brokeboater Posted March 4, 2015 Report Share Posted March 4, 2015 Amen Dutch. ditto that. I don't fully trust regulators not to abuse their power but I trust them a tad more than for profit corporations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skp51443 Posted March 4, 2015 Report Share Posted March 4, 2015 A little different spin on the FCC's Title II action: "Dear FCC: Thanks for Listening..." the last bit of that article is the meat of many folk's worries: So congratulations, Team Internet. We put the FCC on the right path at last. Reclassification under Title II was a necessary step in order to give the FCC the authority it needed to enact net neutrality rules. But now we face the really hard part: making sure the FCC doesn’t abuse its authority. For example, the new rules include a “general conduct rule” that will let the FCC take action against ISP practices that don’t count as blocking, throttling, or paid prioritization. As we said last week and last year, vague rules are a problem. The FCC wants to be, in Chairman Wheeler’s words, “a referee on the field” who can stop any ISP action that it thinks “hurts consumers, competition, or innovation.” The problem with a rule this vague is that neither ISPs nor Internet users can know in advance what kinds of practices will run afoul of the rule. Only companies with significant legal staff and expertise may be able to use the rule effectively. And a vague rule gives the FCC an awful lot of discretion, potentially giving an unfair advantage to parties with insider influence. That means our work is not yet done. We must stay vigilant, and call out FCC overreach. The actual order is over 300 pages long, and it’s not widely available yet. Details matter. Watch this space for further analysis when the FCC releases the final order. First rule of computer consulting: Sell a customer a Linux computer and you'll eat for a day. Sell a customer a Windows computer and you'll eat for a lifetime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chalkie Posted March 4, 2015 Report Share Posted March 4, 2015 the last bit of that article is the meat of many folk's worries: Exactly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barbaraok Posted March 4, 2015 Report Share Posted March 4, 2015 You mean that "we the people" need to stay active in making sure that our representatives are working for us, not against us. That is just what an engaged citizen should do - not sit back and wait until the next time one of their pet projects seems in danger. Barb Barb & Dave O'Keeffe 2002 Alpine 36 MDDS (Figment II), 2018 Ford C-Max HYBRID Blog: http://www.barbanddave.net SPK# 90761 FMCA #F337834 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nscaler2 Posted March 4, 2015 Report Share Posted March 4, 2015 You mean that "we the people" need to stay active in making sure that our representatives are working for us, not against us. That is just what an engaged citizen should do - not sit back and wait until the next time one of their pet projects seems in danger. Barb As long as our representatives are bought and sold by big business's interests with anonymity guaranteed them by the supreme court, "we the people" don't have a chance. 2006 Heartland Bighorn 3055RL w/ Mor/Ryde IS Suspension and Hydraulic Brakes 2011 GMC Sierra 3500HD w/B&W turnover hitch and Companion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barbaraok Posted March 4, 2015 Report Share Posted March 4, 2015 If "we the people" vote for candidates that sell their soul then we deserve what we get. Barb & Dave O'Keeffe 2002 Alpine 36 MDDS (Figment II), 2018 Ford C-Max HYBRID Blog: http://www.barbanddave.net SPK# 90761 FMCA #F337834 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mariner Posted March 4, 2015 Report Share Posted March 4, 2015 Everytime I contact my Congressman all I ever get back is just the same old tired party line. Which by the way is probably answered by a staffer, not the pol themselves. I even went face to face with mine 3 mos. ago to ask him his thoughts on Keystone. All he did was echo what the White House has put out. When I pressed him for HIS thoughts, he said I was rude and wouldn't answer anymore questions. I then reminded him his re-election is coming up in 2016 and that he'd better start listening to the electorate. And anyone who just blindly agrees that what's needed is MORE & MORE govt. regs., and intrusion in our lives, had better wake up. Every freedom that has been fought for with blood & treasure can be eroded a little at a time, and then you wake up one day and find the govt. can now snoop on phone calls and your dailey life. Oh wait a minute...they're doing that now!!!! Fulltiming since 2010 2000 Dutch Star 2009 Saturn Vue Myrtle Beach, SC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat & Pete Posted March 4, 2015 Report Share Posted March 4, 2015 If "we the people" vote for candidates that sell their soul then we deserve what we get. Pardon ??? How is being duped equal to being deserved ? Goes around , comes around . