Ted Cruz: Net Neutrality is Obamacare for the Internet

[7rmr]

(Post 17) ^^^ Interesting twist of the data, to claim that "2 or less" is bad, when 2 (by definition) means there's competition.

So, by your own chart, 70% have access and choice between two or more ISPs...

It's a duopoly. I would hope you would be intellectually honest enough to recognize duopolies do not promote competition.

[Fist-Of-Freedom]

It's a duopoly. I would hope you would be intellectually honest enough to recognize duopolies do not promote competition.

Let me ask you, how did these duopolies come to exist?

[7rmr]

Things the government has done better than private businesses:



fuk...any ideas?

Go to the moon

Create the internet

Kill Nazis

[Ghosting]

I think net neutrality is a great concept. I also think cheaper and more accessible healthcare is a great concept.

I am skeptical of the federal government being able to manage anything effectively and typically when they try to it leads to more taxes/more expensive/less effective services.

I totally agree

[Fist-Of-Freedom]

Go to the moon

Create the internet

Kill Nazis

Kill Nazis, although we are the ones living in a fascist state now. The irony is comical..

[7rmr]

Let me ask you, how did these duopolies come to exist?

I hope you're about to tell me, and I hope you're explanation includes why even though they are duopolies they actually promote competition, because that is the only way it would be relevant.

[BrotatoChip]

I get the impression that you guys are saying the government might use this as an excuse to step in. In which case, I agree, government control is not necessary (it was fine before) and potentially bad when someone has control of what you view.

B-but government solves everything for us! It's the most efficient machine out there!


People don't realize that this big government mess doesn't happen overnight. It's not like one day a law was signed saying government would control basically every aspect of our lives. It happens in little, "justifiable" steps. This is yet another one of those steps

That is regulating. Regulating the regulators.

But regardless, you honestly think they wouldn't expand there influence on the internet once they get there dirty little paws inside with this?

We are screwed

Proof positive that this is just a gut reaction to the word government. Net neutrality is about stopping massive ISPs from throttling connection speeds and employing other consumer targeted, predatory business practices.

[Fallfree]

(Post 17) ^^^ Interesting twist of the data, to claim that "2 or less" is bad, when 2 (by definition) means there's competition.

So, by your own chart, 70% have access and choice between two or more ISPs... (as of a year ago).

Meanwhile: http://www.broadbandmap.gov/number-of-providers

You really really cannot be serious if you are saying that the current US internet is completely fine? You cannot be that blind right? Just because you have a choice does not mean the rest of the country does and just because 67% has 2 choices does not mean both those choices are not completely terrible....why do you think TWC suddenly decided to raise their download speeds when google fiber moved in next door...

[truthbringer12]

(Post 17) ^^^ Interesting twist of the data, to claim that "2 or less" is bad, when 2 (by definition) means there's competition.

So, by your own chart, 70% have access and choice between two or more ISPs...

Actually they dont. in most cases when there is only 2 providers, the backbone is leased by the primary provider and network peering is used by both companies.

Its obvious you have no clue about the internet infrastructure. I suggest you lookup the definition of network peering and how one broadband provider can degrade or impact an unrelated ISP. Comcast has used network peering to degrade competitors networks. This has been well documented over the last few year. Not by consumers on content creators (like Netflix) but the actual backbone owners themselves.

[BDPfit]

I think net neutrality is a great concept. I also think cheaper and more accessible healthcare is a great concept.

I am skeptical of the federal government being able to manage anything effectively and typically when they try to it leads to more taxes/more expensive/less effective services.

O35 crew and still just "skeptical" about this? Cmon, man it REALLY doesn't take all that much to see that government is blatantly the biggest time/money wasting agency that's ever been created. The MORE they shove up their anus to "regulate", the more and more inefficient everything becomes

[Fist-Of-Freedom]

I hope you're about to tell me, and I hope you're explanation includes why even though they are duopolies they actually promote competition, because that is the only way it would be relevant.

Hilarious

[nutsy54]

It's a duopoly. I would hope you would be intellectually honest enough to recognize duopolies do not promote competition.

You're right (I'm being sarcastic, since you now completely change your story from "monopolies are bad!" to "oops, I mean duopolies are bad!"). There's no competition at all between Pepsi & Coke, or Microsoft & Apple, and Comcast certainly never advertises against Verizon...

Seriously, where do you come up with this stuff?

[nutsy54]

You really really cannot be serious if you are saying that the current US internet is completely fine? You cannot be that blind right?

It's really annoying when people attack and insult me for a claim I never made. Go rant against someone else, or come back and address what I actually posted.

