(11-23-2017 02:55 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(11-23-2017 01:48 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(11-23-2017 01:38 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(11-23-2017 01:11 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(11-23-2017 12:58 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  No it wasn't, it was nothing but meaningless rhetoric claiming a risk of technological stagnation backed by no quantitative evidence supporting such claim. Only a simpleton whose political identity aligns with these vague ideals would find this argument compelling.

you just came a whole lot of the same rhetoric......you fit right in with the dems.....

what you're smart enough to know is that censoring is your last across the bow be-al-gore is sunk....

we're just sitting on the sidelines eating popcorn with floss.....

Stink, read the posts before you comment on them, then maybe you'll grasp why I don't need to provide quantitative evidence or source data to criticise someone affirmatively making a claim without either providing either of those.

you know what.....I'll concede that one (I read 'em all....it makes me laugh)

however, why come with gibberish when you have the potential to make light of .....or am I overstating what I see in ability???

I know you're no dummy.....you simply display the symptoms of another troll....that's a waste of ability IMO....

Truth is I'm not really in a position to easily provide evidence contrary to his claim right now being on my phone, but I still wanted to outline how ridiculous it is for a statement like that to be considered compelling.

lol......ze phone........how I hate thee......I can't wait for the prosthetic neck bracing to evolve for those that lean for-back-ward...

sometimes I post in field.....but it's rare for that reason alone.....

(11-23-2017 02:55 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(11-23-2017 01:48 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(11-23-2017 01:38 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(11-23-2017 01:11 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(11-23-2017 12:58 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  No it wasn't, it was nothing but meaningless rhetoric claiming a risk of technological stagnation backed by no quantitative evidence supporting such claim. Only a simpleton whose political identity aligns with these vague ideals would find this argument compelling.

you just came a whole lot of the same rhetoric......you fit right in with the dems.....

what you're smart enough to know is that censoring is your last across the bow be-al-gore is sunk....

we're just sitting on the sidelines eating popcorn with floss.....

Stink, read the posts before you comment on them, then maybe you'll grasp why I don't need to provide quantitative evidence or source data to criticise someone affirmatively making a claim without either providing either of those.

you know what.....I'll concede that one (I read 'em all....it makes me laugh)

however, why come with gibberish when you have the potential to make light of .....or am I overstating what I see in ability???

I know you're no dummy.....you simply display the symptoms of another troll....that's a waste of ability IMO....

Truth is I'm not really in a position to easily provide evidence contrary to his claim right now being on my phone, but I still wanted to outline how ridiculous it is for a statement like that to be considered compelling.

Open your eyes.

In your lifetime, how much has the electrical technology you buy from your power company improved? How many new innovations in the delivery and utilization of electricity have entered homes in the last 50 years?

Let's go to water now. Is your water service any better? Any major changes in the purity or pressure available to you? Any improvement in the way it is delivered?

Once you decide something is a utility, you freeze it in place. One of the reasons cable TV is in trouble today is that it has transformed itself into a big utility that can no longer deliver innovation.

If you make the Internet a "utility" in this country, we will be a year behind the world leaders next year. We'll be 5 years behind the world leaders in 5 years. And we'll be 25 years behind the world leaders in 10 years. That's how it works.

We did not need "net neutrality" to get here. We certainly don't need it to get to the next technological level. It is a poison to growth and innovation at the expense of some "feel good" bull****. If you really think that policy is going to improve your networking experience more than real progress will, you simply have not paid one bit of attention as to how we got here in the first place.

(11-23-2017 06:48 PM)Claw Wrote:  

(11-23-2017 02:55 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(11-23-2017 01:48 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(11-23-2017 01:38 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(11-23-2017 01:11 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  you just came a whole lot of the same rhetoric......you fit right in with the dems.....

what you're smart enough to know is that censoring is your last across the bow be-al-gore is sunk....

we're just sitting on the sidelines eating popcorn with floss.....

