BS, are you always so pessimistic? Do you ever celebrate a victory or just look for the next failure? I'm not trying to berate you by asking these questions. What I am saying is that a positive outlook will gain more in the long run. For example, I'm as uncertain as anyone (and more so than most) that we can undo anthropocentric climate change but if I just kept saying, "We're screwed, we're all gonna fry!" you would quickly dismiss anything I might say. Let's be thankful for the victories, no matter how big or small.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
Net neutrality is not a victory. It is a loss for freedom on the internet once the FCC slowly starts applying decency standards. Over time speech will be curtailed, bloggers will require licensure, forums such as these will need permission from a goverment agency. Positivity and complacency has lead to this outcome.
Who won? The internet wasn't broken. It will be now.
I was thinking what Brian said yesterday about you. Well, your misery isn't going to get any company here, and the only people bitching about the net neutrality win is the cable providers for not getting a bigger share of the Internet and, of course, you.
Net neutrality is not a victory. It is a loss for freedom on the internet once the FCC slowly starts applying decency standards. Over time speech will be curtailed, bloggers will require licensure, forums such as these will need permission from a goverment agency. Positivity and complacency has lead to this outcome.
Interesting that you equate being positive with being complacent. I see it as the opposite. And that doesn't mean I think everything will turn out well. I just believe in doing what makes sense regardless of how things turn out. Sorry your world is so hopeless.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
Ha. You two are hilarious. A free internet led to sites like this. As per usual when I discuss the problems headed are way I always become enemy number 1. Easier to hate on me then to face the real problems coming our way. We will soon have an internet like China's. I will try to stay positive.
Ha. You two are hilarious. A free internet led to sites like this. As per usual when I discuss the problems headed are way I always become enemy number 1. Easier to hate on me then to face the real problems coming our way. We will soon have an internet like China's. I will try to stay positive.
If you can provide me with evidence of the government putting these restrictions on the internet I would like to see it.
Otherwise, this is pure speculation based on your world view. That is all.
Ha. You two are hilarious. A free internet led to sites like this. As per usual when I discuss the problems headed are way I always become enemy number 1. Easier to hate on me then to face the real problems coming our way. We will soon have an internet like China's. I will try to stay positive.
If any of us here were ignoring real problems we would not be posting here. Also, I might disagree with you on some or even several issues, BS, but I certainly don't hate you.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
Ha. You two are hilarious. A free internet led to sites like this. As per usual when I discuss the problems headed are way I always become enemy number 1. Easier to hate on me then to face the real problems coming our way. We will soon have an internet like China's. I will try to stay positive.
If you can provide me with evidence of the government putting these restrictions on the internet I would like to see it.
Otherwise, this is pure speculation based on your world view. That is all.
Get off my lawn!
Over 300 pages of regulation that was withheld from the public. Normally that is something people on here would be against.
Here is one article discussing it although probably from a source that is too right wing for your blood.
Again...this is not a victory. It is also not a left/right issue. This change can be used by any administration to stifle speech they don't like. If Bush did this you would all be outraged.
Ha. You two are hilarious. A free internet led to sites like this. As per usual when I discuss the problems headed are way I always become enemy number 1. Easier to hate on me then to face the real problems coming our way. We will soon have an internet like China's. I will try to stay positive.
Not an enemy at all, just a real cynic in this thread.
Yeah, it might change in the future, but right now, it's a major win. This fight has been on the table for years and the sheer number of people speaking out to their reps in support is what helped it win. FINALLY, something is ruled in favor of the public rather the corporations. That's why it's absurd to not be for it, because it's OUR win.
Yeah, it might change in the future, but right now, it's a major win. This fight has been on the table for years and the sheer number of people speaking out to their reps in support is what helped it win. FINALLY, something is ruled in favor of the public rather the corporations. That's why it's absurd to not be for it, because it's OUR win.
This is not in favour of the public at all. This is government taking control away from the public and putting it in the hands of an unaccountable board. Howard Stern moved to satellite radio because of the FCC. They are not your friend.
Watch the video at the link...the taiwanese get it
Ha. You two are hilarious. A free internet led to sites like this. As per usual when I discuss the problems headed are way I always become enemy number 1. Easier to hate on me then to face the real problems coming our way. We will soon have an internet like China's. I will try to stay positive.
Not an enemy at all, just a real cynic in this thread.
You think you are speaking truth to power but you are being used for power.
When Eddie sings "Mother should I trust the government?" the crowd usually yells back "No!"
I know Eddie pushed for it...makes zero sense as far as I am concerned. Call me a wet mop but I have yet to see one positive argument for it unless you just have a general anti-corporate view. The government. Fucks. Up. Everything.
I know Eddie pushed for it...makes zero sense as far as I am concerned. Call me a wet mop but I have yet to see one positive argument for it unless you just have a general anti-corporate view. The government. Fucks. Up. Everything.
So it's ok to have an anti-government view but not an anti-corporate view? How does that make sense?
