Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Post) NewsFlash FCC: You know how we said we'd reconsider this net neutrality paid priority thing? We lied   (washingtonpost.com) divider line 886
    More: NewsFlash, Federal Communications Commission, net neutrality, internet, new economy  
•       •       •

19238 clicks; posted to Main » on 15 May 2014 at 11:42 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»


Want to get NewsFlash notifications in email?

886 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-05-15 12:38:11 PM  
Son.  I am Disapoint!

NO ONE used this slogan yet?

cdn-static.zdnet.com

That being said.

RIP Internet.

Drew:  What effect will this have on Fark?
 
2014-05-15 12:38:31 PM  
What, you didn't think we'd just continue to get unlimited, and ever faster service, for the same price, did you?

How does that make sense?
 
2014-05-15 12:38:41 PM  

Deftoons: I am fine with this.  Internet is a service and just like anything else, you pay more to get more.  I don't feel entitled to it.


(clicks profile)

You make money by selling your artwork on a personal website, right?

How much of a subscription are you willing to pay every privately-owned ISP in this country to guarantee unthrottled access to your website? If you forget to pay, say, Mediacom or Cox on a given month, are you willing to let all those potential customers see "The connection has timed out" in their browser every time they click your link?
 
2014-05-15 12:39:19 PM  

snocone: happydude45: snocone: Prophet of Loss: UNAUTHORIZED FINGER: It's time for a revolution.

But it won't happen ... at least until the Boomers die off. That generation holds on to the "MERICA, FARK YA!" delusion with a fervor unmatched by their justifiably cynical children and their completely farked (got our sonny, screw you!) grandchildren. For now, our corporate masters are solidifying their Oligarchy with little resistance and much fanfare.

Another effort at Dividing and Conquering, or are you just misinformed?

Your fantasy "Boomers" ended the Vietnem War.
Whatcha all done lately?
Riot in Chicago? NO!
Occupy Kent State and elect martyrs, Hell NO!

Idiot trolls remain idiot trolls

Pats little pointed head and skritchs between the ears.


Apologies, I meant to direct that to Prophet of Moss
 
2014-05-15 12:39:22 PM  

I alone am best: DarkSoulNoHope: Obama's Reptiloid Master: 1. It's not a final rule.

2. Ruelmaking authority is subservient to legislative power.

3. Congress can always act and supersede the FCC.

4. The solution is therefore that we stop electing Republicans to Congress, or at least any Republican (or Democrat, for that matter) who supports anything less than treating ISPs as common carriers.

Do you really think the Republican led Congress is going to try to change the rules to keep ISPs from making more and more profit? Especially since most (if not all) of those Republican congressmen/women (Democrats too) are lobbied to support these profits through legislation.


Super DERP A++ Would read again.

http://washingtonexaminer.co m/ted-cruz-bill-would-ban-fccs-latest-adve nture-in-net-neutrality/article/2548441


You will note outside of Franken very few people of power are actually against this for reasons that help the American People.  They aren't arguing about the rules really.  They are arguing about how gets to make them and get that awesome telecom lobbyist money.  The Dem's want the power to stay with the FCC since they don't have the house and may lose the senate.  The R's want the power to be in congress.

This was never about if we'd get farked.  Its about who gets paid off to ensure we get farked.
 
2014-05-15 12:39:24 PM  

snocone: UrukHaiGuyz: snocone: Prophet of Loss: UNAUTHORIZED FINGER: It's time for a revolution.

But it won't happen ... at least until the Boomers die off. That generation holds on to the "MERICA, FARK YA!" delusion with a fervor unmatched by their justifiably cynical children and their completely farked (got our sonny, screw you!) grandchildren. For now, our corporate masters are solidifying their Oligarchy with little resistance and much fanfare.

Another effort at Dividing and Conquering, or are you just misinformed?

Your fantasy "Boomers" ended the Vietnem War.
Whatcha all done lately?
Riot in Chicago? NO!
Occupy Kent State and elect martyrs, Hell NO!

No offense to the ideological protesters of the Vietnam War, but it's a f*ckload easier to get people in the streets if they're worried about being drafted. You guys got sold on the most crackpot economic bullsh*t theory, and bought it because of greed. We're still suffering through the effects of Reaganomics, and trends don't look good.

With all due respect, you are fulla zhit.


