Sarge
Register | User Profile | Member List | F.A.Q | Privacy Policy | New Blog | Search Forums | Forums Home
Doomworld Forums : Powered by vBulletin version 2.2.5 Doomworld Forums > Misc. > Everything Else > net-neutrality off money and control on
Pages (2): « 1 [2]  
Author
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:49. Post New Thread    Post A Reply
Obsidian
Senior Member


Posts: 2492
Registered: 05-12


holy shit its sodaholic

Ahem. Hey dude.

Old Post 02-04-14 04:06 #
Obsidian is online now Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
AndrewB
I would commit first degree murder and then fabricate evidence to make it look like self defense.


Posts: 4407
Registered: 05-00



Sodaholic said:
Care to provide any examples of how it's bullshit?
Because we're afraid that an oligopoly of several big companies might collude and restrict services to serve their own interests, we want to take away the oligopoly and create a monopoly instead.

Old Post 02-04-14 05:31 #
AndrewB is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Sodaholic
I feel justified yet disgusted with myself at the same time


Posts: 2807
Registered: 04-07



AndrewB said:
Because we're afraid that an oligopoly of several big companies might collude and restrict services to serve their own interests, we want to take away the oligopoly and create a monopoly instead.
So you're suggesting even less competition in the market? Only a handful of giants control things, you want to make the situation worse and have only one giant control communications infrastructure?

The FCC really needs to redefine ISPs as common carriers already, it's the 21st century. Internet is a vital tool in today's world, and many people have it (at least in most western countries). It drives commerce and innovation, I want it entirely in the hands of the users, not providers attempting to present an alternate reality to the benefit of their interests(hiding 'inconvenient' news coverage about corporations or lobbies, forcing you to get overcharged DRM entertainment from select sources, etc.).

ISPs should present a raw, uncensored internet with high speed at reasonable prices, and should face stiff competition with a variety of smaller competitors, which will drive price down and quality up. The governments of the world should not attempt to make ISPs censor information or do any censorship themselves. They should also not use surveillance without a justified warrant.

Each party should be held accountable to these restraints and responsibilities.

Old Post 02-04-14 07:07 #
Sodaholic is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
GreyGhost
Why don't I have a custom title by now?!


Posts: 8664
Registered: 01-08


Welcome back Soda, try to stay out of trouble.

AndrewB said:
Because we're afraid that an oligopoly of several big companies might collude and restrict services to serve their own interests, we want to take away the oligopoly and create a monopoly instead.
Or we can sit back and watch nature take its course, as the oligopoly morphs into a monopoly via a series of mergers and takeovers. Problem solved?

Old Post 02-04-14 07:10 #
GreyGhost is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Aliotroph?
postCount++


Posts: 2629
Registered: 03-02



AndrewB said:
Because we're afraid that an oligopoly of several big companies might collude and restrict services to serve their own interests, we want to take away the oligopoly and create a monopoly instead.


Telling companies they can't favour other big companies over small ones is creating a monopoly?

What should really happen is the nationalization of all the fibre and copper used for the net. Let companies lease it from the government and compete to provide the best service. If it were set up like that they'd be happy when cities want to lay cables instead of suing them for unfair competition in regions where they don't want to build anyway.

Old Post 02-04-14 20:13 #
Aliotroph? is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Technician
Still no custom title


Posts: 7911
Registered: 08-04


Hey Soda! Glad you're back.

Old Post 02-04-14 21:07 #
Technician is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Sodaholic
I feel justified yet disgusted with myself at the same time


Posts: 2807
Registered: 04-07



People said:
hi
Thanks, but I'd rather my presence not derail the thread. I'd prefer to keep this about net neutrality, please.

Aliotroph? said:
Telling companies they can't favour other big companies over small ones is creating a monopoly?

Yeah, I can't exactly tell what he's trying to say. Is he saying he wants a/no monopoly of the state/private sector to be in place?

Aliotroph? said:
What should really happen is the nationalization of all the fibre and copper used for the net. Let companies lease it from the government and compete to provide the best service. If it were set up like that they'd be happy when cities want to lay cables instead of suing them for unfair competition in regions where they don't want to build anyway.
Couldn't agree more.

Old Post 02-05-14 02:15 #
Sodaholic is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
NiTROACTiVE
Forum Regular


Posts: 888
Registered: 03-11


Hey Sodaholic, I'm surprised your back because I thought your ban was permanent. But anyways, welcome back to Doomworld Forums.

Also, did anyone see the article I recently linked? It has some interesting info.

__________________
Radioactive & Explosive | YouTube | deviantART | Twitter | Project: Illuminatus (32-level Megawad) [Beta Testers Wanted]
Previously Known as NitroactiveStudios

Old Post 02-05-14 18:05 #
NiTROACTiVE is online now Profile || Blog || PM || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Gez
Why don't I have a custom title by now?!