I wonder also, if you feel our government fucks everything up, why are you so eager to poke our government into every conflict the Cons blather on about???
In all fairness, this is a net neutral forum that is slowly becoming net censored. Some posters on here are glad that they can still post an article (greenpeace, etc) without reprisal from the outside. Net neutrality is key and should be fought for by every leader in government of any country.
I know Eddie pushed for it...makes zero sense as far as I am concerned. Call me a wet mop but I have yet to see one positive argument for it unless you just have a general anti-corporate view. The government. Fucks. Up. Everything.
I knew a guy who worked in a government office and he had people frequently tell him the same thing. He got so sick of hearing it because when he questioned about how the government works most people were clueless and b) most of them weren't doing a thing to change anything. I'll add c) (and I'm fairly sure you will agree) it's a heck of a lot better than, say, the North Korean government or the Russian government. Again, BS, blanket statements like "The government. Fucks. Up. Everything." don't make for a good argument. Do you know of NOTHING the government has done well? I can think a many. Yosemite, The Wilderness Act etc., etc...
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
I know Eddie pushed for it...makes zero sense as far as I am concerned. Call me a wet mop but I have yet to see one positive argument for it unless you just have a general anti-corporate view. The government. Fucks. Up. Everything.
So it's ok to have an anti-government view but not an anti-corporate view? How does that make sense?
It is ok to have both. In this instance however an unregulated internet and corporate competition led to huge technical innovations with accessibility to all. Look how far the internet has come in such a short period of time. Internet content of your choice is pretty much available world wide at reduced rates and blazing fast speeds. This is not an accident. Government regulation will only strangle innovation and if anything put more power in the hands of those corporations that are willing to play ball. We see this in China where only corporations that cooperate are given access to the markets. Over time FCC mission creep will grow and the same situation will occur here. New tech start-ups will find it more difficult to get off the ground. We will have more attacks on companies like Uber and Lyft which are being strangled by the government protected taxi industry. We will have more attacks on services like AirBnB which is being strangled by the goverment protected hotel industry. Next you will see new media and bloggers under assualt. I am honestly aghast by the people on this forum who are so concerned about the Patriot Act, NSA spying, etc. yet are so unconcerned about a takeover of the internet. Net Neutrality is a back door to attacking speech and everyone on here should recognize it as such.
I tend to agree with BS about needing to keep perspective. I am 100% in favor of net neutrality. That doesn't mean I am 100% in favor of the FCC reclassifying it, and keeping the details of their plans quiet. I'm reserving judgement about this news until I know what the FCC is actually up to. I may be called pessimistic for joining his concern, but I think it is realistic caution.
Similarly, I am pro-legalization with respect to weed. My state legalized weed through an initiative called I-502. Although I am 100% in favor of legalization I voted against I-502. I was worried that in our rush for legalization we would grant the government regulatory powers that would be detrimental to the actual objective. Sure enough, I-502 shoehorned weed into an archaic, post-prohibition alcohol control scheme that didn't work very well for alcohol, but since alcohol sales were moved out from under their control, they were just itching for something else to inefficiently regulate and got it with weed. I've never been to a legal, retail pot store here because they can't compete on price with the black market or the medical dispensaries. I can get week for $15 - $20/gram at a store. I can get 1/8th for $25 at a dispensary or through the black market. Why would I pay retail prices which have been taxed 3 different times on its way to the consumer? This has resulted in non-competitive pricing, a strange supply/demand problem, and inefficient licensing of retail stores. Some stores that received licenses haven't even opened, probably because they're waiting to see if there's an actual/viable business to be made.
It is this type of disappointment with government controlled services that informs my less-than-positive view of the FCC's actions regarding net neutrality. Again, 100% in favor of net neutrality, not so much in favor of the unknown fall-out that we'll surely be facing soon through new taxes and regulations.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
My step daughter, who is rather conservatively against government legislating pretty much anything, is currently working in a large South American city where the absence of government legislation is very widespread. However, she is appalled at how polluted the place is. She's learning a lot down there. I'm fairly certain she will return to the U.S. with a different perspective on government legislation here in the U.S.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
My step daughter, who is rather conservatively against government legislating pretty much anything, is currently working in a large South American city where the absence of government legislation is very widespread. However, she is appalled at how polluted the place is. She's learning a lot down there. I'm fairly certain she will return to the U.S. with a different perspective on government legislation here in the U.S.
This is fair and I should clarify that I am not for zero government regulation. It is always a question of balance.
My step daughter, who is rather conservatively against government legislating pretty much anything, is currently working in a large South American city where the absence of government legislation is very widespread. However, she is appalled at how polluted the place is. She's learning a lot down there. I'm fairly certain she will return to the U.S. with a different perspective on government legislation here in the U.S.
This is fair and I should clarify that I am not for zero government regulation. It is always a question of balance.