Truly you have a dizzying intellect.
 
2014-05-15 12:39:41 PM  

papatex: Surprisingly all 3 democrats voted for it, both republicans against it.

It's a mad mad world.


If it would have been a GOP Power Play Year, the vote would still be 2/3, just the facemasks would be reversed.
 
2014-05-15 12:39:44 PM  
You assholes keep voting for the fascists.  Enjoy the results.
 
2014-05-15 12:40:03 PM  

I alone am best: DarkSoulNoHope: Obama's Reptiloid Master: 1. It's not a final rule.

2. Ruelmaking authority is subservient to legislative power.

3. Congress can always act and supersede the FCC.

4. The solution is therefore that we stop electing Republicans to Congress, or at least any Republican (or Democrat, for that matter) who supports anything less than treating ISPs as common carriers.

Do you really think the Republican led Congress is going to try to change the rules to keep ISPs from making more and more profit? Especially since most (if not all) of those Republican congressmen/women (Democrats too) are lobbied to support these profits through legislation.


Super DERP A++ Would read again.

http://washingtonexaminer.co m/ted-cruz-bill-would-ban-fccs-latest-adve nture-in-net-neutrality/article/2548441


Ted Cruz wants zero regulation. The problem he and his Republican friends have with the rules is that they simply don't go far enough.

We've subsidized the infrastructure. Now he wants to be sure that we see zero benefits unless we're on the board of one of the already existing major players. He has also advocated for a model where new players cannot make it to market as the existing companies can and will raise the bar for entry so high that it will be impossible to compete with their services.

Their services will not decrease in cost and will not increase in quality. They are guaranteed that no competition will affect their world.
 
2014-05-15 12:40:48 PM  
stuffy:  Now its torch and pitchfork time.

   That's the call of Second Amendment dimwits but they're co-opted into worshiping the power holding them down. 'Tough as Cheney. RAM tough.'
 
2014-05-15 12:40:59 PM  

bighairyguy: Cat videos are going to cost a fortune now.


And that's why i couldn't give a fark about this ruling.
 
2014-05-15 12:41:30 PM  

drjekel_mrhyde: bighairyguy: Cat videos are going to cost a fortune now.

And that's why i couldn't give a fark about this ruling.


You will when they block your VR pron.
 
2014-05-15 12:41:49 PM  

PanicMan: EdNortonsTwin: Just wrote my Senator, again.

I will tonight. Again. EFF is a good resource for that.


This thread is getting a lot of comments - take another minute everyone and bug your congress critter.

Sometimes you even get something other than a form letter in return.  Few years back I had a few exchanges with a staffer - which was nice.  It didn't hurt that I imagined her wearing a skimpy nighty when writing back, but that's another story.
 
2014-05-15 12:41:57 PM  

Tatterdemalian: Doing as much as they did to stop Obamacare.


You can keep your ISP?
 
2014-05-15 12:42:40 PM  

Deftoons: I am fine with this.  Internet is a service and just like anything else, you pay more to get more.  I don't feel entitled to it.


Poe's law?  You're already paying for it.  Would you pay more for gasoline that was more expensive based on how popular the place you wanted to drive to was?  And with said gasoline charging the place you were going on top of charging you, leading to the destination also charging you more to make up for it?
 
2014-05-15 12:43:22 PM  

mr lawson: Ted Cruz bill would ban 'FCC's latest adventure in net neutrality'

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, wants Congress to ban "the FCC's latest adventure in 'net neutrality,' " saying the proposed changes to Internet regulations would damage the industry.
"A five-member panel at the FCC should not be dictating how Internet services will be provided to millions of Americans," Cruz said in a Wednesday afternoon statement. "I will be introducing legislation that would remove the claimed authority for the FCC to take such actions, specifically the Commission's nebulous Sec. 706 authority. More than $1 trillion has already been invested in broadband infrastructure, which has led to an explosion of new content, applications, and Internet accessibility. Congress, not an unelected commission, should take the lead on modernizing our telecommunications laws. The FCC should not endanger future investments by stifling growth in the online sector, which remains a much-needed bright spot in our struggling economy."


If you look at what he's actually saying, he's advocating for removal of FCC regulation for this and other business decisions by ISP's. In other words instead of the FCC having to approve anything impacting net neutrality, the ISP's could just do this all on their own. It reads as though the ISP's are stuck with the FCC forcing selective carrying down their throats, when in fact they're begging it.

