)

reading your

(buffering)

(buffering)

[censored]

before t

(buffering)

hey can b

(buffering)

e posted.

 

[ogibillm]

You

(buffering)

will NOT

(buffering)

notic

(buffering)

e any di

(buffering)

ifference in

(buffering)

the intern

(buffering)

et when g

(buffering)

overnme

(buffering)

nt is re

(buffering)

reading your

(buffering)

(buffering)

[censored]

before t

(buffering)

hey can b

(buffering)

e posted.

i must have missed your point about net neutrality in that. care to try again?

 

[HenryBHough]

Your inability to comprehend is not my responsibility to even try to repair.

Meanwhile, the point is that net neutrality, pure and simple, ain't a bad thing but festooned like some friggen Portagee Christmas Tree with all sorts of governmental intrusion and monkeying is what has worked so well for North Korea and China.

I guess just one inclusion of [censored] might have been a little too subtle.

 

[ogibillm]

Your inability to comprehend is not my responsibility to even try to repair.

Meanwhile, the point is that net neutrality, pure and simple, ain't a bad thing but festooned like some friggen Portagee Christmas Tree with all sorts of governmental intrusion and monkeying is what has worked so well for North Korea and China.

I guess just one inclusion of [censored] might have been a little too subtle.

oh i see. you think net neutrality means government censorship of content.
you're entitled to be wrong.