Sounds to me like he had a solution (even if you don't like it and don't have a solution of your own) and I see that he also didn't mention race (unlike you.) Maybe if you weren't such a racist, arrogant jackass with no solutions, you'd have noticed that. Who's the troll now?
Actually, if you read what I stated, you'd know that what you claim I stated is not at all the same thing. I said that Limiting volume implies CONTROL. This control is a foot in the door. This "movement" is designed to get that foot in the door. This will bypass the argument that the Government has no business controlling private networks (in any capacity.) It will dictate that Government DOES have business controlling private networks (in capacities that it so decides.) This will *lead* to control of content. For you see the Government is using the FCC to bring about these net regulations. What other mandates are given to the FCC? Censorship. Then in the legislative branch, you have Democrat politicians discussing openly and actively pursuing this "Fairness Doctrine" and legislation like that.
Please tell me what you get when you put all of that into a blender and hit "mix?"
I'll tell you. Absolute control of the flow of information by content control.
It's not really a conspiracy "theory" anymore. It's now just a conspiracy. The more you argue in favor of Government regulating the Internet, the further along you advance that conspiracy. Even if you have good intentions and believe the legislation is of good intent. You're being used. First they came for the ISPs..?
If there's sufficient demand then there's a market. If there's a market, then there's money to be made. If there's money to be made, someone will do it. Honestly, this shit isn't rocket science and the fact that you internet dweebs can't figure it out astounds me. You'd sell out private networks to government control because you don't want to use a slower competing ISP. So, you like the service, but you want to demand of the service something it does not want to provide via legislation. What sniveling tyrants you've all become. And of course, all tyrants only understand force, which is how you justify using force against ISPs to provide you with something they do not want to provide. All you are doing is going to artificially keep ISP costs higher for customers and distort the market preventing true innovation and adaptation to your needs from occurring. It's just not fast enough for the "gimme-it-now" generation.
No! Actually, it's about CONTROL. The ability to control the volume of content predicates on the ability to control content *period.* From that ability will bring forth control OF content. Once the government has this hook in on volume, the argument that the government has no place in private networks will have been lost. Therefore, it will see fit to use it for other means.. such as controlling content. Which is something many of your lefty buddies want to do.
Perhaps, you should be the one not perpetuating stupidity.
10x less money goes a long way in China where the per-capita income is 15-20x less. That and I can assure you, waste, pork and cronyism exist in China too, except to a much greater extent. You shouldn't have any doubts that China has the economic power to match the USA in a few decades.. provided things go smoothly for them.
That's quite the inane rant you've got there. I guess the fact that China has a well known history of stealing technology rather than developing it themselves doesn't really register with you. Maybe you should spend less time thinking about penises and the KKK and more time understanding the actual issue at hand.
No worries though, I know anyone that disagrees with you is obviously a warmongering racist.
Oh, since you know what this fraction is, perhaps you could share it with the rest of us? What exactly is a TINY fraction of 1.2 billion people? Perhaps you could also tell us what a TINY fraction of the rest who give direct support to that other TINY fraction? Or the other TINY fraction who gives indirect support to that other TINY fraction? Or that other TINY fraction who are so apathetic and indifferent as to not stopping that TINY fraction but also preventing other people from stopping them?
Oh, please, wise statistician, tell us mere fools your great numerical wisdom.
Lol. Yes, it's been tried. It's a load of shit. They will have a cease-fire until they are powerful enough to resume hostilities. You need to do some more reading. Let's also note that Muslims worldwide are fighting members of every single religion on earth including atheists. Almost every country with significant Muslim populations, no matter their religion/ethinicity/politics are under siege by Muslims who openly subvert and demean their laws.
Oh, and BTW, it's Thou shalt not commit murder. A much more narrowed focus.
"The data is stored in the cloud, but it's under the supervision of the state, and don't worry, if you lose your card they won't lose your data!"
LOL!! Yeah, data being in the "cloud" under the supervision of the state takes away ALL worry I could possibly have.
And why shouldn't we blame him? You think there's no better way to deliver the information that would not cause people to be dead that would have otherwise not been?
Slashdot Mirror
Go away, troll.
Yes. How else is the civilian democracy supposed to know that the mission needs more funds? Pretty simple, eh?
Good way to combat the deficit! Government spending fixes everything!!
It's good to read that the executive branch is listening to the people..
You presume that you'll have a democratic remedy available to you after the switch is used...
Lol
Sounds to me like he had a solution (even if you don't like it and don't have a solution of your own) and I see that he also didn't mention race (unlike you.) Maybe if you weren't such a racist, arrogant jackass with no solutions, you'd have noticed that. Who's the troll now?