It's bad that the FCC has voted this way, but it would be even worse if there was zero regulation and the ISP's could do as they please.
 
2014-05-15 12:43:32 PM  
28.8kbps used to cost around $10.  3Mbps should cost around $1000.

I think there is some wiggle room between $60 and $1000.
 
2014-05-15 12:43:49 PM  
There seem to be a few more details here.

mod3072: The House Republicans are idiots, but that does not absolve Democrats, especially Obama, from blame for passing these rules. I realize that this is Fark where Democrats can do no wrong and Republicans can do no right, but come on. The Republicans may not be taking any action to correct this, but the Democrats are ACTIVELY ENACTING IT. It's now the Republicans' fault because they don't use their majority to override crappy rules enacted by Democrats, but it's not the Democrats' fault for passing the rules in the first place?


The Democrats are clearly at fault for voting for these crappy rules. However, from what I can make out from other sources, it sounds like the GOP are opposed because the rules restrict the amount of crappiness more strictly than presently allowed.

This leaves the political prospects dim, at least until and unless the GOP is completely laughed off the political stage -- which seems to have essentially no chance of happening prior to 2023 at the earliest, and is implausible even then.
 
2014-05-15 12:43:51 PM  

snocone: papatex: Surprisingly all 3 democrats voted for it, both republicans against it.

It's a mad mad world.

If it would have been a GOP Power Play Year, the vote would still be 2/3, just the facemasks would be reversed.


So you're tellin' me vote independent. Or..... don't vote?
 
2014-05-15 12:44:21 PM  

mod3072: The Homer Tax: mod3072: So the Obama-appointed telecom industry shills voted to protect telecom profits at the expense of the consumer and free expression?? I blame Republicans. DAMN YOU, REPUBLICANS!!!

Are the republicans using their house majority to draft new legislation preventing companies from doing this? The regulatory powers of the regulatory bodies are determined by the laws enacted by the legislature. What are the republicans doing with their house majority to stop this?

Oh, having another Benghazi investigation? Awesome.

The FCC already has all the power they need to regulate the industry, they just refuse to do it. There is no need for legislation, the FCC just needs to step up and do its job. The House Republicans are idiots, but that does not absolve Democrats, especially Obama, from blame for passing these rules. I realize that this is Fark where Democrats can do no wrong and Republicans can do no right, but come on. The Republicans may not be taking any action to correct this, but the Democrats are ACTIVELY ENACTING IT. It's now the Republicans' fault because they don't use their majority to override crappy rules enacted by Democrats, but it's not the Democrats' fault for passing the rules in the first place? Would the Senate pass it even if the House acted to overturn the rules? Would Obama sign it? Yes, the Republicans are corrupt, bought-and-paid-for corporate shills who only care about themselves and their rich cronies. The problem is, so are the Democrats, you just refuse to believe it because GO TEAM! I would point out that Obama has appointed insider industry shills to every single regulatory agency in existence, but you'd probably find a way to blame that on Bush.


The reason the FCC is revisiting this is because they were smacked down by the courts for their prior rules. Initially, the full-bore net neutrality was the policy.

Time to make ISP common carriers.
 
2014-05-15 12:44:25 PM  

Plant Rights Activist: [affordablehousinginstitute.org image 400x230]


hah, it's also a new track from Austrian Death Machine

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7mBUiyNdkwM
 
2014-05-15 12:44:34 PM  
You know what this calls for, right?

Another day on FARK where 90% of all submissions get greenlit
 
2014-05-15 12:45:10 PM  
Well, that was a surprise.  No, really!  This is my surprised face:

:-|
 
2014-05-15 12:46:14 PM  

DanZero: Another day on FARK where 90% of all submissions get greenlit


YOU GET A GREENLIGHT, YOU GET A GREENLIGHT!!!  GREENLIGHTS FOR EVERYONE!!!
 
2014-05-15 12:46:38 PM  

UrukHaiGuyz: snocone: UrukHaiGuyz: snocone: Prophet of Loss: UNAUTHORIZED FINGER: It's time for a revolution.

But it won't happen ... at least until the Boomers die off. That generation holds on to the "MERICA, FARK YA!" delusion with a fervor unmatched by their justifiably cynical children and their completely farked (got our sonny, screw you!) grandchildren. For now, our corporate masters are solidifying their Oligarchy with little resistance and much fanfare.

