whoops my bad (and to reiterate your point, yes, 7 different cable networks would be completely fucking stupid)
doubledeluxe said:We invented the damn thing but don't utilize it. It's bizarre. However we have other really bizarre things. We still use checks for example. This has been phased out in most of Europe. I can buy most things with my phone in Europe. Install an app or SMS a number and voila I buy something. I accept that these things are not readily available in South America but in the USA I find it very strange. It's not like these technologies are brand spanking new either.
"Net Neutrality" is a scam invented by a self-described Marxist. Its a ploy to gain control over the internet while pretending to preserve it. Seriously who still falls for this baloney after Obama?
John Fund in WSJ:
"The net neutrality vision for government regulation of the Internet began with the work of Robert McChesney, a University of Illinois communications professor who founded the liberal lobby Free Press in 2002. Mr. McChesney's agenda? "At the moment, the battle over network neutrality is not to completely eliminate the telephone and cable companies," he told the website SocialistProject in 2009. "But the ultimate goal is to get rid of the media capitalists in the phone and cable companies and to divest them from control." A year earlier, Mr. McChesney wrote in the Marxist journal Monthly Review that "any serious effort to reform the media system would have to necessarily be part of a revolutionary program to overthrow the capitalist system itself." Mr. McChesney told me in an interview that some of his comments have been "taken out of context." He acknowledged that he is a socialist and said he was "hesitant to say I'm not a Marxist."
http://online.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748703886904576031512110086694
"Net Neutrality" is a scam invented by a self-described Marxist. Its a ploy to gain control over the internet while pretending to preserve it. Seriously who still falls for this baloney after Obama?
John Fund in WSJ:
"The net neutrality vision for government regulation of the Internet began with the work of Robert McChesney, a University of Illinois communications professor who founded the liberal lobby Free Press in 2002. Mr. McChesney's agenda? "At the moment, the battle over network neutrality is not to completely eliminate the telephone and cable companies," he told the website SocialistProject in 2009. "But the ultimate goal is to get rid of the media capitalists in the phone and cable companies and to divest them from control." A year earlier, Mr. McChesney wrote in the Marxist journal Monthly Review that "any serious effort to reform the media system would have to necessarily be part of a revolutionary program to overthrow the capitalist system itself." Mr. McChesney told me in an interview that some of his comments have been "taken out of context." He acknowledged that he is a socialist and said he was "hesitant to say I'm not a Marxist."
http://online.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748703886904576031512110086694
"Net Neutrality" is a scam invented by a self-described Marxist. Its a ploy to gain control over the internet while pretending to preserve it. Seriously who still falls for this baloney after Obama?
John Fund in WSJ:
"The net neutrality vision for government regulation of the Internet began with the work of Robert McChesney, a University of Illinois communications professor who founded the liberal lobby Free Press in 2002. Mr. McChesney's agenda? "At the moment, the battle over network neutrality is not to completely eliminate the telephone and cable companies," he told the website SocialistProject in 2009. "But the ultimate goal is to get rid of the media capitalists in the phone and cable companies and to divest them from control." A year earlier, Mr. McChesney wrote in the Marxist journal Monthly Review that "any serious effort to reform the media system would have to necessarily be part of a revolutionary program to overthrow the capitalist system itself." Mr. McChesney told me in an interview that some of his comments have been "taken out of context." He acknowledged that he is a socialist and said he was "hesitant to say I'm not a Marxist."
http://online.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748703886904576031512110086694
Is Cruz telling the rubes that net neutrality is one broadband speed for everyone? Is he really trying to make it sound like it's all about 'network socialism' (divvying up the available bandwidth equally, leaving everyone with a little). Boy, he must think his supporters are fucking stupid.
I was checking out the Twit feed of the spokesmouth for Cruz and she twatted this:
Is Cruz telling the rubes that net neutrality is one broadband speed for everyone? Is he really trying to make it sound like it's all about 'network socialism' (divvying up the available bandwidth equally, leaving everyone with a little). Boy, he must think his supporters are fucking stupid.
Oh, right...
It's astounding. they're going to eat it right up too, we actually have a duty to uphold here (intelligent, tech savvy folks, of both parties), we have to make sure we don't allow these crooked ass politicians to fuck the country over with this ignorance, we have to make sure people actually understand what this is about.
i've already seen typical conservative types parroting this over facebook and such, jumping right behind what Cruz says, not having a clue, what this is actually about.. after it gets explained, i've seen people change their minds....
can you actually believe that the R party thinks this crap up behind closed doors, pushes it out over the media, this IGNORANCE. i would be so pissed off at my party, if i was an R, and saw this happening from that perspective.