Actually, if you read what I stated, you'd know that what you claim I stated is not at all the same thing. I said that Limiting volume implies CONTROL. This control is a foot in the door. This "movement" is designed to get that foot in the door. This will bypass the argument that the Government has no business controlling private networks (in any capacity.) It will dictate that Government DOES have business controlling private networks (in capacities that it so decides.) This will *lead* to control of content. For you see the Government is using the FCC to bring about these net regulations. What other mandates are given to the FCC? Censorship. Then in the legislative branch, you have Democrat politicians discussing openly and actively pursuing this "Fairness Doctrine" and legislation like that.
Please tell me what you get when you put all of that into a blender and hit "mix?"
I'll tell you. Absolute control of the flow of information by content control.
It's not really a conspiracy "theory" anymore. It's now just a conspiracy. The more you argue in favor of Government regulating the Internet, the further along you advance that conspiracy. Even if you have good intentions and believe the legislation is of good intent. You're being used. First they came for the ISPs..?
Unless those things aren't actually crazy. You lefties sure like to demean the women of the Republican party. Don't think we haven't noticed. :)
(Score:0) Yeah, mark that one down guys. Get an early start on the censoring. Practice what you preach.
If there's sufficient demand then there's a market. If there's a market, then there's money to be made. If there's money to be made, someone will do it. Honestly, this shit isn't rocket science and the fact that you internet dweebs can't figure it out astounds me. You'd sell out private networks to government control because you don't want to use a slower competing ISP. So, you like the service, but you want to demand of the service something it does not want to provide via legislation. What sniveling tyrants you've all become. And of course, all tyrants only understand force, which is how you justify using force against ISPs to provide you with something they do not want to provide. All you are doing is going to artificially keep ISP costs higher for customers and distort the market preventing true innovation and adaptation to your needs from occurring. It's just not fast enough for the "gimme-it-now" generation.
Pathetic.
No! Actually, it's about CONTROL. The ability to control the volume of content predicates on the ability to control content *period.* From that ability will bring forth control OF content. Once the government has this hook in on volume, the argument that the government has no place in private networks will have been lost. Therefore, it will see fit to use it for other means.. such as controlling content. Which is something many of your lefty buddies want to do.
Perhaps, you should be the one not perpetuating stupidity.
We must control the internet..
Or not.
Maybe you should actually read that convention. It doesn't give China full sovereign rights.
You're right, your comparison isn't fair. Poor analogy.
10x less money goes a long way in China where the per-capita income is 15-20x less. That and I can assure you, waste, pork and cronyism exist in China too, except to a much greater extent. You shouldn't have any doubts that China has the economic power to match the USA in a few decades.. provided things go smoothly for them.
That's quite the inane rant you've got there. I guess the fact that China has a well known history of stealing technology rather than developing it themselves doesn't really register with you. Maybe you should spend less time thinking about penises and the KKK and more time understanding the actual issue at hand.
No worries though, I know anyone that disagrees with you is obviously a warmongering racist.
Because eventually people will be unwilling to buy it?
Oh, since you know what this fraction is, perhaps you could share it with the rest of us? What exactly is a TINY fraction of 1.2 billion people? Perhaps you could also tell us what a TINY fraction of the rest who give direct support to that other TINY fraction? Or the other TINY fraction who gives indirect support to that other TINY fraction? Or that other TINY fraction who are so apathetic and indifferent as to not stopping that TINY fraction but also preventing other people from stopping them?
Oh, please, wise statistician, tell us mere fools your great numerical wisdom.
Lol. Yes, it's been tried. It's a load of shit. They will have a cease-fire until they are powerful enough to resume hostilities. You need to do some more reading. Let's also note that Muslims worldwide are fighting members of every single religion on earth including atheists. Almost every country with significant Muslim populations, no matter their religion/ethinicity/politics are under siege by Muslims who openly subvert and demean their laws. Oh, and BTW, it's Thou shalt not commit murder. A much more narrowed focus.
The truth can be dark and disturbing. I hope it really does disturb you.
I think you're abusing the term "abuse."
How would they know that 99% of people are doing nothing of interest if they don't spy on them to find out?
"The data is stored in the cloud, but it's under the supervision of the state, and don't worry, if you lose your card they won't lose your data!" LOL!! Yeah, data being in the "cloud" under the supervision of the state takes away ALL worry I could possibly have.
And why shouldn't we blame him? You think there's no better way to deliver the information that would not cause people to be dead that would have otherwise not been?
Give your head a shake.