Another effort at Dividing and Conquering, or are you just misinformed?

Your fantasy "Boomers" ended the Vietnem War.
Whatcha all done lately?
Riot in Chicago? NO!
Occupy Kent State and elect martyrs, Hell NO!

No offense to the ideological protesters of the Vietnam War, but it's a f*ckload easier to get people in the streets if they're worried about being drafted. You guys got sold on the most crackpot economic bullsh*t theory, and bought it because of greed. We're still suffering through the effects of Reaganomics, and trends don't look good.

With all due respect, you are fulla zhit.

Truly you have a dizzying intellect.


You get all the intellect you deserve, Pud.
 
2014-05-15 12:46:40 PM  

Tatterdemalian: The Homer Tax: mod3072: So the Obama-appointed telecom industry shills voted to protect telecom profits at the expense of the consumer and free expression?? I blame Republicans. DAMN YOU, REPUBLICANS!!!

Are the republicans using their house majority to draft new legislation preventing companies from doing this? The regulatory powers of the regulatory bodies are determined by the laws enacted by the legislature. What are the republicans doing with their house majority to stop this?

Oh, having another Benghazi investigation? Awesome.

Doing as much as they did to stop Obamacare.

/which to say, everything they can, yet far from enough
//the only power the "House Republican Majority" has is to be a convenient scapegoat to blame for the continuing failure of leftist policies
///just like the sequester, Obama can shut everything down personally, and yet the Republicans still get blamed for making him pitch that temper tantrum with their naysaying


They have put up 80-something bills to overturn Obamacare. How many votes have they recorded strengthening net neutrality and preventing the cable companies from doing this?

It wouldn't take but a handful of senators to flip to pass this in both houses, then it's on Obama.

Saying "it's pointless so why try" doesn't pass the smell test when they pass pointless bills almost every single day over and over again...
 
2014-05-15 12:46:47 PM  

Nadie_AZ: Deftoons: I am fine with this.  Internet is a service and just like anything else, you pay more to get more.  I don't feel entitled to it.

The thing is you will pay more keep your current speeds. Or slower.


No.

Your existing service is likely to remain unchanged. You will just end up paying a lot more for some content or that content will become unbearably slow so as to devalue it entirely. Strangely, whatever terribly boring stuff NBC produces will alway be of very high quality with little delay.
 
2014-05-15 12:47:17 PM  

make me some tea: Gunther: mod3072: The Republicans may not be taking any action to correct this, but the Democrats are ACTIVELY ENACTING IT.

Much as it galls me to admit it, you are indeed correct. On this issue the democrats deserve more of the blame.

And if you vote Republican this year, the Republicans will be the ones actively enacting it.


That's most likely true, but that doesn't make it any less silly to try blaming these rules on the Republicans, as many in this thread are doing.
 
2014-05-15 12:47:25 PM  

papatex: Surprisingly all 3 democrats voted for it, both republicans against it.

It's a mad mad world.


The Republicans don't feel that the FCC should have jurisdiction here, and Comcast/Verizon et. al. should be able to do as they please. The Democrats voting for it actually ensures that the FCC maintains the authority to make this decision.

Don't get me wrong; I'm not happy about it at all, and there should have been a better way to make sure the FCC (or at least somebody) has the ability to regulate an essential service like broadband Internet. But I'm trying to look at the bright side here.
 
2014-05-15 12:47:51 PM  
Do what you want, but you're gonna loose net neutrality because there's too much potential money in it.

Ask anyone who recalls the beginning of cable TV, which was considered amazing, and look at it now. Broken often into tiers to give viewers a ton of channels they don't want if they want to see anything except the most basic TV programming. 'Stealing cable' went from a misdemeanor to a felony. Infomercials flood the stations after midnight and while you might have 500 different channels, there's probably only 100 you actually watch. You might find one show on three different channels you pay for, at the same time.

You can be forced to take 25 sports channels even if you hate sports -- and get to have your favorite program pre-empted for sports games anyhow.

Pretty much cable TV is working to maximize profits at the cost of service -- at least among the biggest providers. Small providers find themselves nearly shut out.

When the internet opened up to the public it was much different than today. A major change has been the ads and tracking cookies which infest your devices. Then came the pop-ups which annoyed the crap out of everyone. Rules required, eventually, that each one needed to have a close button, but then the designers started making that button harder to find.

Redirectors were born, infesting websites and search engines, so when you looked for something, you could be sucked into some other site. Then, the sites which popped up under misleading names that turned out to be small search engines for 'local services'.

Spam came into being and while we've all biatched about it and laws have been created to deal with it, major Spammers make millions -- get caught and tossed in jail -- and another takes their place because no one goes after the companies who pay the Spammer to spam everyone.

Download a blocking program to cut back on tracking and ad cookies -- and watch your system slow down as the thing sorts through thousands of cookies trying to be downloaded on your system. Just setting one up opens your eyes to the huge amount of companies set up to pile garbage onto your system -- and many websites are paid to allow such garbage access.

Then, you need programs to clean out the tracking and ad cookies which often will sit on your system and feed back information or trigger pop ups and slow things down by hogging needed resources.

You have bigger hard drives now. That requires a more powerful CPU to get stuff done rapidly, yet a large amount of reasonably priced laptops and PCs come with low powered versions. Newer devices dump much of your info into 'The Cloud', mainly because storing terabytes on your cell or tablet isn't possible because we can't make a hard drive that small to hold that much.

How long before someone finds a way to hack into the Cloud? They've hacked into everything else.

The Internet is a gold mine for those who can control access to it.

Like Cable TV and most cell phone services, companies have seen the billions to be made by regulating the quality of service to access this global medium.

Texting uses less bandwidth than voice, yet started out more expensive and as people have flocked to it, the cell providers are making billions. It's a cash cow. Especially with teens.

When there is so much money to be made, Big Business will unhesitatingly buy off law makers and incessantly lobby congress to get a piece of the pie.

You get screwed.
 
2014-05-15 12:48:12 PM  

dr_blasto: Nadie_AZ: Deftoons: I am fine with this.  Internet is a service and just like anything else, you pay more to get more.  I don't feel entitled to it.

The thing is you will pay more keep your current speeds. Or slower.

No.

Your existing service is likely to remain unchanged. You will just end up paying a lot more for some content or that content will become unbearably slow so as to devalue it entirely. Strangely, whatever terribly boring stuff NBC produces will alway be of very high quality with little delay.


Ah yes. Sorry.
So Netflix will be tiered for speed and NBCflix will be cheaper and faster?
 
2014-05-15 12:48:18 PM  

kling_klang_bed: Republicans siding with the larger corporations and in turn duking the small businesses?

[i45.photobucket.com image 240x189]


It was actually the other way around.  These were Democrats screwing the people over.  This time, anyway...


Nadie_AZ: kling_klang_bed: Republicans Corporatists siding with the larger corporations and in turn duking the small businesses?

[i45.photobucket.com image 240x189]

This is really the truth of it.


Yeah, well, that, too.
 
2014-05-15 12:48:25 PM  

UNAUTHORIZED FINGER: This country in no way resembles the nation of my youth.


img.fark.net
 
2014-05-15 12:48:33 PM  

medius: I will not jerk off to dial up speeds again!


www.charmofthecarolines.com
 
2014-05-15 12:49:09 PM  

papatex: snocone: papatex: Surprisingly all 3 democrats voted for it, both republicans against it.

It's a mad mad world.

If it would have been a GOP Power Play Year, the vote would still be 2/3, just the facemasks would be reversed.

So you're tellin' me vote independent. Or..... don't vote?


If I had an answer that would work, I would be in prison.
 
2014-05-15 12:49:22 PM  
3 Democrats vote to pass theses rules and the first 150 comments are full of how evil the Republicans are for allowing this to happen.

I love Fark.
 
2014-05-15 12:49:47 PM  

DanZero: You know what this calls for, right?
Another day on FARK where 90% of all submissions get greenlit


Nah. Greenlight all of the spam links, but with the type changed to img.fark.net.
 
2014-05-15 12:49:58 PM  

sendtodave: Better Comcast than than the next Mark Zuckerberg, selling another useless bazillion dollar marketing scheme.


i.imgur.com

I am paying my ISP for a service.  I am not paying Facebook for one.
 
2014-05-15 12:50:12 PM  

RickN99: 3 Democrats vote to pass theses rules and the first 150 comments are full of how evil the Republicans are for allowing this to happen.

I love Fark.


Also, the Internet should be free.  As in beer.

And Netflix and google are scrappy underdogs.
 
2014-05-15 12:50:19 PM  

abb3w: The Democrats are clearly at fault for voting for these crappy rules. However, from what I can make out from other sources, it sounds like the GOP are opposed because the rules restrict the amount of crappiness more strictly than presently allowed.


Exactly. For all the [justified] hype about the Democrats not being restrictive enough, the Republicans don't believe there should be any regulations on the ISP's at all.
 
2014-05-15 12:50:35 PM  
I may start actively campaigning for Bernie Sanders as our next president. He could make a bigger dent in this perspective of change than any other currently presented potential candidate.

I like Obama, but I'm definitely not one of the leg-humpers that the conservatrolls think exist here. Appointing these five people and Wheeler and others were big mistakes. Fortunately I'm not a one-issue voter, so there are upsides here even if they are few and far between.

Both sides are bad, but in our crusade towards oligarchy and anarchy and self-destruction the Republicans are getting us there faster. So many corporate interests, so many "we got 98%" buffoons. All three branches of government are driving us into darkness, the president slowest and the SCOTUS fastest, with the burdening standstill Congress in the middle mostly by non-action.
 
2014-05-15 12:50:39 PM  

ox45tallboy: But I'm trying to look at the bright side here.


Much like this guy here.

;)
 
2014-05-15 12:51:17 PM  
USA Inc. Your freedom has been purchased.


We have Google Fiber. It has not changed our lives. However, it has revealed the variety of bottlenecks that already exist. Some sites are simple ALWAYS slower to load. This is only going to create more of those bottlenecks...
 
2014-05-15 12:51:25 PM  

Biff_Steel: UNAUTHORIZED FINGER: This country in no way resembles the nation of my youth.

[img.fark.net image 600x865]


Is it me, or is Ann turning into Roger from American Dad?
 
2014-05-15 12:51:32 PM  

sendtodave: Bandwidth isn't like memory. It's a series of cables.


It was an analogy.

How much did a 56k modem cost 20 years ago?  How much does a 50Mbps cable modem cost today?

How much did a 1 Mbps switch cost 20 years ago?  How much does a 100 Gbps switch cost today?
 
2014-05-15 12:51:50 PM  

xanadian: ox45tallboy: But I'm trying to look at the bright side here.

Much like this guy here.

;)


YES
 
2014-05-15 12:52:20 PM  
So this wont effect data that passes through your guy's ass backwards country from other countries, right?
 
2014-05-15 12:52:23 PM  

elchip: sendtodave: Better Comcast than than the next Mark Zuckerberg, selling another useless bazillion dollar marketing scheme.

[i.imgur.com image 600x480]

I am paying my ISP for a service.  I am not paying Facebook for one.


Sure.

And you will still get your "up to x" speed.
 
2014-05-15 12:52:24 PM  

abb3w: There seem to be a few more details here.

mod3072: The House Republicans are idiots, but that does not absolve Democrats, especially Obama, from blame for passing these rules. I realize that this is Fark where Democrats can do no wrong and Republicans can do no right, but come on. The Republicans may not be taking any action to correct this, but the Democrats are ACTIVELY ENACTING IT. It's now the Republicans' fault because they don't use their majority to override crappy rules enacted by Democrats, but it's not the Democrats' fault for passing the rules in the first place?

The Democrats are clearly at fault for voting for these crappy rules. However, from what I can make out from other sources, it sounds like the GOP are opposed because the rules restrict the amount of crappiness more strictly than presently allowed.

This leaves the political prospects dim, at least until and unless the GOP is completely laughed off the political stage -- which seems to have essentially no chance of happening prior to 2023 at the earliest, and is implausible even then.


Yea, make no mistake - the Republicans aren't for Net Neutrality.  They voted against this because it goes to far for Net Neutrality.
They want to completely unregulate the internet (well except for morality legislation) and let the ISPs do as they please.  You know, free market and all that.
 
2014-05-15 12:52:56 PM  

ikanreed: Okay, we need a backup plan.

Digging up cables of companies that do this?  Boycotts?  Class action lawsuit for failure to deliver promised service?


My plan is to send the vast majority of my job applications overseas when I'm finishing my dissertation and on the market.
 
Displayed 50 of 886 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report