Nosy, ain't you?Vrede wrote: "How long has your Mom been seeing Mr.B?"
So...you ain't figured out how to delete cookies either :?:bannination wrote: "Fixed, here ya go...."
Nosy, ain't you?Vrede wrote: "How long has your Mom been seeing Mr.B?"
So...you ain't figured out how to delete cookies either :?:bannination wrote: "Fixed, here ya go...."
I'm trying to eat right and this is giant ass chocolate chip cookie on my computer screen is not helping me in my struggle.bannination wrote:Fixed, here ya go:
O Really wrote:Is there no end to the idiocy?
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2690615/ ... rules.html
Conservatives say that net neutrality equates to government takeover of the Internet
AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!The petition reads, in full: “The Internet is not broken, and does not need to be fixed. Left-wing extremists have been crying wolf for the past decade about the harm to the Internet if the federal government didn’t regulate it. Not only were they wrong, but the Internet has exploded with innovation. Do not regulate the Internet. The best way to keep it open and free is what has kept it open and free all along—no government intervention.”
Needless to say, in response, Republicans are declaring a holy war against net neutrality.Vrede wrote:From Common Cause:BREAKING: President demands real net neutrality
Except net neutrality has been more or less of the status quo for a while now...rstrong wrote:Needless to say, in response, Republicans are declaring a holy war against net neutrality.Vrede wrote:From Common Cause:BREAKING: President demands real net neutrality
Ted Cruz: "Net Neutrality" is Obamacare for the Internet
Except that it isn't. Not even remotely.JTA wrote:Except net neutrality has been more or less of the status quo for a while now...
True true... isn't this a recent phenomenon though? Seems like it's only come to the forefront the past few years with the rise of competition from things like Netflix.rstrong wrote:Except that it isn't. Not even remotely.JTA wrote:Except net neutrality has been more or less of the status quo for a while now...
Comcast and Verizon have been throttling Netflix traffic. AT&T has been throttling “Unlimited” wireless plans.
Up here in Canada - and no doubt in the US - some companies have been blocking streaming video from the web sites of various news, comedy and sports channels. This in an effort to stop "cable cutters", people who realize that they just don't need to pay for the same provider's cable TV when they have internet.
Cable is a rip off."cable cutters"
Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, etc. Now the cable/internet companies are creating their own competing services. And so they're throttling or outright blocking the competition.JTA wrote: True true... isn't this a recent phenomenon though? Seems like it's only come to the forefront the past few years with the rise of competition from things like Netflix.
They're already doing that. If your video isn't streaming fast enough, you can pay your ISP for a higher bandwidth plan.JTA wrote:Answer me this, they may already do this, but if net neutrality is upheld could ISPs, instead of throttling traffic, instead move to tiered pricing like they do with other utilities like water? Or could they charge based on bandwidth usage?
Well, yes. That's why people are going without. And in turn, that's why the TV channels' streaming services are being blocked, to force people back into paying cable bills.JTA wrote:Cable is a rip off."cable cutters"
Admittedly, it may be a fair comparison: Most people don't really understand it, Republicans will declare it commie Marxist socialism, and it'll probably end up working fairly well.rstrong wrote:Ted Cruz: "Net Neutrality" is Obamacare for the Internet
Obama should have said he was against Net Neutrality, then Cruz would've praised it.rstrong wrote:Admittedly, it may be a fair comparison: Most people don't really understand it, Republicans will declare it commie Marxist socialism, and it'll probably end up working fairly well.rstrong wrote:Ted Cruz: "Net Neutrality" is Obamacare for the Internet
In all seriousness, that's not even a joke. It would really work that way. Just like when Obama adopted 15 years of Republican healthcare policy, and Republicans immediately declared it commie Marxist socialist "ObamaCare." And countless other examples of Obama sticking to Republican policy.JTA wrote:Obama should have said he was against Net Neutrality, then Cruz would've praised it.
. . .would take a stand on the unfair persecution of priests.Vrede wrote:If Obama said he was against pedophilia, then Cruz . . .JTA wrote:Obama should have said he was against Net Neutrality, then Cruz would've praised it.
We can't take Cruz back; he finally renounced his citizenship. Granted, that can be invalidated if he lied on the forms. And regardless, he'll still be a "Canadian Person" under the US's FACTA banking laws.Vrede wrote:JTA wrote:Thanks for Neil Young, rstrong, but would you please take Cruz and Bieber back?
What happens if Obama comes out and says he supports everything Ted Cruz supports?Vrede wrote:If Obama said he was against pedophilia, then Cruz . . .JTA wrote:Obama should have said he was against Net Neutrality, then Cruz would've praised it.
The rest of the party would quickly start using Rafael Cruz's real first name, declare him not eligible for the presidency, not a real American to begin with. They'd declare him a RINO traitor, like they've done with Republican moderates once Obama's policies became indistinguishable from theirs.JTA wrote:What happens if Obama comes out and says he supports everything Ted Cruz supports?
It's amazing to me how the wingnuts see this as an attack on <insert warped jargon here>. I guess the cable companies have a great double-speak campaign for them to buy into this. The nutters claim that if you don't like your ISP, just switch..... uh yeah.... sure.... my choices are.. AT&T, and AT&T. Looks like the free market is working wonderful (for monopolies).Vrede wrote:Also, though it got less coverage:
FCC Votes Net Neutrality and Legalizes Municipal Broadband
... In another important win for Internet access, the FCC voted today to pre-empt state laws in North Carolina and Tennessee that prevented two cities (Wilson, N.C. and Chattanooga, Tenn) from expanding their high-speed municipal broadband networks to neighboring communities. The ruling affects only those two cases, but builds a useful precedent. There are 19 states that restrict cities’ ability to provide municipal broadband. Those laws leave people in poorer neighborhoods without access to modern-speed Internet service if private companies won’t build broadband infrastructure because it’s not profitable enough.