Posts: 11075
Registered: 07-07


In emergent countries (that is to say, what we called "third world" 20 years ago), net neutrality has never existed. Lacking the dense infrastructure of the western world, dedicated broadband Internet (that you can leave on 24/7 without spending more than your ISP's basic subscription fee) is nonexistent. Instead, you have to use your phone (landline + modem, or smartphone with data plan) to access Internet. As a result? Internet access is expensive. You pay for it by the second or by the kilobyte, so you try to limit your use of it.

But fortunately, there are sponsored deals giving you free access to some Internet sites! Things like Google Free Zone or Facebook Zero. Your ISP gives you GFZ? Then you can access Google, Google+, and GMail for free all day long! Same thing for Zero and Facebook. Of course, the moment you step away from them -- for example, to follow a search result on Google -- and you start spending money... So with a limited budget, you are essentially restricted to playing only in Faceboogle's walled garden.

Old Post 02-05-14 18:20 #
Gez is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Aliotroph?
postCount++


Posts: 2629
Registered: 03-02


Does that mean sites like FB are covering the costs of viewing sites that appear in branded iframes?

Old Post 02-05-14 19:35 #
Aliotroph? is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Maes
I like big butts!


Posts: 12416
Registered: 07-06



Gez said:
In emergent countries .... Things like Google Free Zone or Facebook Zero.


QFT. And yeah, I am using the GSM/GPRS/EDGE/3G network for internet access.

Old Post 02-05-14 19:47 #
Maes is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
myk
volveré y seré millones


Posts: 15226
Registered: 04-02



Gez said:
In emergent countries (that is to say, what we called "third world" 20 years ago), net neutrality has never existed. Lacking the dense infrastructure of the western world, dedicated broadband Internet (that you can leave on 24/7 without spending more than your ISP's basic subscription fee) is nonexistent. Instead, you have to use your phone (landline + modem, or smartphone with data plan) to access Internet.
What used to be called the Third World varies (and has varied) a lot in economic development and current digital access. See this study for some comparisons, a digitalization index and some internet development notes. The index divides countries into constrained, emerging, transitional and advanced digitalization. The Third World would include most countries in the first three categories, which vary greatly in digital development. Latin America is about the same as Eastern Europe (emerging to transitional), while a good part of Africa and some parts of Asia are constrained.

Old Post 02-05-14 22:46 #
myk is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
AndrewB
I would commit first degree murder and then fabricate evidence to make it look like self defense.


Posts: 4407
Registered: 05-00



Sodaholic said:
So you're suggesting even less competition in the market? Only a handful of giants control things, you want to make the situation worse and have only one giant control communications infrastructure?
No, that's what net neutrality proponents want.

I can see why my post would have been misinterpreted. When I said "we're afraid", I wasn't including myself in that "we", I was talking about we as a society, i.e. net neutrality proponents.

Old Post 02-05-14 23:30 #
AndrewB is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Sokoro


Posts: 353
Registered: 10-10


The solution is not to give control over the internet to big companies, but to leave it in control of states and fix corruption of the states.

Also liberatians are bad, they propose changes without asking me if I agree with them.. pfff.....

Old Post 02-07-14 14:39 #
Sokoro is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Kontra Kommando
Let's attack aggressively


Posts: 1318
Registered: 02-13



Sokoro said:
The solution is not to give control over the internet to big companies, but to leave it in control of states and fix corruption of the states.

Also liberatians are bad, they propose changes without asking me if I agree with them.. pfff.....



Sure, then we can all use the internet as freely as the Chinese.

Old Post 02-07-14 14:58 #
Kontra Kommando is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Sokoro


Posts: 353
Registered: 10-10


Chinese goverment is not free of corruption, they are also dirty communists.

Old Post 02-07-14 16:38 #
Sokoro is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Kontra Kommando
Let's attack aggressively


Posts: 1318
Registered: 02-13



Sokoro said:
Chinese goverment is not free of corruption, they are also dirty communists.


If you think far-left stateism is bad, than why would you want to give total control of the internet the state? Not being sarcastic, just curious.

Old Post 02-07-14 16:43 #
Kontra Kommando is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Sokoro


Posts: 353
Registered: 10-10


Because people can still vote for who they want to be in charge of the state, and politicans' job is prosperity of the state.
While leaders of private companies can not be voted by everyone and they care only about themselves and their shareholders, that is much lesser ammount of people than all members of the state. It is also a minority which I am not part of.

Old Post 02-07-14 17:00 #
Sokoro is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Kontra Kommando
Let's attack aggressively


Posts: 1318
Registered: 02-13



Sokoro said:
Because people can still vote for who they want to be in charge of the state, and politicans' job is prosperity of the state.
While leaders of private companies can not be voted by everyone and they care only about themselves and their shareholders, that is much lesser ammount of people than all members of the state. It is also a minority which I am not part of.