Stink, read the posts before you comment on them, then maybe you'll grasp why I don't need to provide quantitative evidence or source data to criticise someone affirmatively making a claim without either providing either of those.

you know what.....I'll concede that one (I read 'em all....it makes me laugh)

however, why come with gibberish when you have the potential to make light of .....or am I overstating what I see in ability???

I know you're no dummy.....you simply display the symptoms of another troll....that's a waste of ability IMO....

Truth is I'm not really in a position to easily provide evidence contrary to his claim right now being on my phone, but I still wanted to outline how ridiculous it is for a statement like that to be considered compelling.

Open your eyes.

In your lifetime, how much has the electrical technology you buy from your power company improved? How many new innovations in the delivery and utilization of electricity have entered homes in the last 50 years?

Let's go to water now. Is your water service any better? Any major changes in the purity or pressure available to you? Any improvement in the way it is delivered?

Once you decide something is a utility, you freeze it in place. One of the reasons cable TV is in trouble today is that it has transformed itself into a big utility that can no longer deliver innovation.

If you make the Internet a "utility" in this country, we will be a year behind the world leaders next year. We'll be 5 years behind the world leaders in 5 years. And we'll be 25 years behind the world leaders in 10 years. That's how it works.

We did not need "net neutrality" to get here. We certainly don't need it to get to the next technological level. It is a poison to growth and innovation at the expense of some "feel good" bull****. If you really think that policy is going to improve your networking experience more than real progress will, you simply have not paid one bit of attention as to how we got here in the first place.

he's so full of rhetorical bs, he can't remember where the toilet paper is located.....

he knows it's another bs attempt at a control mechanism that only slows the purging of dippo agenda.....

he loses....they lose.....they're losers.....

my best conjugation......

ISP are in many cases under one bill for utilities. Cable, phone, internet under one cable line like Suddenlink, Comcast and several others do bundle. Phone companies have their bundle like landline companies. Even satellite companies are doing the same thing.
As for my bundled package, people do have a choice what speed they want and how much data usage for Gigabytes online per month. What this jerk under Trump is saying is that the Net Neutrality is hurting these companies. Excuse me, when they have speed plans in place for them to make money? They do not need to slow down the internet to sites. Since Comcast owns NBC? The Net Neutrality law was to block companies like ComCast to slow or block their costumers from going onto ESPN sites to watch games, mainly college football. It is the same for them trying to block their costumers from accessing Youtube, HULU, Netflix and other sites that interferes with their streaming online shows.
When Viacom and Suddenlink had the rift where we lost Spike, Comedy, MTV, Nick and so forth, we were blocked from viewing any videos on those sites.

(11-24-2017 03:29 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  ISP are in many cases under one bill for utilities. Cable, phone, internet under one cable line like Suddenlink, Comcast and several others do bundle. Phone companies have their bundle like landline companies. Even satellite companies are doing the same thing.
As for my bundled package, people do have a choice what speed they want and how much data usage for Gigabytes online per month. What this jerk under Trump is saying is that the Net Neutrality is hurting these companies. Excuse me, when they have speed plans in place for them to make money? They do not need to slow down the internet to sites. Since Comcast owns NBC? The Net Neutrality law was to block companies like ComCast to slow or block their costumers from going onto ESPN sites to watch games, mainly college football. It is the same for them trying to block their costumers from accessing Youtube, HULU, Netflix and other sites that interferes with their streaming online shows.
When Viacom and Suddenlink had the rift where we lost Spike, Comedy, MTV, Nick and so forth, we were blocked from viewing any videos on those sites.

That is bullchit. It was standard negotiations over the cost to carry viacom channels.
When they reached an agreement those channels were included.

(11-24-2017 01:06 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(11-24-2017 03:29 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  ISP are in many cases under one bill for utilities. Cable, phone, internet under one cable line like Suddenlink, Comcast and several others do bundle. Phone companies have their bundle like landline companies. Even satellite companies are doing the same thing.
As for my bundled package, people do have a choice what speed they want and how much data usage for Gigabytes online per month. What this jerk under Trump is saying is that the Net Neutrality is hurting these companies. Excuse me, when they have speed plans in place for them to make money? They do not need to slow down the internet to sites. Since Comcast owns NBC? The Net Neutrality law was to block companies like ComCast to slow or block their costumers from going onto ESPN sites to watch games, mainly college football. It is the same for them trying to block their costumers from accessing Youtube, HULU, Netflix and other sites that interferes with their streaming online shows.
When Viacom and Suddenlink had the rift where we lost Spike, Comedy, MTV, Nick and so forth, we were blocked from viewing any videos on those sites.

