[opendtv] Re: Congress, the FCC & Internet Privacy: A Path to Protecting Americans Online | National Review
- From: "Manfredi, Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <opendtv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2017 19:51:36 +0000
Craig Birkmaier wrote:
Apple is not a wolf Bert.
ROTFL.
Sorry, but Title II does no such thing. It simple is a regulatory
scheme for certain types of communications businesses.
Craig, educate yourself. Read the article Monty posted. It repeats many of the
points I already made. The hilarious part about all of this? EVEN THE FTC
believes that the FCC should regulate neutrality. Another kick in the pants for
clueless libertarians. The supposed "cop on the beat" telling the FCC that
nope, we aren't the cop on the beat at all. We merely consult with the cops on
the beat, about matters of privacy.
Sorry Bert. This was widely covered at the time. It was a massive
campaign to overload the FCC with comments,
What crap, honestly Craig. Read the article Monty posted. There's hope yet,
though, as Pai has not fully divulged his ideas. But you'll note, no one
mentioned in the article think it's a good idea for the FCC to drop the
neutrality regulation, and hand the baton over to the FTC. The "voluntary"
option is plainly unworkable, since (as the article also points out) there
isn't enough competition for broadband service. And check out what the one
conservative economist says. Even he's against this, and he's the guy Pai
apparently used as an excuse to begin this noise.
We did not need to classify ISPs as common carriers to GET THIS.
They *are* common carriers, every bit as much as telephone companies are. There
is no earthly excuse to deny the obvious. Cable companies were cleasrly not
common carriers, operating as MVPDs. But when these cable companies became,
essentially, monopolist ISPs, taking over the two-way network role previously
held by telephone companies, they very OBVIOUSLY became common carriers.
There were no excesses.
Keep murmuring that to yourself, Craig. And as I've repeated multiple times, if
nothing else, their timing was absurd. They began playing those games just as
the FCC was debating a neutrality mandate, creating a public outcry, changing
Wheeler's mind. At the time, I thought huh? What a dumb thing to do. Well,
turns out, it was. Only you haven't gotten this yet, Craig.
My doing?
You, Craig. You become beholden to a monopoly pipe, and you haven't yet figured
out how this distorts your perceptions. You put the blame everywhere else,
except where it belongs. If you subject yourself to unregulated monopolies, you
should understand the consequences, and blame yourself for being so gullible.
Furthermore, if the Wheeler FCC made it so the same problems YOU experienced,
with your monopoly pipe, don't occur with Internet broadband service, you
should be grateful, not complain about it. Bitching about the cost of your "the
bundles" is frivolous silliness, compared with middlemen who mess with Internet
neutrality, to help line their own pockets.
Instead, you appear to be arguing as best you can, to make sure the same
problems you whine about incessantly also occur for Internet service. And then,
you will attribute them to "oligopolies" and "politicians," instead of the
clueless libertarians that couldn't figure out how these situations happen.
Bert
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
FreeLists.org
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.
Other related posts:
- » [opendtv] Congress, the FCC & Internet Privacy: A Path to Protecting Americans Online | National Review- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Congress, the FCC & Internet Privacy: A Path to Protecting Americans Online | National Review- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Congress, the FCC & Internet Privacy: A Path to Protecting Americans Online | National Review- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Congress, the FCC & Internet Privacy: A Path to Protecting Americans Online | National Review- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Congress, the FCC & Internet Privacy: A Path to Protecting Americans Online | National Review- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Congress, the FCC & Internet Privacy: A Path to Protecting Americans Online | National Review- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Congress, the FCC & Internet Privacy: A Path to Protecting Americans Online | National Review- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Congress, the FCC & Internet Privacy: A Path to Protecting Americans Online | National Review- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Congress, the FCC & Internet Privacy: A Path to Protecting Americans Online | National Review- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Congress, the FCC & Internet Privacy: A Path to Protecting Americans Online | National Review - Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Congress, the FCC & Internet Privacy: A Path to Protecting Americans Online | National Review- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Congress, the FCC & Internet Privacy: A Path to Protecting Americans Online | National Review- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Congress, the FCC & Internet Privacy: A Path to Protecting Americans Online | National Review- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Congress, the FCC & Internet Privacy: A Path to Protecting Americans Online | National Review- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Congress, the FCC & Internet Privacy: A Path to Protecting Americans Online | National Review- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Congress, the FCC & Internet Privacy: A Path to Protecting Americans Online | National Review- Manfredi, Albert E
- » [opendtv] Re: Congress, the FCC & Internet Privacy: A Path to Protecting Americans Online | National Review- Craig Birkmaier
- » [opendtv] Re: Congress, the FCC & Internet Privacy: A Path to Protecting Americans Online | National Review- Craig Birkmaier