Las Vegas Advisor Menu
« LVA Forums « Vegas Free-for-All

The Obama Internet

Boilerman
Boilerman
Feb 25, 2015
7:41am
Block User
Would Forkie please tell the audience what percentage of the federal government GNP went towards non-military expenditures during the Roosevelt Presidency? Feel free to include how much of the GNP went towards the military also.

I'll expect no answer.


Quote
Originally posted by: forkushV
Quote
Originally posted by: Boilerman
We on the right believe that capitalism is the best way for business to operate and that government intervention always only mucks things up...
Fortunately America had some great patriotic Americans who disagreed with that sentiment, like Theodore Roosevelt and William Jennings Bryan.

In the late nineteenth century, when the railroad robber barons wanted to use discriminatory pricing to starve out farmers, so they could buy up the land for pennies on the dollar, America put a stop to it. When Western Union wanted to use discriminatory pricing to favor newspapers they liked, and to starve out newspapers they didn't, America put a stop to it. And fortunately those common carrier laws were applied to the phone companies also. I kind of like the result.

DonDiego and Boilerman: Have guys like you ever been on the right side of history?


alanleroy
alanleroy
Feb 25, 2015
8:07am
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: pjstroh
Documented examples of "the problem that doesn't exist":

Netflix files complaint against Comcast for throttling

historical incidents of isp's blocking, capping, throttling content of competitors and opponents

I'm at a loss as to how Comcast blocking access to Netflix improves Comcast's ability to invent or compete. Quite the opposite. Netflix competes with Comcast's on-demand service.

And Cell phone companies blocking access to Vonage (their competitor) would also seem to be the height of anti-competitive behavior.

The real world provides legitimate examples of corporate abuse of internet access. You can make policy based upon facts and actual cases....or you can make policy based on abstract ideology about the role of governments. I'm happy to choose the former.

Weren't all of these heinous crimes already resolved without your Overlord FCC's ISP reclassification and Net Neutrality buzz? How can that possibly be? Don't FTC and anti-trust rules apply to these companies? Can't the FCC still address serious issues if and when they arise? As a matter of fact they do and they can...and they did...so remind me why we need this new power grab by the FCC.

Perhaps you missed Commissioner Pai's characterization of the most common cited example (Madison River) as a "Decade old case with an ISP that nobody's ever heard of with no market power". That happens to be the first case PJ cited. Here's the real story...I'll quote it for you.

reason: What are the instances that Net Neutrality proponents can point to where ISPs or other network operators have actually arbitrated those open network principles?

Pai: There are scattered examples that people often cite—an ISP that nobody’s ever heard of called Madison River almost a decade ago—some have targeted Metro PCS, which was acquired by T-Mobile. Metro PCS, upstart competitor of course, basically had no market power to speak of compared to the other carriers, wanted to make a splash in the marketplace, so it offered its consumers virtually unlimited data plans for $40, so you could stream YouTube for example without it counting against your data cap, all for $40.

reason: But it was basically you could only stream YouTube videos, right? The rest of the web, you really couldn’t get on it.

Pai: Exactly. So critics called it a net neutrality violation, called it a walled garden which was bad for consumers. And it’s telling that they didn’t go after one of the major incumbents, which now they complain about vociferously. They went after an upstart competitor."

So according to a longtime FCC commissioner, there are only a few examples, they aren't really convincing and they all resolved through other means. So why exactly are we changing the way the Federal Government regulates Internet Services?


Boilerman
Boilerman
Feb 25, 2015
8:31am
Block User
If what Obama wants happens, history tells us the the subsequent bureaucracy will be ten times the size as promised within 50 years. It's a certainty.

How the hell do Liberals not see this? Maybe they do.
pjstroh
pjstroh
Feb 25, 2015
8:52am
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: alanleroy


Weren't all of these heinous crimes already resolved without your Overlord FCC's ISP reclassification and Net Neutrality buzz? How can that possibly be? Don't FTC and anti-trust rules apply to these companies? Can't the FCC still address serious issues if and when they arise? As a matter of fact they do and they can...and they did...so remind me why we need this new power grab by the FCC.

