Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by bit-tech, 22 Nov 2017.
Ajit Pai sounds like a very confused guy, unless it's only me who thinks he's being a bit contradictory when he says"the federal government will stop micromanaging" and then goes onto say how they're going police ISPs, protect consumers, and promote competition (assumedly via some sort of micromanagement).
I do hope the Americans get rid of their own net neutrality as it will provide a fine example of the consequences of doing so, for the rest of the world.
Yeah, get rid of it. See what all the rightwingers will say, if they see their Breitbart, Crowder, etc being restricted by their democratic leaning ISPs.
It is no secret what kind of bs entrenched companies will pull, have an example and another one.
And of course someone somewhere will inevitably bring up the argument about the public wanting net neutrality to go and ignore that those demands are fake.
When I saw something similar advertised to this it raised an eyebrow with me. Any ideas why this is allowed under the current EU net neutrality framework?
because they are not restricting, stopping/altering the speed or priority of the content received. they are simpy saying "hey all that data you are using we usually charge per MB/GB for; don't worry about it, just pay me £5 to consume as much as you want."
It also could simply be because no-one has challenged it yet...
Yeah that seems to be the case. It's definitely not in the spirit of net neutrality. Thankfully it seems as though it is only something they can pull off with mobile data.
On another note there seems to be a bit of AstroTurfING in YouTube comments of videos discussing Pai's wonderful work.
Ajit Pai is also an ex Verizon lawyer so if you believe he is working for the good of the people and bot the good opf the internet companies you are mistaken. I would put good money on after this being passed within 2 years Ajit is working as a lobbiest or 'adviser' to one of the biggest internet companies.
They couldn't pass SOPA and PIPA so this for them is the next best thing. Can't pay the entry fee or we don't like your content - oops looks like access to your site is real slow and as we know after less than 10 seconds waiting for a page to load people go elsewhere and boom - bye bye your ad revenue and most likely your site.
whats worse is that bribes are now called contributions seems like almost everything is for sale (yes I know it was march)
Yep, America has legalized bribery through the campaign contribution system in conjunction with superpacs which easily circumvents rules on donation amounts.
This is why private money in politics is so dangerous. In the USA money = speech and corporations are people entitled to exercise of free speech (Citizens United, Buckley v. Valeo), but they have more speech than a regular citizen as they have more money.These companies have 1 objective - maximize profits, they are not immoral but amoral. If it helps people, great, if it hurts people, tough. People often look at some decisions by large corporations as good or bad, they are not they are always with 1 motive in mind.
They donate because they want something back, they donate again because they got it the first time and they want it again. If they didn't they wouldn't donate again.
Combine this with the revolving door of government - corporations - regulator meaning the promises of well paying non-jobs for doing what they need and you can start to see why what we call democracy is just shiny wrapping on an empty box and crony capitalism is the name of the game at the moment and if you are wed to any political party believing that side to be better then you have been conned (granted there are social issue differences that make voting a 'better of 2 evils' situation most of the time)
Who ever thought it would be a good idea to have privately financed elections was a moron. Elections need to be financed by the state and heavily regulated to make them fair to begin with.
Separate names with a comma.