Yeah, I'm going to have fun with this in my little community. A good portion of my customers are conservative, love Cruz and watch Faux Nooz (and usually have it on when I make house calls). I'll just carefully explain it to them and give them links to research it for themselves. I've built up a lot of respect among my customers over the years for dealing straight from the deck in fixing their computers and building them custom systems so they trust my opinion on computer and network matters. I've had many of these customers for over twenty years now. I'll do my part locally to try to prevent them from being fleeced by this snake oil salesman, that's for damned sure.
Unfortunately this is Oregon so it will have little influence but they have relatives around the country so there's that.
i'll be doing the same
but in Texas...lol i might get hung.
If you want to post "I'm too stupid to figure out what the educated people are talking about" you can do so with less typing then that trash.
It's astounding. they're going to eat it right up too, we actually have a duty to uphold here (intelligent, tech savvy folks, of both parties), we have to make sure we don't allow these crooked ass politicians to fuck the country over with this ignorance, we have to make sure people actually understand what this is about.
i've already seen typical conservative types parroting this over facebook and such, jumping right behind what Cruz says, not having a clue, what this is actually about.. after it gets explained, i've seen people change their minds....
can you actually believe that the R party thinks this crap up behind closed doors, pushes it out over the media, this IGNORANCE. i would be so pissed off at my party, if i was an R, and saw this happening from that perspective.
Not to say the Dems are the greatest. While they are more often technically correct on the issues, they can't fight their way out of a paper bag. They can't explain themselves well, and when they try to they come off as condescending dicks.
LOL. maybe on this particular issue, maybe.
Listening to the anti-firearms liberals try and talk about guns is easily as hilarious as what cruz is spewing about this subject matter
Here is a good example of what our big business internet overlords thing about home connections:
http://arstechnica.com/business/201...ps-is-too-fast-for-broadband-4mbps-is-enough/
...
Not to say the Dems are the greatest. While they are more often technically correct on the issues, they can't fight their way out of a paper bag.
...
...
I'm looking forward to net neutrality in 2025.
Funny thing is where I live there's actually a local rural electric coop that recently started offering FTTH up to 100Mbps outside city limits. Inside the city however it's a different (municipal) power company and fastest option we have here is 50Mbps cable that costs more than the 100Mbps outside the city lol.
There are a lot of municipalities and utilities/coops starting to roll out FTTH, it's pretty exciting times. Plus Google's getting into the game now and will hopefully light a fire up under the incumbent cablecos/telcos and/or encourage others to throw their hat in the ring as well. It's not as dark of a picture for broadband in the US as some people try to paint IMO.
Except Comcast/Netflix thing isn't even a net neutrality issue. Have to hand it to Netflix, though, they've done an excellent job of spinning a complicated and difficult to understand issue to the less informed public to make themselves look like the victim and Comcast look like the bad guy. When in reality it just boils down to Netflix trying to take advantage of peering arrangements (where conventionally both parties send/receive relatively equal amounts of data, nobody charges anybody and everyone benefits and is happy; one party doesn't dump a ton more traffic on the other and then expect to not have to pay for the interconnect).
http://www.cnet.com/news/comcast-vs-netflix-is-this-really-about-net-neutrality/
Said types of co-op and municipal backed broadband are banned in most states thanks to conservatives protecting business interests. Just like now, they are protecting business interests instead of consumers with their push against net neutrality.
I can understand private ISPs concerns about them not being able to compete on an even level with a publicly owned provider that is potentially funded at least in part by local taxes and it being unfair. But at the same time, if the incumbent ISPs are unwilling to provide what customers want and the people have spoken and decided to ask their local government to do it, that's just too bad for them. If they don't want to have to compete with a municipal provider, maybe they should have been more receptive to customer feedback and invested in some infrastructure upgrades.Said types of co-op and municipal backed broadband are banned in most states thanks to conservatives protecting business interests. Just like now, they are protecting business interests instead of consumers with their push against net neutrality.
Said types of co-op and municipal backed broadband are banned in most states thanks to conservatives protecting business interests. Just like now, they are protecting business interests instead of consumers with their push against net neutrality.
Seems to me that Chicago recently sold off their parking meters to a private monopoly. Are you going to blame that on conservatives as well?
You've said "zero competition" several times.
Look, I realize I don't know a lot about this stuff, but can you please explain how it appears that I have a number providers in my small town?
See here: http://broadbandnow.com/North-Carolina/Hendersonville?zip=28792
TIA
Fern
call them up and see if they're all available at your address. that tool is showing things that (i'm pretty sure) aren't available around me - or maybe are available at one apartment complex to the exclusion of the other services