Perhaps you missed Commissioner Pai's characterization of the most common cited example (Madison River) as a "Decade old case with an ISP that nobody's ever heard of with no market power". That happens to be the first case PJ cited.


Oh, yes! The decades old fight between Comcast and Netflix (complaint filed in Aug 2014) was settled without net-neutrality enforcement from the government.
Netflix paid a ransom to Comcast so as to stop them from blocking access to their customers Or as Alanleroy and commissioner Pei would call it- "a problem that doesn't exist".

And I guess any legitimate example that happened beyond AlanLeroy's defined statute of limitations does not constitute a legitimate case of abuse...because ...well ... AlanLeroy says so.


chefantwon
chefantwon
Feb 25, 2015
9:03am
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: pjstroh
Quote
Originally posted by: alanleroy

I would recommend that if PJ is unhappy with his high speed internet provider and if it is such a big thing in his life that he let his feet do the talking and move a location where he can get the ISP of his dreams. Now I like my ISP and Obama promised that if I like my ISP I can keep my ISP....or something like that.


Lucky for me I wont have to move. We're getting net neutrality. What we're not getting is: a government telling us what sites we can visit, or a magically created and funded government agency, or any of the other false arguments you've made on this thread. Its nice to be in touch with reality. Life is much less scary.


PJ, can you tell me exactly what is in the Presidents bill? I mean DETAILS of the bill not the "free health care for everyone shit we go with the Obama care BS"
Boilerman
Boilerman
Feb 25, 2015
9:03am
Block User
Netflix wasn't in business decades ago.


Quote
Originally posted by: pjstroh
Quote
Originally posted by: alanleroy


Weren't all of these heinous crimes already resolved without your Overlord FCC's ISP reclassification and Net Neutrality buzz? How can that possibly be? Don't FTC and anti-trust rules apply to these companies? Can't the FCC still address serious issues if and when they arise? As a matter of fact they do and they can...and they did...so remind me why we need this new power grab by the FCC.

Perhaps you missed Commissioner Pai's characterization of the most common cited example (Madison River) as a "Decade old case with an ISP that nobody's ever heard of with no market power". That happens to be the first case PJ cited.


Oh, yes! The decades old fight between Comcast and Netflix (complaint filed in Aug 2014) was settled without net-neutrality enforcement from the government.
Netflix paid a ransom to Comcast so as to stop them from blocking access to their customers Or as Alanleroy and commissioner Pei would call it- "a problem that doesn't exist".

And I guess any legitimate example that happened beyond AlanLeroy's defined statute of limitations does not constitute a legitimate case of abuse...because ...well ... AlanLeroy says so.


alanleroy
alanleroy
Feb 25, 2015
9:27am
Block User
Commissionar Pai was referring to the 2004 Madison River case that was RESOLVED by a Consent Decree and FCC levied fine of $15,000. Madison River was accused of blocking Vonage Voice over IP. So...it's a 2004 violation by a tiny ISP that was fixed by the FCC with a ruling and a small fine. It's one of the bellwether examples of data discrimination. You can't make this shit up.

As to NETFLIX and Comcast....PJ sees it as a Ransom. I see it as a business partnership. If the FCC spent more time finding ways to increase competition rather than stymie it, maybe even more of the country would have 3 or more competing broadband providers like well over half the people do...and they'd be fighting for NETFLIX's business.... That's real consumer empowerment


Quote
Originally posted by: Boilerman
Netflix wasn't in business decades ago.


Quote
Originally posted by: pjstroh
Quote
Originally posted by: alanleroy


Weren't all of these heinous crimes already resolved without your Overlord FCC's ISP reclassification and Net Neutrality buzz? How can that possibly be? Don't FTC and anti-trust rules apply to these companies? Can't the FCC still address serious issues if and when they arise? As a matter of fact they do and they can...and they did...so remind me why we need this new power grab by the FCC.

