Here's my issue with your logic, the government is what created this issue by preventing a free market environment and now they have made it incredibly beneficial for the ISPs to save all your data.
On top of that, what makes the people in the government any different than the people at the ISP, besides the fact that the government can force you under threat of incarceration, fines, or even violence? If I don't like Comcast, I don't need to use them. If I don't like the government, I'm screwed.
PS: Yes I quoted The Patriot, it's a good quote and without a doubt Mell Gibson's best movie
I don't know about that... Braveheart was pretty damn good.
Dafuq people? Mad Max anyone?
In high school you have such limited choices it's either CCNA or some shitty class you're going to hate.
Your Cisco teacher sounds like my robotics team.
Kill the unbelievers with fire. We must not allow them to win. Call them a race and lets commit genocide
No, because both schools of thought are corrupt and supporters on both sides seem to be equally extreme and/or ill-informed.
Ask the teacher how much they were paid and by who to say that, because the reason the government is so crap there is the corporate bribery and lobbying. If the choice is between the bribers, and a collective of politicians called government who might actually have someone refusing bribes from corporations and a fear factor against the more technologically inclined generations, the choice is pretty damn clear. If it is considered that it isn't "Republicans" as a whole supporting the "Freedom Act", no matter how clickbaity Ars likes to be, but rather an irrelevant number, then the binary politics stupidity falls even harder on the individual. The whole point is that it is now time for secularism between government and corporation to exist, as corporations have become what the church was in the times of dread way back when the schisms started.
Ask the teach whether they even know what net neutrality is and whether their teaching license is worth any more than the piss in their bladder if their thought processes depend on how well designed a propaganda flyers is or an article, rather than sitting down in a damn chair and thinking for oneself in multiple angles.
You would like more govt surveillance, more of the govt in your life for security and protection from ISPs? LOL! Blind leading the blind, less is best.
Here's the thing, several people have more or less hit the nail on the head with why people are against net neutrality. We have had the FCC involved with internet regulation back in the 90's and 2000's and they did a horrible job. Giving them more authority to screw things up does not hold up to a lot of logical scrutiny. I understand that the FCC has the authority to selectively enforce certain aspects of title II to not create a really business hostile environment but even Wendell has mentioned that there are certain sections that can be used to be very onerous. I know that Wheeler will be unlikely to do this but he isn't going to be there forever. When given the authority to regulate something the federal government will regulate it to the max eventually if not immediately. I can't stand Comcast and the other large ISP's that have screwed us over for many years now, but there is a right way to handle this and a wrong way to handle this. We do not have a free market environment when you have these super ISP's and nothing else. We should be determining where our money goes not beauracrats since we know and care about what we want our money to go to better than they ever will. In order to accomplish this and take the power back for ourselves we need to remove the barriers for entry into the ISP market. That, unfortunately is going to be a lot more difficult because we will have to address several other big problems in our legal code such as TORT reform. I mentioned this on another thread but Britain has developed a simple but brilliant plan for dealing with bullshit lawsuits: loser pay all. That way if a large ISP tries to bankrupt a startup with bullshit lawsuits the large ISP will just be paying their legal fees and not really creating a financial burden on these small companies. The loser pay all method makes the result of a lawsuit much more determined by who's actually at fault as opposed to who's got the most money. This article does a decent job of describing some of the nonsense associated with starting your own ISP:
Also certain aspects of Dod Frank regulations need to be done away with so that small businesses can actually get the loans needed to start their businesses and have better service with small banks. The desire for the title II is an honest, sincere, and well intentioned plan but it is still not a good one. Proponents are looking for a quick and easy fix not a complete one that isn't going to blow up in their face.
Exactumundo
get violent !
but then again you shouldnt listen ot me, im on druuuuuugs
Nice triple, and even quad posting in this thread. Have you people used forums before?
Thanks for the help guys. i was able to convince her and she now knows a lot more than just net neutrality. thanks for the help, it means a lot. Now i just need to convince my peers at school that are oblivious to all things computers.