Obama ruins the internet

Can anyone briefly summarize what the point/s of disagreement are? Aside from the trivial stuff like interpretations of metaphorical cartoons.

At least some percentage of the exchanges in this thread seem to be of the nature of

Person A: "X is true."
Person B: "Wrong. Y is not true."

or

Person A: "X is true"
Person B: "Wrong. X is true."
 
mumblethrax said:
Which does make me think that we should just drop the net neutrality banner and talk about the fact that we rely on a patchwork of regional/vertical monopolies for internet service, and what we can do about that.
Click to expand...
That'd be great. Which one is more likely to be accomplished in the next 12 months? 12 years, even?
 
Upchurch said:
If you don't want the quick explanations of cartoons, your best bet for a first pass understanding is Wikipedia.
Click to expand...

I didn't say anything about not wanting the quick explanations of cartoons, nor was I requesting any sort of explanation of what net neutrality is.

I requested to know what the point/s of disagreement are ITT, with the exclusion of trivial trivial points of disagreement such as the disagreement over how a particular cartoon panel is meant to be interpreted.
 
Belz... said:
You are incorrect. It is another issue. Perhaps you should not try to simplify things by conflating issues into one.
Click to expand...

Like claiming that Netflix's dispute with ISP's was about net neutrality?

Yup, that sort of conflation is indeed a bad idea.
 
cornsail said:
I requested to know what the point/s of disagreement are ITT, with the exclusion of trivial trivial points of disagreement such as the disagreement over how a particular cartoon panel is meant to be interpreted.
Click to expand...
Oh, we're largely talking past one another about two separate issues.
 
Francesca R said:
It is a monopoly carrier (of letters). There is thus a case for regulating its charges and service commitment to avoid market failure.
Click to expand...

The Post Office isn't a monopoly carrier. There are many competing services. They usually focus on delivering packages, but you can send letters as well. Moreover, the barrier to entry for a new company wanting to deliver letters is quite low. Unlike ISPs, the competing services don't have to own their own set of roads to everyone's house first.
 
Last edited:
Belz... said:
You are incorrect. It is another issue. Perhaps you should not try to simplify things by conflating issues into one.
Click to expand...
To you maybe. To some NN proponents in this thread, increasing competition and separating line owndership is a superior solution to NN. And that's because the complaint boils down to lack of competition.

But if all you want is NN and your ISP doesn't provide it, go get another then. Mine does. Not that it has to.
 
Newtons Bit said:
The Post Office isn't a monopoly carrier. There are many competing services. They usually focus on delivering packages, but you can send letters as well.
Click to expand...

Not without an act of congress.

Article I, section 8, Clause 7 of the United States Constitution grants Congress the power to establish post offices and post roads, which has been interpreted as a de facto Congressional monopoly over the delivery of first class residential mail - which has been defined as non-urgent residential letters (not packages). Accordingly, no other system for delivering first class residential mail – public or private – has been tolerated, absent Congress's consent
Click to expand...

link

So a bad example.
 
Francesca R said:
To you maybe. To some NN proponents in this thread, increasing competition and separating line owndership is a superior solution to NN. And that's because the complaint boils down to lack of competition.

But if all you want is NN and your ISP doesn't provide it, go get another then. Mine does. Not that it has to.
Click to expand...

My preference would be both, but it isn't going to happen in the US.
 
Francesca R said:
To you maybe. To some NN proponents in this thread, increasing competition and separating line owndership is a superior solution to NN. And that's because the complaint boils down to lack of competition.
Click to expand...

Did you not just agree that it is a separate issue, there ?

But if all you want is NN and your ISP doesn't provide it, go get another then.
Click to expand...

What if none of them do ?
 
FCC pushes back against Obama on net neutrality
On Monday, Wheeler told executives from major Internet companies -- including Google and Yahoo -- that the agency is considering an approach which combines both Obama's proposals and also addresses concerns registered by ISPs -- but the route may not follow the US president's wishes.

[...]

However, Wheeler felt it was necessary during the meeting to pointedly remind executives that the FCC was not beholden to the White House, and repeatedly said "I am an independent agency."
Click to expand...
Poor Wheeler. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom