Slashdot Mirror
McCain on Net Neutrality, Copyright, Iraq
An anonymous reader writes "Sen. John McCain kicked off the All Things Digital conference Tuesday night with some interesting comments about net neutrality among other things. His take: there should be as little government regulation of broadband as possible. The market should be allowed to solve the Net-neutrality issue: 'When you control the pipe you should be able to get profit from your investment.'"
Where is that in the article?
In most locales, these are illegal, so the mafia which transacts in them is also illegal. If the mafia limited themselves to transacting these commodities where they were legal, and did not use assault and murder to maintain their business, they would in fact be quite legal.
The internet is mostly legal - and by "extortion", do you perhaps mean withholding their product from people who do not pay for it? Barring what the government determines to be "monopolistic practices", trading in internet bandwidth (a legal commodity) is entirely legal and consistent with other U.S. laws.
Disclaimer: I'm not necessarily against (or for) net neutrality, so don't assume. I just think that drawing these kinds of parallels between ISPs and the mafia is not accurate, and does an injustice to a very complex issue. A better analogy would be Microsoft, who has classically used commodities that it [usually] owns to lord over people in unwholesome ways.
The French lost their right to have an opinion in world affairs for all time on the day they surrendered to Hitler. The general reason for surrender was that you didn't want your artwork bombed. "Sure, Mr. Hitler, come on in and kill all of our people. Gypsies, Jews, Catholics, who ever you want. Just don't hurt our art. It's waaaay more important than our populace."
Riiiight. Anyone who thinks like that deserves what they get. And, in case you've forgotten, it was the USA who bailed YOU out of WWII, not the other way around.
As for "net neutrality", what has the government ever gotten it's hands on that it handled well? Name one thing....
2 cents,
QueenB.
HDGary secures my bank
Does anyone remember when he paraded down the streets of Iraq, protected by a whole infantry of U.S. soldiers
...and then claim that it is a very safe and a lot better than a few years ago?
What exactly is an "infantry" of soldiers? How many soldiers are in one infantry?
Well, strictly speaking, it was much safer for a U.S. Senator to be in Baghdad than just before or after the invasion. So in that sense, he was right, at least.
Every time I hear that "them hating us for our freedom"
I agree that that does gloss over a lot of things, but in some ways it is accurate: the jihadis in the world hate anyone who doesn't follow their brand of Islam. If by "our freedom" they mean "our way of life" and "our values", then, yes, the jihadis do hate us for those things. But like I said, this glosses over a more complex truth which wouldn't fit as nicely into a sound bite.
It will be interesting to see what Ron Paul will do to the upcoming republican debates.
Not a damn thing, the guy is a loon. Have you heard his latest theory on 9/11? Total crackpot, not even worth debating.
God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
You right to do as you wish with your property ends where that conflicts with my rights.
If you can't understand that, you'll never understand basic Civics and you'll forever be a slave to people who do not have your best interests in mind.
I have something in common with Stephen Hawking...
That's because you're a numbskull!
In case you haven't been informed, "freedom" and "democracy" goes against Sharia law from the prospective of the Islamic extremists. Ergo, they HATE western civilization. It doesn't matter if you're Christian, Jewish, or practice Buddhism. These radicals want you dead if you don't convert.
Pay attention to the world around you. You might learn something.
Life is not for the lazy.
You are incorrect. If a US senator was walking downtown during the Saddam era, he would probably be invited to the palace since Saddam did not want to provoke the Americans.
You might be right before the invasion, but I'm definitely right about just after. That was a very dangerous time.
If so, why was he surrounded by American soldiers?
Photo-op. Duh.
If they really hated freedom, they would very likely turn to the Hindu countries and the majority of Asia that does not practice Islam.
What are you talking about, this has already happened, and continues to do so. The Mumbai train bombing, the Bali nightclub, there are dozens of murders a week in south Thailand. And did you forget about the Taliban blowing up the giant Buddha statues? Jihadis don't just want us out of their holy lands, they want to wipe out the Jews and kill or convert everyone who doesn't practice their form of Islam.
First of all, I did not say anything about what he said.
That's why I asked if you knew about it.
I only commented that he would probably cause another upset (WHICH HE DID).
No, he won't, because the people who are likely to vote for a Republican won't pay any attention to him.
You should always take everything with a grain of NaCL when watching FOX
I don't watch Fox News, and you shouldn't make blanket assumptions about people.
I would enjoy debating liberals more if you people had the intelligence of my dog.
God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.