Slashdot Mirror
Verizon Challenges FCC's Net Neutrality Rules
GovTechGuy writes "Verizon filed an appeal on Friday asking a federal court to strike down the FCC's net neutrality rules, which are scheduled to take effect on November 20. A federal judge tossed the FCC's previous attempt at enforcing net neutrality against Comcast last May, and more legal challenges are expected in the coming days."
They ALL assert that they are committed to net neutrality. The problem is, they want to define what neutrality is. When you've cut away all the verbiage, to get to the heart of the matter, the telcos only want their monopoly to remain unchallenged, so that they can continue to rape the consumers. To them, "neutrality" means "anything goes, as long as WE approve of it, and it increases profits".
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
Where I live, I can use landline DSL that's too far from the DSLAM so I'm capped at 384/384 on a perfect day, often less.
Or I can pay through the nose for a 7.2 mbps mobile connection with a 5GB cap that throttles to 40 kbps after the cap is reached, effectively making any modern website time out.
Considering that nothing seems to get cached anymore, ie. Youtube videos, videos on newspaper and TV websites etc. those 5 GB are spent awfully fast through normal surfing and gaming.
Those are my options. Short of paying for a company to come out and lay fiberoptic cables all the way to the nearest large city I'm screwed. Tell me again how I have options to play by other rules?
-=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
Stop using this argument. Now. This argument is fucking stupid (excuse my cursing but this irritates me). You apparently live in a different reality than the rest of us. Let's not even address the fact that most people have a choice between dial up or one provider (hell I'm not even sure I can get DSL and I live near one of the biggest cities in the country...Phoenix) and just look at the plain and simple fact that a choice between DSL or Cable internet is not a choice. This has been discussed so many times here it is ridiculous and I see this same dumb ass line parroted over and over again and it infuriates me. They have GOVERNMENT MANDATED MONOPOLIES. By DEFINITION you do not have a choice. It's a FUCKING MONOPOLY.
The free market works well in MOST situations but not every single one. For starters, this type of industry is nearly impossible to enter into unless you have billions of dollars to invest or you have government help. Guess what all the telcos had? Both (hah) but they got government help. You know what that means? That means WE own those lines. The telcos don't get to decide what we get to do with the lines that we paid for. This isn't the free market...sometimes you are trying to fit a square peg into a round hole.
Seriously though, why do people keep saying this? Is it this libertarian movement thing where people think that every single thing can be decided by the market? I really feel as if people that say this are honestly not even thinking about what they're saying and just repeating something they saw someone else say. I have to be honest...I'm definitely starting to see this a lot here. I feel strange not being a zealot to some cause sometimes...like is it that hard for some of you people to stand back and think harder on these situations? Are you so completely bound to your idealism that it like...warps reality? Some of the shit I see people say on here is honestly just brain dead. Really. They don't think about what they're saying or consider actual situations so much as they have a knee jerk reaction that suits whatever mantra they hold. It's irritating and quite frankly makes for shitty discussion. I mean there is a difference between my having a different opinion on a matter and someone just like...I don't know...not even paying attention to facts? It's like watching politicians debate. We get mad at them for this kind of retarded shit and then do it ourselves. Do you really think this or were you trying to score some free karma?
"Those who would sacrifice essential liberties for a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - BenF
Imagine if your power provider wanted to charge different prices for your power based on whether you used it for toasting bread or watching TV; even further, what if it charged more for your toaster power if you used a brand of toaster that has not paid the power company for 'better' rates. The courts would never allow such a business practice.