You are completely ignoring one of the main points of the article in that they are basing these decisions off of faulty and incorrect assumptions about how the basic internet works.
That, itself, is a flawed assumption. They're basing their decisions on what best suits the ISPs and then backfilling the "reasons" with whatever they can come up with that sounds most plausible.
The trouble for them is that nothing they've come up with is remotely possible. The trouble for the nation is that none of that matters; We're all fucked regardless.
Re: Again: SO? Not intended to. It's to stop the advertising that causes MORE.
The advertising does not cause more. Consider that "you" repeat arguments in the very way to claim "Silicon Valley fiends" do. That's a symptom of sociopathy.
Sex trafficking will occur no matter what laws are put in place, no matter what tangential products and services are made illegal in the fight against sex trafficking. It is already illegal. We do not need more laws that say "It's still illegal!" and drag down largely innocent services in an attempt to make sex trafficking more illegal than it already is.
If you honestly cannot recognize the damage these bills would cause, both to the currently protected internet sites that allow us to post opinions such as this one and to the victims themselves then your world view is far too myopic to be involved in this issue.
The trouble with their plan is that they'll need to somehow block access to every non-BRICS DNS server on the planet by IP. All you have to do on any computer to use whatever DNS servers you want to is change a couple minor networks settings. Anyone can do it. And all they need to know is an IP address or two for the DNS servers they wish to use.
There's no way this plan for a BRICS internet will be fully capable of blocking out the rest of the world. Any IP on Earth could serve as a DNS or a proxy for one.
India is working hard to exclude external influences in its internal policy writing. They're not going to follow anybody. Whatever else might be said about India, they're taking their independence and neutrality very seriously.
How much do you get paid to shill this stuff? This is just more "but what about..." misdirection.
NN is about preventing the large corporations from abusing their near-monopoly positions and screwing the public. Saying "but it won't stop corruption" is truly disingenuous as having no laws, rules or regulations on the books will surely do far less to protect the public.
Regulations or no, symptoms and root causes be damned, we need something right now to protect us while we work on a longer term solution (such as breaking up these corporations). Net Neutrality is it.
You assume everyone in favor of Net Neutrality is a leftist which is objectively incorrect. It has nothing to do with regulation and everything to do with not wanting to live in a world controlled by corporate overlords, eating whatever they care to spoon feed us to maximize their profits.
You right wingers are amusing though. Please, keep posting.
On the post: The Folks That Built The Internet Tell The FCC It Has No Idea How The Internet Works
Re: Let's look skeptically at your list of "experts":
On the post: The Folks That Built The Internet Tell The FCC It Has No Idea How The Internet Works
Re: Re: Re: Re: If FCC has no clue...
On the post: The Folks That Built The Internet Tell The FCC It Has No Idea How The Internet Works
Re: Re: Re: If FCC has no clue...
That, itself, is a flawed assumption. They're basing their decisions on what best suits the ISPs and then backfilling the "reasons" with whatever they can come up with that sounds most plausible.
The trouble for them is that nothing they've come up with is remotely possible. The trouble for the nation is that none of that matters; We're all fucked regardless.
On the post: FCC Boss 'Jokes' About Being A 'Verizon Puppet' At Tone Deaf Industry Gala
Re:
On the post: FCC Boss 'Jokes' About Being A 'Verizon Puppet' At Tone Deaf Industry Gala
Re: Re: Verizon and Pai handed every state everything they needed to shut them down, shut them down hard!!!
On the post: MPAA Wins: Australia To Carve Google And Facebook Out Of Its Expanded Safe Harbor Provisions
Re: Landmines..
On the post: Court Says Google Must Unmask Person Who Left Wordless, One-Star Review Of Local Psychiatrist
Re:
On the post: MPAA Wins: Australia To Carve Google And Facebook Out Of Its Expanded Safe Harbor Provisions
Re: Rights are for those who create, NOT leeches or "platforms".
On the post: Internet Censorship Bills Won't Help Catch Sex Traffickers
Re: Again: SO? Not intended to. It's to stop the advertising that causes MORE.
Sex trafficking will occur no matter what laws are put in place, no matter what tangential products and services are made illegal in the fight against sex trafficking. It is already illegal. We do not need more laws that say "It's still illegal!" and drag down largely innocent services in an attempt to make sex trafficking more illegal than it already is.
If you honestly cannot recognize the damage these bills would cause, both to the currently protected internet sites that allow us to post opinions such as this one and to the victims themselves then your world view is far too myopic to be involved in this issue.
On the post: India Embraces Full Net Neutrality As The U.S. Turns Its Back On The Concept
Re: Re: Re: Re: India corruption
There's no way this plan for a BRICS internet will be fully capable of blocking out the rest of the world. Any IP on Earth could serve as a DNS or a proxy for one.
On the post: India Embraces Full Net Neutrality As The U.S. Turns Its Back On The Concept
Re: Re: Re:
Both sides are bad. That's the whole problem. We need to do away with "sides" and come together on issues.
On the post: India Embraces Full Net Neutrality As The U.S. Turns Its Back On The Concept
Re: Re: As The U.S. Turns Its Back On The Concept
... please?
On the post: India Embraces Full Net Neutrality As The U.S. Turns Its Back On The Concept
Re:
On the post: Dear Tech Guys: HBO's Silicon Valley Is NOT An Instruction Manual
On the post: Opening Statements In The Trademark Battle Of The Comic Cons, While Other Regional Cons Go Full Judas
Re: SDCC
On the post: Opening Statements In The Trademark Battle Of The Comic Cons, While Other Regional Cons Go Full Judas
Re: So Rose City asked nice and aren't in court... THE EVIL FOOLS!
On the post: Why I Changed My Mind On Net Neutrality
Re: Re: "You just won't stop corruption"
NN is about preventing the large corporations from abusing their near-monopoly positions and screwing the public. Saying "but it won't stop corruption" is truly disingenuous as having no laws, rules or regulations on the books will surely do far less to protect the public.
Regulations or no, symptoms and root causes be damned, we need something right now to protect us while we work on a longer term solution (such as breaking up these corporations). Net Neutrality is it.
On the post: FCC Boss Lies Again, Insists Net Neutrality Harms The Sick And Disabled
Re: Re: Karma
You right wingers are amusing though. Please, keep posting.
On the post: AT&T, Whose Ex-CEO Promised To Wreck Net Neutrality, Insists It Won't Do Anything To Net Neutrality
That's right. It's because consumers are already paying for those pipes. AT&T doesn't need to be paid twice for the same data.
Now, back up on your high horses, and use a proper argument this time.
On the post: Ajit Pai Doesn't Want You Talking About Court Ruling That Undermines His Bogus Claim That The FTC Will Protect Consumers
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Next >>