Good enough, BS.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
My step daughter, who is rather conservatively against government legislating pretty much anything, is currently working in a large South American city where the absence of government legislation is very widespread. However, she is appalled at how polluted the place is. She's learning a lot down there. I'm fairly certain she will return to the U.S. with a different perspective on government legislation here in the U.S.
This is fair and I should clarify that I am not for zero government regulation. It is always a question of balance.
I tend to agree with BS about needing to keep perspective. I am 100% in favor of net neutrality. That doesn't mean I am 100% in favor of the FCC reclassifying it, and keeping the details of their plans quiet. I'm reserving judgement about this news until I know what the FCC is actually up to. I may be called pessimistic for joining his concern, but I think it is realistic caution.
Similarly, I am pro-legalization with respect to weed. My state legalized weed through an initiative called I-502. Although I am 100% in favor of legalization I voted against I-502. I was worried that in our rush for legalization we would grant the government regulatory powers that would be detrimental to the actual objective. Sure enough, I-502 shoehorned weed into an archaic, post-prohibition alcohol control scheme that didn't work very well for alcohol, but since alcohol sales were moved out from under their control, they were just itching for something else to inefficiently regulate and got it with weed. I've never been to a legal, retail pot store here because they can't compete on price with the black market or the medical dispensaries. I can get week for $15 - $20/gram at a store. I can get 1/8th for $25 at a dispensary or through the black market. Why would I pay retail prices which have been taxed 3 different times on its way to the consumer? This has resulted in non-competitive pricing, a strange supply/demand problem, and inefficient licensing of retail stores. Some stores that received licenses haven't even opened, probably because they're waiting to see if there's an actual/viable business to be made.
It is this type of disappointment with government controlled services that informs my less-than-positive view of the FCC's actions regarding net neutrality. Again, 100% in favor of net neutrality, not so much in favor of the unknown fall-out that we'll surely be facing soon through new taxes and regulations.
Usually there is nothing the govt runs that is more efficient then private enterprise.But Lets not forget Jeff,At least you have the added availability for procurement and a progressive minded state.We are still in the dark ages here in FL,when it comes to MJ.Hopefully this year.We lost out by 2%.we needed 60% to pass and only got 58%.
Comments
If you can provide me with evidence of the government putting these restrictions on the internet I would like to see it.
Otherwise, this is pure speculation based on your world view. That is all.
Get off my lawn!
Here is one article discussing it although probably from a source that is too right wing for your blood.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/414483/comrades-net-neutrality-john-fund
If you are not concerned with the speech aspect you can also read Mark Cuban's thoughts on how it will stifle innovation.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/11/24/why-mark-cuban-opposes-net-neutrality-i-want-there-to-be-fast-lanes/
Again...this is not a victory. It is also not a left/right issue. This change can be used by any administration to stifle speech they don't like. If Bush did this you would all be outraged.
Watch the video at the link...the taiwanese get it
http://www.tomonews.net/m/fcc-and-obama-think-1930s-regulation-best-way-to-govern-a-modern-internet-198443630706688
When Eddie sings "Mother should I trust the government?" the crowd usually yells back "No!"
The FCC certainly cannot be trusted, Good God. I said before, the future will bring change, but you're being a wet mop here.
But who am I to speak, alas I am behind bars.
I'll add c) (and I'm fairly sure you will agree) it's a heck of a lot better than, say, the North Korean government or the Russian government. Again, BS, blanket statements like "The government. Fucks. Up. Everything." don't make for a good argument. Do you know of NOTHING the government has done well? I can think a many. Yosemite, The Wilderness Act etc., etc...
http://www.wsj.com/articles/gordon-crovitz-liberals-mugged-by-obamanet-1425252804
Damn...link could be behind a paywall. For some reason I can read it when I click through google.
Similarly, I am pro-legalization with respect to weed. My state legalized weed through an initiative called I-502. Although I am 100% in favor of legalization I voted against I-502. I was worried that in our rush for legalization we would grant the government regulatory powers that would be detrimental to the actual objective. Sure enough, I-502 shoehorned weed into an archaic, post-prohibition alcohol control scheme that didn't work very well for alcohol, but since alcohol sales were moved out from under their control, they were just itching for something else to inefficiently regulate and got it with weed. I've never been to a legal, retail pot store here because they can't compete on price with the black market or the medical dispensaries. I can get week for $15 - $20/gram at a store. I can get 1/8th for $25 at a dispensary or through the black market. Why would I pay retail prices which have been taxed 3 different times on its way to the consumer? This has resulted in non-competitive pricing, a strange supply/demand problem, and inefficient licensing of retail stores. Some stores that received licenses haven't even opened, probably because they're waiting to see if there's an actual/viable business to be made.
It is this type of disappointment with government controlled services that informs my less-than-positive view of the FCC's actions regarding net neutrality. Again, 100% in favor of net neutrality, not so much in favor of the unknown fall-out that we'll surely be facing soon through new taxes and regulations.