Talk of The Villages Florida - Net Neutrality. What do you think about this?

Talk of The Villages Florida (https://www.talkofthevillages.com/forums/)

- The Villages, Florida, Non Villages Discussion (https://www.talkofthevillages.com/forums/villages-florida-non-villages-discussion-93/)

- - Net Neutrality. What do you think about this? (https://www.talkofthevillages.com/forums/villages-florida-non-villages-discussion-93/net-neutrality-what-do-you-think-about-132778/)

Ted Cruz said, "Net Neutrality is Obamacare for the internet."

Quote:

Originally Posted by Villages PL (Post 973418)

Ted Cruz said, "Net Neutrality is Obamacare for the internet."

Perhaps you can explain what that means (without getting political, of course).

Quote:

Originally Posted by TexaninVA (Post 973345)

Here's a much simpler thought experiment ...

Imagine you're a centralized powerful government and that, because of a statist view of the world, wants to control everything ... especially because you think the poor rubes are not bright enough to make their own choices, plus its your duty to make everything "fair." Thus, the only solution is for the Government to take full control of the Internet but give them platitudes about how it's good for them so call it something that sounds nice, like "Net Neutrality."

Perhaps add a new slogan too , maybe something along the lines of "If you like your Internet, you can keep your Internet."

The government did not create the term �net neutrality�.

In 2003, Columbia University law professor Tim Wu popularized the idea�and the term�in "Network Neutrality, Broadband Discrimination" in the Journal of Telecommunications and High Technology Law, Vol. 2, p. 141, 2003.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Villages PL (Post 973418)

Ted Cruz said, "Net Neutrality is Obamacare for the internet."

I think it means everyone should have equal access to the internet as well as healthcare. Sounds like a good thing to me! We should all be thankful on this day.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gary7 (Post 973372)

If someone does not want the government involved with the internet, then this same person supports the actions of Comcast and AT&T in the following four examples of violations of net neutrality:

- In 2007 Comcast blocked people from sharing digital files of the King James Bible and public-domain song recordings. (Fox News)

- In 2007, Comcast started blocking its customers from trading files on BitTorrent (peer-to-peer file sharing) by intercepting the data transmitted between the user downloading a file and the file�s host website and thus disconnecting the user from the host. (Fox News)

- In April 2012, Netflix charged that Comcast was restricting access to popular online video sites, in order to promote Comcast's own Xfinity TV service, giving Comcast product an unfair advantage against other Internet video services. (PC Magazine)

- In September 2012, AT&T was accused of violating net-neutrality rules, by restricting use of the video-conferencing Apple application "FaceTime" to certain customers. The application which could be used over Wi-Fi signals was restricted to only be used over cellular connection for customers who have a shared data plan on AT&T and excludes those with older unlimited or tiered data plans. (New York Times).

No, one does not support those examples at all. By contrast, we also don't want to see other problems worsened. Think about it ... how often does the next move to expand gov't control come with anything less than sweetness and light promised? We're going to fix this problem, trust us, is always the theme.

Overall, the concerns are they will make the problems worse. What they really seem to want the most is a source of money to tax and then redistribute but ... they can't say that honestly and openly because the rubes get upset and we have a recent example of that in the news. Thus, I think the proponents of �net neutrality� will be much more careful to mask the true longer term goals. Btw, the origin of the term is immaterial as the debate is now where do we go from here.

Getting back to trust ... can you understand why a lot of people simply do not trust the government to do this?? It doesn't matter what they SAY, once you know that they are untrustworthy. The examples of the latter are so numerous now it's hard to keep track of it all.

Quote:

Originally Posted by redwitch (Post 966440)

Totally for net neutrality. Gary7 said it all.

Well said Gary7.

Net Neutrality. What do you think about this?

Quote:

Originally Posted by GuardMeSecurity (Post 973948)

Unfortunately, here is the truth...

I'm not saying I agree or disagree with the post, but anytime anybody declares so boldly that what they are about to say is the truth, I read what follows with much skepticism. :)

HBO wants to go to direct streaming and ComCast said it would cost users $15.00 the same cost fo HBO on comcast

First an admission of lack of knowledge.......but I oppose net neutrality from what I know...

1. It seems like income distribution on the internet

2. It seems to stifle free enterprise and pass on mucho authority to the government.

3. It also appears that it would throttle the ability of schools, hospitals and the like to buy faster broadband to be able to perform their important functions. This is my biggest anti on this, and I asked before if I was correct but never got an answer.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Polar Bear (Post 973961)

I'm not saying I agree or disagree with the post, but anytime anybody declares so boldly that what they are about to say is the truth, I read what follows with much skepticism. :)

And that is an appropriate comment. Thanks

Quote:

Originally Posted by rubicon (Post 973963)

HBO wants to go to direct streaming and ComCast said it would cost users $15.00 the same cost fo HBO on comcast

My concern is that I currently subscribe to more than 400 channels. If they each decide they are worth $10.00 per month. I'm back in the dark ages.

I believe in the Free Market... it works. Government involvement always seems to screw things up and in the end you will pay a lot more and get a lot less!

Quote:

Originally Posted by TNLAKEPANDA (Post 974040)

I believe in the Free Market... it works. Government involvement always seems to screw things up and in the end you will pay a lot more and get a lot less!

I agree 100%. As long as they have less control than they do now. Comcast would like to become a monopoly. My costs for their service has increase from $75 to $200 over the last 5 years. Their customer service is the worst I have ever experienced and I will do everything I can to prevent them from growing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TNLAKEPANDA (Post 974040)

I believe in the Free Market... it works. Government involvement always seems to screw things up and in the end you will pay a lot more and get a lot less!

Totally agree if it is a free market. However, how many choices do you have in The Villages? When you have A, B, or C, it is not a free market but a oligopoly and there is a lack of competition. Their services become a utility so the the consumer can be protected as are electric services. How many other products have increased threefold in 5 years ($75 to $200) under a fee market?

Trust me the Govt would love to Tax internet service as much as they can get away with. The FCC should not allow Comcast to buy up smaller companies that I agree with. Same goes with Cell Phone companies. No monopolies but also no Govt control either.