That is bullchit. It was standard negotiations over the cost to carry viacom channels.
When they reached an agreement those channels were included.

Viacom said that they were not blocking the videos from their site for us to view and blamed it on Suddenlink, and suddenlink said that Viacom was blocking our ISP numbers from viewing. It was a big battle between the two blaming each other for the failed contract agreement.

I hate to sound like a liberal with this, but if you think "fast lanes" are capitalist and anything else is communist then you are an idiot.

The internet has become a utility. It should not be up to the whims of the market. It is simply too important to trade in general. It is so important that messing with it much in general is a restriction on trade.

(11-24-2017 08:16 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  I hate to sound like a liberal with this, but if you think "fast lanes" are capitalist and anything else is communist then you are an idiot.

The internet has become a utility. It should not be up to the whims of the market. It is simply too important to trade in general. It is so important that messing with it much in general is a restriction on trade.

I'm (almost) torn on this one.....but yeah, I'm in that camp....you cannot deny what drives the USD and simply "let it play out"

we both (and many others) know why this was unleashed.....

it sucks picking up the trash from others that never mattered in scope.....

ask anyone in a striped jumpsuit on the back of that truck......

the OP is banned, apparently.

(11-24-2017 07:49 PM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(11-24-2017 01:06 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(11-24-2017 03:29 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  ISP are in many cases under one bill for utilities. Cable, phone, internet under one cable line like Suddenlink, Comcast and several others do bundle. Phone companies have their bundle like landline companies. Even satellite companies are doing the same thing.
As for my bundled package, people do have a choice what speed they want and how much data usage for Gigabytes online per month. What this jerk under Trump is saying is that the Net Neutrality is hurting these companies. Excuse me, when they have speed plans in place for them to make money? They do not need to slow down the internet to sites. Since Comcast owns NBC? The Net Neutrality law was to block companies like ComCast to slow or block their costumers from going onto ESPN sites to watch games, mainly college football. It is the same for them trying to block their costumers from accessing Youtube, HULU, Netflix and other sites that interferes with their streaming online shows.
When Viacom and Suddenlink had the rift where we lost Spike, Comedy, MTV, Nick and so forth, we were blocked from viewing any videos on those sites.

That is bullchit. It was standard negotiations over the cost to carry viacom channels.
When they reached an agreement those channels were included.

Viacom said that they were not blocking the videos from their site for us to view and blamed it on Suddenlink, and suddenlink said that Viacom was blocking our ISP numbers from viewing. It was a big battle between the two blaming each other for the failed contract agreement.

Your post makes 0 sense.

(11-25-2017 01:21 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(11-24-2017 08:16 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  I hate to sound like a liberal with this, but if you think "fast lanes" are capitalist and anything else is communist then you are an idiot.

The internet has become a utility. It should not be up to the whims of the market. It is simply too important to trade in general. It is so important that messing with it much in general is a restriction on trade.

I'm (almost) torn on this one.....but yeah, I'm in that camp....you cannot deny what drives the USD and simply "let it play out"

we both (and many others) know why this was unleashed.....

it sucks picking up the trash from others that never mattered in scope.....

ask anyone in a striped jumpsuit on the back of that truck......

So you pay for what you need. You can't ship a 100 pound package like you do an envelope.

Technology will require those fast lanes to improve. All you are going to do is create an explosion of private backbones that use the Internet as a last mile.

Some stuff will still be slow. You guys are living in a make believe Internet.

Where I live, a small 30,000 person town in Alabama, decided a few years ago to install fiber optic throughout the city to become Alabama's first "Gig city." Since then the prices for internet have dropped from other providers due to competition. I think there are 3 available ISPs here, and the neighboring city is trying to get the state law changed to allow for our fiber cable to expand outside of our municipality.

