So today in my Cisco CCNA class i mentioned the "Internet Freedom ACT" to her and said how its basically undermining net neutrality. I don't know what happened because to my knowledge she was for it like a month ago. so she must had gotten hold of the propaganda or something (Politics\ Party association possibly).
Anyways, she said that the internet needs to be regulated as it was and she does not understand that net neutrality and Title II is how it was governed.
Does anyone have any good articles that i can show her from more I guess "trusted sources" what ever that means to her.
Adding from @mutation666's comment, this article was linked on the EFF's website
The only people that I thought would be anti net neutrality would be people that profit from its non existence. Maybe your teacher has some stock in Comcast, haha!
Lol, No i think she fell to propganda, or that one republican FCC guy who was like "I wish i could show you how bad this is, its basically Obama care for the internet". possibly Forbs but i dont know.
I have a problem with most, if not all, government entities that can't tell the difference between their asshole from a crater on Titan. And you want them to "regulate" at the mercy of lobbyist money?
I don't think this will turn out the way the proponents envision it, especially when companies like Comcast and AT&T have enough money to sway rulings in their favor.
There is nothing good that will come from a ruling that is passed by either party. Dems will want to tax and mommy the hell out of it and Repubs will want capitalism gone wild at the expense of the citizens/customers of said markets and companies.
Then the Corruption from isp's and cable company's
Here are some good videos on how the internet used to be governed and net neutrality.
I personally like teksyndicate because they go in-dept into the history of how the internet was regulated, like how dsl was a "public utility" AKA title ll. and their sources are very good (fcc.gov and ACLU, ect.)
I honestly did not think you would listen to the propaganda put out there. the people who are supporting the ending of net neutrality have their ears stuffed with money. i was just very concerned at what you said today about not supporting it. all you half to do is look at the recent internet slowdowns by your Verizon overloads.
If you wish to debate these facts with me or how net neutrality could possibly be bad i would like to hear you defense.
Oh dont worry, i boot into a customized version of Debian on a external HDD everyday because locked down windows 7 is just nasty, also slow. also cisco CLI commands are very similar to linux cli commands.
Do you trust the government to understand technology?
Do you trust the government with all you online traffic?
Do you trust the government to control any segment of the internet?
Do you trust the government to properly implement net neutrality?
Which would be better, the government implementing net neutrality or the government no longer implementing monopolies of the state and local levels? I feel that net neutrality is a fix by the government to solve the problem that was created by the government without actually correcting the original problem.
I hope anyone continuing this conversation will honestly answer the questions I have posed.
Statement A says "All right wing people are stupid."
And uneducated people who blindly follow right-wing extremists.
Statement B says "I try and be fair and balanced."
I try to look at both sides of an equation before solving problems.
These two statements contradict each other. either you are tolerant to right wing thought and take right wing ideas into your decision making process, as you insist in statement B, or you think right wing thought is stupid and extreme, as seen in statement A.
There are absolutely valid right wing 'extreme' arguments to be considered when it comes to this title II stuff... the main one being "WTF did these 5 unelected people vote on!!!" The other one being "Can we trust anyone involved in this process."
No, you clearly meant to slur people. The post is clear that you think there are two types of people who oppose net neutrality. 1) people with monied interest,
people that I thought would be anti net neutrality would be people that profit from its non existence
or 2) idiot right wingers.
uneducated people who blindly follow right-wing extremists.
There are plenty of good 'right wing' type issues to take with net neutrality
Your phrasing is all wrong, it should be "Do you trust the government more that (insert any isp name here)? and so on and in that respect I think many of us will say "yes" we do have more faith in the government than we do comcast or time warner.
There are more positives that can come from net neutrality than negatives. Yes the govt is corrupt and backroom deals can and will be made, Yes ISP's are corrupt and get sadistic pleasure from ravaging our wallets. What is worse, 1 tyrant 3,000 miles away or 3,000 tyrants 1 mile away? It's just a shame the logic for this has to be such but i'm sure i'm not the only one who looks at it this way and for when the law is implemented well or before its changed beyond recognition it will be a boon to the internet at large. PS: Yes I quoted The Patriot, it's a good quote and without a doubt Mell Gibson's best movie