Jump to content
270soft Forum
NYrepublican

Net Neutrality

Do you support net neutrality?  

26 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you support net neutrality?



Recommended Posts

Just now, NYrepublican said:

@ThePotatoWalrus @jvikings1 @Reagan04 what was explained by Victorraiders is why we have a first amendment and net neutrality.

Government cant be regulating all that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, NYrepublican said:

ISP'S or what Brazil's Govt is doing?

I'm talking here in America, we shouldnt be socializing the internet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Reagan04 said:

I'm talking here in America, we shouldnt be socializing the internet.

how is it socializing the internet exactly?(with all the City's pointless socialistic nonsense I fail to see how it's socialistic)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, NYrepublican said:

@ThePotatoWalrus @jvikings1 @Reagan04 what was explained by @victorraiders is why we have a first amendment and net neutrality.

 

1 minute ago, Reagan04 said:

Government cant be regulating all that.

68 percent of people voted against gun control and PT,PMDB,PSDB and minors party banned all guns here, only former nationalist party PRONA voted against.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, NYrepublican said:

how is it socializing the internet exactly?(with all the City's pointless socialistic nonsense I fail to see how it's socialistic)

It's Rent Control basically, the government is regulating prices that providers can charge.

1 minute ago, victorraiders said:

 

68 percent of people voted against gun control and PT,PMDB,PSDB and minors party banned all guns here, only former nationalist party PRONA voted against.

Wat. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Reagan04 said:

It's Rent Control basically, the government is regulating prices that providers can charge.

rent control is very different (coming from a city that has it).

Net Neutrality refers to if ISP'S can favor various forms of data.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Reagan04 said:

It's Rent Control basically, the government is regulating prices that providers can charge.

Wat. 

referendum about gun control and partys banned guns for ''more better to people and guns take to the violence,venezuela and brazil are one of recents examples of gun control/gun ban

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, NYrepublican said:

rent control is very different (coming from a city that has it).

Net Neutrality refers to if ISP'S can favor various forms of data.

Net Neutrality bans chargin more for better service, or what a provider can charge for a domain, Rent Control.

Just now, victorraiders said:

referendum about gun control and partys banned party for ''more better to people and guns take to the violence,venezuela and brazil are one of recents examples of gun control/gun ban

That has nothing to do with Net Neutrality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Reagan04 said:

Net Neutrality bans chargin more for better service, or what a provider can charge for a domain, Rent Control.

That has nothing to do with Net Neutrality.

yep i talked with nyrepublican about net neutrality and others censorship

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Reagan04 said:

Net Neutrality bans chargin more for better service, or what a provider can charge for a domain, Rent Control.

That has nothing to do with Net Neutrality.

We've restrained other companies in similar manners.the electricity company can't decide rather than invest in new infrastructure it'll  dim your bulbs and then sell you a brighter blub subscription.

3 minutes ago, Reagan04 said:

Net Neutrality bans chargin more for better service, or what a provider can charge for a domain, Rent Control.

That has nothing to do with Net Neutrality.

what exactly prevents ISP's from slowing competitor traffic or those of political agendas they oppose?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am fine with providers charging more if it is stated in the policy that a person buys

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Reagan04 said:

we shouldnt be socializing the internet.

Hes right.

3 hours ago, jvikings1 said:

I am fine with providers charging more if it is stated in the policy that a person buys

So is he, lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, NYrepublican said:

Net neutrality says that all data you access must be treated equally by the ISP. allowing them to speed up access to various sites allows them to also slow traffic down to less popular sites.

Nothing wrong with this. It improves and speeds internet access for everyone on the best sites, and increases competition to provide higher quality services.

@Reagan04, you'd agree, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ThePotatoWalrus said:

Nothing wrong with this. It improves and speeds internet access for everyone on the best sites, and increases competition to provide higher quality services.

@Reagan04, you'd agree, right?

 

Yes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, ThePotatoWalrus said:

Nothing wrong with this. It improves and speeds internet access for everyone on the best sites, and increases competition to provide higher quality services.

@Reagan04, you'd agree, right?

1.most popular is not the best.Best is a subjective word

2.by that you accept that they have the right to slow access to less popular sites.

3.If you allow them to slow access to various sites what's stopping them from slowing access to sites they disagree with or to competitor's sites(it's known that if a page takes more than 10 seconds to load most users leave.) source(in this example an e-commerce site):http://www.marketingprofs.com/charts/2016/29670/how-long-will-consumers-wait-for-an-e-commerce-page-to-load

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, NYrepublican said:

1.most popular is not the best.Best is a subjective word

2.by that you accept that they have the right to slow access to less popular sites.

3.If you allow them to slow access to various sites what's stopping them from slowing access to sites they disagree with or to competitor's sites(it's known that if a page takes more than 10 seconds to load most users leave.) source(in this example an e-commerce site):http://www.marketingprofs.com/charts/2016/29670/how-long-will-consumers-wait-for-an-e-commerce-page-to-load

 

@Reagan04 any response to this  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, ThePotatoWalrus said:

Nothing wrong with this. It improves and speeds internet access for everyone on the best sites, and increases competition to provide higher quality services.

@Reagan04, you'd agree, right?

Not the best sites, just the ones willing to pay the ISPs for preferred access

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, pilight said:

Not the best sites, just the ones willing to pay the ISPs for preferred access

One of the biggest flaws in the capitalist/corporatist economic system is that all sense of "value," becomes entirely subjective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Patine said:

One of the biggest flaws in the capitalist/corporatist economic system is that all sense of "value," becomes entirely subjective.

I'm so looking forward to @SirLagsalott's 2040 thing with "Patine explains why you're wrong" as an interviewer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, pilight said:

i somehow don't see Google removing search results globally since soemone will find some ground to sue Google if it will.Also other courts can hold that falls out of Canada's jurisdiction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, NYrepublican said:

i somehow don't see Google removing search results globally since soemone will find some ground to sue Google if it will.Also other courts can hold that falls out of Canada's jurisdiction.

Google can be penalized by the Canadian government if they don't comply

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...