Actually, if you use their product, that technically makes you a stakeholder. So its more of a symbiotic relationship, in some regards. But at any rate, there is obviously a more favorable partner, and that is the provider. If the government solely assumes the role of the provider, what is there to indicate that it will be administered more fairly? There will always be special interests everywhere in some shape or form. Its a amorphous phenomenon in politics, that takes on different forms. After all, there are times in democracies where one group is suffering at the hands of another; even when its a marginal victory for one side. I think there should be a better co-operation between the state and the private companies. This includes more regulation on the part of the government. but to absolutely take the companies out of the equation, and putting it into the hand of the government solely, I feel is too extreme.

Old Post 02-07-14 18:42 #
Kontra Kommando is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Quast
insert title here


Posts: 2632
Registered: 09-02



Kontra Kommando said:
Actually, if you use their product, that technically makes you a stakeholder.

This would be very ok in reality if consumers had any real choice in the matter. However they do not.


If the government solely assumes the role of the provider...and putting it into the hand of the government solely, I feel is too extreme.


Are you saying net-neutrality is giving control of the internet to the government? Am I misunderstanding you here?

Old Post 02-07-14 20:57 #
Quast is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Kontra Kommando
Let's attack aggressively


Posts: 1318
Registered: 02-13



Quast said:
Are you saying net-neutrality is giving control of the internet to the government? Am I misunderstanding you here?


I wasn't referring to that. I was referring to Sokoro saying that private providers should be taken out of the equation.


Sokoro said:
The solution is not to give control over the internet to big companies, but to leave it in control of states and fix corruption of the states.

Old Post 02-07-14 21:21 #
Kontra Kommando is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Kontra Kommando
Let's attack aggressively


Posts: 1318
Registered: 02-13



Quast said:

This would be very ok in reality if consumers had any real choice in the matter. However they do not.



Consumers do have the option to not consume. Its the demand that dictates what will be consumed; not the other way around. If anything, I believe that the government should enforce that the stakeholders are insured a quality product from its producers. This does mean that its necessary to expand the government's authority to regulate, and prevent monopolies from forming. In regards to the internet, I'm on the side of the FCC.

Last edited by Kontra Kommando on 02-07-14 at 21:39

Old Post 02-07-14 21:27 #
Kontra Kommando is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
myk
volveré y seré millones


Posts: 15226
Registered: 04-02


Stakeholders get dividends and may determine the investment and development strategies of the company through the weight and voting power of their stake or by joining other smaller stakeholders. The only way users without stakes or that don't participate in a trust or fund that holds stakes are stakeholders of a company is when the state that represents them is a key stakeholder. This is not uncommon in various national energy firms, like Statoil.

Otherwise, the effect of users and consumers on a company depends on the amount of competition there is, and the communications sector has poor competition levels. Competition increases the less you need a product or service to cover basic necessities and welfare, and the less it's tied to large scale infrastructure or "consolidated" sectors controlled by cartels.

Old Post 02-07-14 23:51 #
myk is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Gez
Why don't I have a custom title by now?!


Posts: 11075
Registered: 07-07



Kontra Kommando said:
Its the demand that dictates what will be consumed; not the other way around.

If that were true, marketing and advertising would not exist.

Old Post 02-08-14 00:16 #
Gez is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Linkrulezall
Member


Posts: 339
Registered: 05-12



Sodaholic said:
The FCC really needs to redefine ISPs as common carriers already, it's the 21st century. Internet is a vital tool in today's world, and many people have it (at least in most western countries). It drives commerce and innovation, I want it entirely in the hands of the users, not providers attempting to present an alternate reality to the benefit of their interests(hiding 'inconvenient' news coverage about corporations or lobbies, forcing you to get overcharged DRM entertainment from select sources, etc.).

ISPs should present a raw, uncensored internet with high speed at reasonable prices, and should face stiff competition with a variety of smaller competitors, which will drive price down and quality up. The governments of the world should not attempt to make ISPs censor information or do any censorship themselves. They should also not use surveillance without a justified warrant.

Each party should be held accountable to these restraints and responsibilities.



For once, I agree with you 100%

Old Post 02-08-14 03:47 #
Linkrulezall is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:49. Post New Thread    Post A Reply
Pages (2): « 1 [2]  
Doomworld Forums : Powered by vBulletin version 2.2.5 Doomworld Forums > Misc. > Everything Else > net-neutrality off money and control on

Show Printable Version | Email this Page | Subscribe to this Thread

 

Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is OFF
vB code is ON
Smilies are OFF
[IMG] code is ON
 

< Contact Us - Doomworld >

Powered by: vBulletin Version 2.2.5
Copyright ©2000, 2001, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.