Competition is good.

(11-25-2017 09:37 AM)dfarr Wrote:  Where I live, a small 30,000 person town in Alabama, decided a few years ago to install fiber optic throughout the city to become Alabama's first "Gig city." Since then the prices for internet have dropped from other providers due to competition. I think there are 3 available ISPs here, and the neighboring city is trying to get the state law changed to allow for our fiber cable to expand outside of our municipality.

Competition is good.

I'm not sure how that fits into the conversation.

The issue isn't the cable but the use of it.

(11-25-2017 08:03 AM)Claw Wrote:  

(11-25-2017 01:21 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(11-24-2017 08:16 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  I hate to sound like a liberal with this, but if you think "fast lanes" are capitalist and anything else is communist then you are an idiot.

The internet has become a utility. It should not be up to the whims of the market. It is simply too important to trade in general. It is so important that messing with it much in general is a restriction on trade.

I'm (almost) torn on this one.....but yeah, I'm in that camp....you cannot deny what drives the USD and simply "let it play out"

we both (and many others) know why this was unleashed.....

it sucks picking up the trash from others that never mattered in scope.....

ask anyone in a striped jumpsuit on the back of that truck......

So you pay for what you need. You can't ship a 100 pound package like you do an envelope.

Technology will require those fast lanes to improve. All you are going to do is create an explosion of private backbones that use the Internet as a last mile.

Some stuff will still be slow. You guys are living in a make believe Internet.

That's not an accurate analogy.

You use roads don't you?

The information put on the internet should be treated the same and should have equal availability.

If you want the internet to look like your cable tv package, you'll love "fast lanes."

Suddenlink already have different speeds at different prices. If you want faster speeds? It will cost you more. If you want more limits? It will cost you more. When I was under Cox Cable, we get unlimited access with no limits. But when Suddenlink took over? They limited us, and would not honor the old contracts that we signed with Cox. When you signed a contract, it should be honored.

(11-25-2017 10:56 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(11-25-2017 08:03 AM)Claw Wrote:  

(11-25-2017 01:21 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(11-24-2017 08:16 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  I hate to sound like a liberal with this, but if you think "fast lanes" are capitalist and anything else is communist then you are an idiot.

The internet has become a utility. It should not be up to the whims of the market. It is simply too important to trade in general. It is so important that messing with it much in general is a restriction on trade.

I'm (almost) torn on this one.....but yeah, I'm in that camp....you cannot deny what drives the USD and simply "let it play out"

we both (and many others) know why this was unleashed.....

it sucks picking up the trash from others that never mattered in scope.....

ask anyone in a striped jumpsuit on the back of that truck......

So you pay for what you need. You can't ship a 100 pound package like you do an envelope.

Technology will require those fast lanes to improve. All you are going to do is create an explosion of private backbones that use the Internet as a last mile.

Some stuff will still be slow. You guys are living in a make believe Internet.

That's not an accurate analogy.

You use roads don't you?

The information put on the internet should be treated the same and should have equal availability.

If you want the internet to look like your cable tv package, you'll love "fast lanes."

Why is that NOT an accurate analogy? Do you not understand a movie is more expensive to transmit than a webpage because it is a digitally larger object?

(11-25-2017 08:07 PM)Claw Wrote:  

(11-25-2017 10:56 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(11-25-2017 08:03 AM)Claw Wrote:  

(11-25-2017 01:21 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  

(11-24-2017 08:16 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  I hate to sound like a liberal with this, but if you think "fast lanes" are capitalist and anything else is communist then you are an idiot.

The internet has become a utility. It should not be up to the whims of the market. It is simply too important to trade in general. It is so important that messing with it much in general is a restriction on trade.

I'm (almost) torn on this one.....but yeah, I'm in that camp....you cannot deny what drives the USD and simply "let it play out"

we both (and many others) know why this was unleashed.....

it sucks picking up the trash from others that never mattered in scope.....

ask anyone in a striped jumpsuit on the back of that truck......

