Quote:
Originally Posted by mickmoranis
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
1. the fcc CAN do exactly what they did on the 14th with various websites they have the exact power as the oversight apointed commity to do exactly that.
the very fact that they got rid of NN is a literal example of their power to do exactly that.
|
No. Do Not Pass Go. Do Not Collect $200.
The FCC has the power to enact rules on HOW an ISP delivers its content, not rules on WHAT content may be delivered. Telling people that all cars must travel no greater than 65 MPH on the freeway is not the same as banning all Honda Accords.
Please cite a law, ruling, or administrative memo detailing this power. Don't worry, I've got all day.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dildo Shwaggins
2. Explain to me why google put fiber in kansas and not california first. And these states enacting their own regulation on internet is your last fucking hope you stupid loser libcuck, so you better figure out how to succeed at enacting it quick. Or leprechauns are going to charge you 5.99 to browse twitter.
|
Because Kansas fit the model they needed to experiment with urban fiber, and the city governments were willing to indemnify Google against property damage with the installation of the lines. What does this have to do with anything?
Secondly, I'm a conservative, I just don't worship your god emperor.
Third, have you seen a doctor for your ADHD? For like the 6th time now, the states can launch their own NN regulations, but they will likely fail in Federal court. I know that planning ahead is an alien concept to you, but it's something that grownups like to do because they have responsibilities.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Skankhunt42
I mean seriously, there is no difference between the goverment allowing corperations to throttle a website and throttling a website the government doesn't want you to have access to.
|
Except this thing called the Constitution. You know, the little part they amended first to say that the
Government cannot restrict your free speech?
And, no corporations shouldn't be allowed to throttle either. If we were in a perfect setting of monopolistic competition, NN wouldn't be needed; you could just buy service from a competing ISP who didn't throttle. Except we're not. At best, most markets are an oligopoly, but typically they are duopolies and monopolies. This means that it's a matter of "when" and not "if" they'll abuse consumers to the detriment of the general welfare of the nation.
I know 4th grade is exciting now, but just wait until you have Economics 101 in about 15 years.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by MLKKK
the entire support structure for getting rid of NN from my alt right bro's is for states to set up their own rules and to not allow the gov to do it federally.
Removing the internet from Tittle II does NOT prevent states from setting up their own regulation.. contrary to what that other poster with the adventure time avatar thinks.
|
It does not prevent them yet, because there's been no preemption lawsuit yet. You do understand that NN was eliminated because the FCC is
hostile to the idea, right? There is a strong chance that because of this hostility that they will challenge individual state's NN laws. Because they have a problem with NN as a concept, not because they simply don't want to handle it.