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barbaraok Posted March 4, 2015 Report Share Posted March 4, 2015 How have you been dumped about a candidates plan? Information is there if you just look for it. Barb Barb & Dave O'Keeffe 2002 Alpine 36 MDDS (Figment II), 2018 Ford C-Max HYBRID Blog: http://www.barbanddave.net SPK# 90761 FMCA #F337834 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat & Pete Posted March 4, 2015 Report Share Posted March 4, 2015 How does a politicians' weakness or deviation make what we get deserved ? As much as it seems an oxymoron , I'm sure there are some honest politicians or at least those with good intentions , I hope . Goes around , comes around . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barbaraok Posted March 4, 2015 Report Share Posted March 4, 2015 How does a politicians' weakness or deviation make what we get deserved ? As much as it seems an oxymoron , I'm sure there are some honest politicians or at least those with good intentions , I hope . If your representative turns out to be bad, it is because the majority of the people in that district/state/etc. voted for him or her. So they reaped what they sowed. Unfortunately a lot of us get carried along when we aren't in the majority, but often it is because a majority of the voters don't bother to vote - again their not voting allows things to happen. Barb & Dave O'Keeffe 2002 Alpine 36 MDDS (Figment II), 2018 Ford C-Max HYBRID Blog: http://www.barbanddave.net SPK# 90761 FMCA #F337834 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat & Pete Posted March 4, 2015 Report Share Posted March 4, 2015 If your representative turns out to be bad, it is because the majority of the people in that district/state/etc. voted for him or her. So they reaped what they sowed. Sorry , but that^ makes no sense . The person is bad because of a majority vote ? Kwame Kilpatrick screwed Detroit royally . The voters knew that before they elected him and the voters got what they deserved ? Goes around , comes around . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barbaraok Posted March 4, 2015 Report Share Posted March 4, 2015 Sorry , but that^ makes no sense . The person is bad because of a majority vote ? Kwame Kilpatrick screwed Detroit royally . The voters knew that before they elected him and the voters got what they deserved ? If the voters who elected him didn't thoroughly check him out before they voted for him, and he/she performs as expected, then those who voted for her/him shouldn't be complaining. The key is to really check a person out before you give them your vote. People don't change just because they are elected - even though they may try to obscure past performances. Where I say all politicians who received a majority vote were bad? But I think we should get back on topic, that being the FCC decision. Barb Barb Barb & Dave O'Keeffe 2002 Alpine 36 MDDS (Figment II), 2018 Ford C-Max HYBRID Blog: http://www.barbanddave.net SPK# 90761 FMCA #F337834 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RV_ Posted March 5, 2015 Report Share Posted March 5, 2015 The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. RV/Derekhttp://www.rvroadie.com Email on the bottom of my website page.Retired AF 1971-1998 When you see a worthy man, endeavor to emulate him. When you see an unworthy man, look inside yourself. - Confucius “Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.” ... Voltaire Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mariner Posted March 5, 2015 Report Share Posted March 5, 2015 The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. Amen to that!!!! Fulltiming since 2010 2000 Dutch Star 2009 Saturn Vue Myrtle Beach, SC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colddog15 Posted March 5, 2015 Report Share Posted March 5, 2015 Net neutrality is a very complex topic. I will be the first to admit I have no idea what other rules and regulations that govern the telecommunications industry. I do know that large organizations will do what is best for their own self-interest. My self interest does not match the self-interest of Comcast, Verizon, and AT&T. I have no interest in defending their priorities. If and when my self interest matches the self-interest of large telecoms and large Internet companies then I will defend their positions. Till then I will assume they are attempting to maximize their profit. There is no natural right for large companies to make money. I am not against their ability to make as much money as they want to but they have no natural right to be extract money from my wallet of using laws and regulations that benefit only there're bottom line. https://nocommentphotography.blogspot.com/ Glen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skp51443 Posted March 