So you pay for what you need. You can't ship a 100 pound package like you do an envelope.

Technology will require those fast lanes to improve. All you are going to do is create an explosion of private backbones that use the Internet as a last mile.

Some stuff will still be slow. You guys are living in a make believe Internet.

That's not an accurate analogy.

You use roads don't you?

The information put on the internet should be treated the same and should have equal availability.

If you want the internet to look like your cable tv package, you'll love "fast lanes."

Why is that NOT an accurate analogy? Do you not understand a movie is more expensive to transmit than a webpage because it is a digitally larger object?

The shipping analogy relies on variables not directly connected to the conveyance.

The issue is the conveyance, i.e. the road the shipping truck would be driving on.

(11-25-2017 08:12 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(11-25-2017 08:07 PM)Claw Wrote:  

(11-25-2017 10:56 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(11-25-2017 08:03 AM)Claw Wrote:  

(11-25-2017 01:21 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  I'm (almost) torn on this one.....but yeah, I'm in that camp....you cannot deny what drives the USD and simply "let it play out"

we both (and many others) know why this was unleashed.....

it sucks picking up the trash from others that never mattered in scope.....

ask anyone in a striped jumpsuit on the back of that truck......

So you pay for what you need. You can't ship a 100 pound package like you do an envelope.

Technology will require those fast lanes to improve. All you are going to do is create an explosion of private backbones that use the Internet as a last mile.

Some stuff will still be slow. You guys are living in a make believe Internet.

That's not an accurate analogy.

You use roads don't you?

The information put on the internet should be treated the same and should have equal availability.

If you want the internet to look like your cable tv package, you'll love "fast lanes."

Why is that NOT an accurate analogy? Do you not understand a movie is more expensive to transmit than a webpage because it is a digitally larger object?

The shipping analogy relies on variables not directly connected to the conveyance.

The issue is the conveyance, i.e. the road the shipping truck would be driving on.

You really don't get it.

Shipping something involves planes, terminals, different classes of trucks, commercial licensing, load limits, special load permits, and another 100 things I don't even know. All of things exist to address different needs.

Thinking all data is the same is just an over simplification. It's not. Some data may be needed to coordinate physical processes within certain time windows. People needing those services need to be able to purchase them. Some data streams constantly. Other data is demanded in very large bursts.

Let the network people deliver you good technical services. Demanding everything be treated the same is some weird kind of technological Harrison Bergeron concept. It makes absolutely no sense at all.

(11-25-2017 08:45 PM)Claw Wrote:  

(11-25-2017 08:12 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(11-25-2017 08:07 PM)Claw Wrote:  

(11-25-2017 10:56 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(11-25-2017 08:03 AM)Claw Wrote:  So you pay for what you need. You can't ship a 100 pound package like you do an envelope.

Technology will require those fast lanes to improve. All you are going to do is create an explosion of private backbones that use the Internet as a last mile.

Some stuff will still be slow. You guys are living in a make believe Internet.

That's not an accurate analogy.

You use roads don't you?

The information put on the internet should be treated the same and should have equal availability.

If you want the internet to look like your cable tv package, you'll love "fast lanes."

Why is that NOT an accurate analogy? Do you not understand a movie is more expensive to transmit than a webpage because it is a digitally larger object?

The shipping analogy relies on variables not directly connected to the conveyance.

The issue is the conveyance, i.e. the road the shipping truck would be driving on.

You really don't get it.

Shipping something involves planes, terminals, different classes of trucks, commercial licensing, load limits, special load permits, and another 100 things I don't even know. All of things exist to address different needs.

Thinking all data is the same is just an over simplification. It's not. Some data may be needed to coordinate physical processes within certain time windows. People needing those services need to be able to purchase them. Some data streams constantly. Other data is demanded in very large bursts.

Let the network people deliver you good technical services. Demanding everything be treated the same is some weird kind of technological Harrison Bergeron concept. It makes absolutely no sense at all.

That has to be it...

Wasn't Trump for it before he was against it?