Perhaps you missed Commissioner Pai's characterization of the most common cited example (Madison River) as a "Decade old case with an ISP that nobody's ever heard of with no market power". That happens to be the first case PJ cited.


Oh, yes! The decades old fight between Comcast and Netflix (complaint filed in Aug 2014) was settled without net-neutrality enforcement from the government.
Or as Alanleroy and commissioner Pei would call it- "a problem that doesn't exist".

And I guess any legitimate example that happened beyond AlanLeroy's defined statute of limitations does not constitute a legitimate case of abuse...because ...well ... AlanLeroy says so.


alanleroy
alanleroy
Feb 25, 2015
9:56am
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: pjstroh
And I guess any legitimate example that happened beyond AlanLeroy's defined statute of limitations does not constitute a legitimate case of abuse...because ...well ... AlanLeroy says so.

Don't take my word for it. Commissionar Pai was only the Deputy General Counsel for the FCC between 2007 & 2011...and longtime senior counsel in the Department of Justice. What would he know about the validity of these complaints? And again every one of those horrible infringements on hopeless consumers was resolved without reclassifying ISP's to be ruled like telephone companies. Tempest in a teapot and a poor excuse to bring thousands of businesses under the thumb of the FCC. Maybe it's time Congress clarifies the intent of the Federal Communications Act of 1934. A lot has changed since 1934.

malibber2
malibber2
Feb 25, 2015
12:39pm
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: alanleroy
Quote
Originally posted by: pjstroh
And I guess any legitimate example that happened beyond AlanLeroy's defined statute of limitations does not constitute a legitimate case of abuse...because ...well ... AlanLeroy says so.

Don't take my word for it. Commissionar Pai was only the Deputy General Counsel for the FCC between 2007 & 2011...and longtime senior council in the Department of Justice. What would he know about the validity of these complaints? And again every one of those horrible infringements on hopeless consumers was resolved without reclassifying ISP's to be ruled like telephone companies. Tempest in a teapot and a poor excuse to bring thousands of businesses under the thumb of the FCC. Maybe it's time Congress clarifies the intent of the Federal Communications Act of 1934. A lot has changed since 1934.


I liked PJ's article. I epically liked how Verizon and Google conspired to commit fraud and in fact defrauded millions of consumers and companies that wrote apps out of several millions of dollars, or as Alan would say no harm no foul.
alanleroy
alanleroy
Feb 25, 2015
4:49pm
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: malibber2
Quote
Originally posted by: alanleroy
Quote
Originally posted by: pjstroh
And I guess any legitimate example that happened beyond AlanLeroy's defined statute of limitations does not constitute a legitimate case of abuse...because ...well ... AlanLeroy says so.

Don't take my word for it. Commissionar Pai was only the Deputy General Counsel for the FCC between 2007 & 2011...and longtime senior council in the Department of Justice. What would he know about the validity of these complaints? And again every one of those horrible infringements on hopeless consumers was resolved without reclassifying ISP's to be ruled like telephone companies. Tempest in a teapot and a poor excuse to bring thousands of businesses under the thumb of the FCC. Maybe it's time Congress clarifies the intent of the Federal Communications Act of 1934. A lot has changed since 1934.


I liked PJ's article. I epically liked how Verizon and Google conspired to commit fraud and in fact defrauded millions of consumers and companies that wrote apps out of several millions of dollars, or as Alan would say no harm no foul.

Conspiring to commit fraud and fraud are crimes. The FCC doesn't need this overreach for more power to punish companies that defraud consumers. The DOJ and FTC have plenty of tools to do that...like you know...charging and trying them in Federal court.

Already a LVA subscriber?
To continue reading, choose an option below:
Diamond Membership
$3 per month
Unlimited access to LVA website
Exclusive subscriber-only content
Limited Member Rewards Online
Join Now
or
Platinum Membership
$50 per year
Unlimited access to LVA website
Exclusive subscriber-only content
Exclusive Member Rewards Book
Join Now