5, 2015 Report Share Posted March 5, 2015 Companies tend to maximize their profits, politicians tend to maximize their power, campaign contributions or both. Neither political goal is in the public interest and the political solutions proposed by both political sides and labeled as net neutrality in this case clearly demonstrate that. What we needed was a simple set of rules passed by congress and signed by the president that the FCC could then enforce, rules that implemented what was the original definition of net neutrality fair and equal transmission of data but without the burden of all the other unwanted control and rules from the 1930 era Title II rules. We got what we got, not much we can do at this point but hope for the best and that it doesn't make things too much worse. First rule of computer consulting: Sell a customer a Linux computer and you'll eat for a day. Sell a customer a Windows computer and you'll eat for a lifetime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mariner Posted March 6, 2015 Report Share Posted March 6, 2015 What we needed was a simple set of rules passed by congress and signed by the president that the FCC could then enforce, rules that implemented what was the original definition of net neutrality fair and equal transmission of data but without the burden of all the other unwanted control and rules from the 1930 era Title II rules. Exactly. Not rules put in place by appointed bureaucrats who obviously answer to no-one. But it's the same at the EPA. They have written regs. that affect just about all Americans, but again again who do they answer to? Just talk with a farmer and ask if he had any input as to what he can & cannot do with his own land. Bigger govt.= Bigger bureaucracy that runs amok. Fulltiming since 2010 2000 Dutch Star 2009 Saturn Vue Myrtle Beach, SC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigjim Posted March 6, 2015 Report Share Posted March 6, 2015 Mariiner, no man is an island. What a guy does wrong on his farm can affect way more than just him and his property. The converse is also true in that what he does right may positively affect evey person or critter in the food chain. I remember a guy owned a herd of high quality well fed cows that wanted to bid on a government grazing permit in the buffer zones of a bombing range. He had a right and he got one. His cows did less than thrive and he accused the Air Force of poisoning his cows. Turns out his cows had never been on that type of range and didn't know what to eat. On other allotments the guys were experienced and were running range cattle. The EPA and other agencys can be a pain but they are ultimatly trying to make sure we all have clean water, clean air and be able to thrive. According to some recent news reports China is beginning to pay attention to their environment since they have such a problem with pollution. California used to be a nightmare smog wise but it is som much better now. Their state EPA equivalent is much more stringent than the FEDS. Sure it can be a pain in the --- but what real choice is there if we want the grandkids to be able to drink water and breath. If you can come up with better solution I am sure willing to try it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oletimer Posted March 7, 2015 Report Share Posted March 7, 2015 Mariiner, no man is an island. What a guy does wrong on his farm can affect way more than just him and his property. The converse is also true in that what he does right may positively affect evey person or critter in the food chain. I remember a guy owned a herd of high quality well fed cows that wanted to bid on a government grazing permit in the buffer zones of a bombing range. He had a right and he got one. His cows did less than thrive and he accused the Air Force of poisoning his cows. Turns out his cows had never been on that type of range and didn't know what to eat. On other allotments the guys were experienced and were running range cattle. The EPA and other agencys can be a pain but they are ultimatly trying to make sure we all have clean water, clean air and be able to thrive. According to some recent news reports China is beginning to pay attention to their environment since they have such a problem with pollution. California used to be a nightmare smog wise but it is som much better now. Their state EPA equivalent is much more stringent than the FEDS. Sure it can be a pain in the --- but what real choice is there if we want the grandkids to be able to drink water and breath. If you can come up with better solution I am sure willing to try it. Let me get the straight, The cows didn't know what to eat!! I have been around ALOT of cattle, for MANY years, and I have never heard of a cow so dumb it didn't know what to eat. Maybe my cows were better educated, because they never went hungry. This is like the post I read one time where the poster said we could all get better fuel mileage if we picked our route where we always ran down hill. Dick T 2006 Volvo VNL 630(VED12 400HP)10 speed autoshift,3.58 gear 236" twin screw, w/ET, Jackalopee, Blue Dot2016 Space Craft 37' Blu/Dot, Dexter 8K triple axel, HD Drum hydraulic brakes Feather lite air ride2005 Jeep Rubicon2007 Suzuki DR 650 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigjim Posted March 7, 2015 Report Share Posted March 7, 2015 I had never heard of it either at the time but have seen something like it elsewhere since then. I got bewildered once when stopped for a break on a remote west tx road. A horse and a goat wandered up so I thought I would get out a couple of carrots and feed them. It kind of surprised me but the horse first wouldn't eat it or even take a bite then I said heck I'll just feed the goat. I was even more surprised. The goat wouldn't eat it either. My experience with goats is they are subject to eating just about anything but I guess not after that one. As far as the cows they were on range in central FL and while they didn't starve totally, they didn't thrive like the other range cows on the other leases. I forget what they were but I do believe they were blooded stock, maybe Charlais. All they had ever been on before was good developed pasture. I don't think the owner was a long term stockman but more like a rich guy trying to be a rancher. No offense intended to the guy being rich. I have another story similar to that I oberved will caretaking a cotton farm next to pasture a gentleman farmer bought and began raising blooded stock. At one point he accused us of poisoning his cows. Sorry everyone that this is so far from the topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mariner Posted March 7, 2015 Report Share Posted March 7, 2015 Wow! From the internet....to cows. It's always fun to see where some of these conversations go. Fulltiming since 2010 2000 Dutch Star 2009 Saturn Vue Myrtle Beach, SC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Joyce Posted March 7, 2015 Report Share Posted March 7, 2015 "Net Neutrality: Fact & Fiction" - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQ9E0db8-lU is an interesting video on the subject. (14 minutes, set your quality to 240p with the gear icon and it will use around 50MB of bandwidth). 2004 40' Newmar Dutch Star DP towing an AWD 2020 Ford Escape Hybrid, Fulltimer July 2003 to October 2018, Parttimer now. Travels through much of 2013 - http://www.sacnoth.com - Bill, Diane and Evita (the cat) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wa_desert_rat Posted March 7, 2015 Report Share Posted March 7, 2015 I've been involved in the Internet since we used to email the "hosts" file (which linked domain names to IP addresses before DNS). The way it has worked has been that every link in the chain paid for their own bandwidth. That bandwidth was pretty puny by today's standards; actually it was pretty puny the standards back then, too. But at least we all paid for what we got. As the Internet grew so did the bandwidth available (which was never as much as the demand). Today every link in the chain pays for bandwidth except (usually) the end user. The end user pays $50 a month and expects to be able to download and/or watch whatever they want and however much of it they want. The last mile providers (the company that is your ISP) cannot afford to buy all the bandwidth necessary to feed every customer all the bandwidth they desire (or even all the "speed" they think they've bought). The answer has been to throttle high bandwidth users so that the ISP can afford to stay in business. Now that throttling bandwidth is out the window I'm thinking that the only alternative is for the last-mile provider to charge their customers for bandwidth (like cell phone providers charge for bandwidth now). We RVers are used to paying for bandwidth and having "caps" put on the bandwidth we use. But most Internet subscribers are not at all used to this. I suspect they'll be getting used to it, though. Be careful what you wish for. WDR 1993 Foretravel U225 with Pacbrake and 5.9 Cummins with Banks 1999 Jeep Wrangler, 4" lift and 33" tires Raspberry Pi Coach Computer Ham Radio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richfaa Posted March 7, 2015 Report Share Posted March 7, 2015 OUR representative are worthless if they do not agree with our views. Great if they do. My understanding is that majority rules and the person that gets the most votes wins. They may not get my vote but they still win if they get more votes than the other person. How did they buy my vote if they won?? I have never paid anyone I voted for. Helen and I are long timers ..08 F-350 Ford,LB,CC,6.4L,4X4, Dually,4:10 diff dragging around a 2013 Montana 3402 Big Sky SKP 100137. North Ridgeville, Ohio in the summer, sort of and where ever it is warm in the winter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.