[truthbringer12]

O35 crew and still just "skeptical" about this? Cmon, man it REALLY doesn't take all that much to see that government is blatantly the biggest time/money wasting agency that's ever been created. The MORE they shove up their anus to "regulate", the more and more inefficient everything becomes

Prior to vehicle safety regulations (ie big government ) were cars better or worse?

[sayso]

it doesn't really matter what the general public thinks, this battle will be won with lobbyists.

It's basically the telecom/cable companies vs. microsoft/google/yahoo/tumblr/********/amazon/netflix/etc

There are way way way more companies in favor of net neutrality than there are against, the only people really against it are the telecom/cable companies but if they lose this battle the days of high priced telephone/cable are pretty much done for. Why pay $200 a month for a cable package when you only watch 5 or 6 channels and youtube/amazon are negotiating direct contracts with major networks to let you pick your channels for $0.50 - $10 per month and verizon/charter/comcast/att/etc can't throttle you to give you bad video quality?

[Yero91]

Proof positive that this is just a gut reaction to the word government. Net neutrality is about stopping massive ISPs from throttling connection speeds and employing other consumer targeted, predatory business practices.

I also get the feeling that people are just reacting to the word "government" instead of the concept of net neutrality. I don't think anyone agrees with ISP's being allowed to bottle neck your service as it suits them.

[truthbringer12]

You're right (I'm being sarcastic, since you now completely change your story from "monopolies are bad!" to "oops, I mean duopolies are bad!"). There's no competition at all between Pepsi & Coke, or Microsoft & Apple, and Comcast certainly never advertises against Verizon...

Seriously, where do you come up with this stuff?

Again, you do not understand the infrastructure of the internet.
In you Coke Pepsi analogy, imagine if Pepsi's only option were to lease production facilities from Coke. Coke periodically slows the production down or arbitrarily raises the prices.

That is the situation you have with ISP's. ISP's & network providers have to use peering to reach all parts of the internet. It is the way the internet was designed. It provides network resiliency. Since the birth of the internet all peering has been treated equally except recently Comcast (which is a Tier 2 ISP) had started throttling peering. Net Neutrality would prevent that. Throttling peering actually causes issues with other networks.

In the cases where you think there is competion, look at the photo I attached. in most regions there is a Tier 2 ISP and a Tier 3 network. If you dont like Comcast and switch to another ISP, you are still relying on Comcast, you just sent your payment to a different company.

Again, there is almost no competition in the broadband market.

[7rmr]

You're right (I'm being sarcastic, since you now completely change your story from "monopolies are bad!" to "oops, I mean duopolies are bad!"). There's no competition at all between Pepsi & Coke, or Microsoft & Apple, and Comcast certainly never advertises against Verizon...

Seriously, where do you come up with this stuff?

Are you seriously arguing duopolies foster competition beneficial to consumers?

[suave2000]

Again, you do not understand the infrastructure of the internet.
In you Coke Pepsi analogy, imagine if Pepsi's only option were to lease production facilities from Coke. Coke periodically slows the production down or arbitrarily raises the prices.

That is the situation you have with ISP's. ISP's & network providers have to use peering to reach all parts of the internet. It is the way the internet was designed. It provides network resiliency. Since the birth of the internet all peering has been treated equally except recently Comcast (which is a Tier 2 ISP) had started throttling peering. Net Neutrality would prevent that. Throttling peering actually causes issues with other networks.

In the cases where you think there is competion, look at the photo I attached. in most regions there is a Tier 2 ISP and a Tier 3 network. If you dont like Comcast and switch to another ISP, you are still relying on Comcast, you just sent your payment to a different company.

Again, there is almost no competition in the broadband market.

Sadly their partisan views will outpower the facts and they will just continue opposing net neutrality because 'Obama

[BioDiver]

My understanding was that Obama was trying to implement policy to prevent ISPs from throttling and upcharging to get the same speed on certain sites, i.e. "non-discriminatory speed."

[truthbringer12]

it doesn't really matter what the general public thinks, this battle will be won with lobbyists.

It's basically the telecom/cable companies vs. microsoft/google/yahoo/tumblr/********/amazon/netflix/etc

There are way way way more companies in favor of net neutrality than there are against, the only people really against it are the telecom/cable companies but if they lose this battle the days of high priced telephone/cable are pretty much done for. Why pay $200 a month for a cable package when you only watch 5 or 6 channels and youtube/amazon are negotiating direct contracts with major networks to let you pick your channels for $0.50 - $10 per month and verizon/charter/comcast/att/etc can't throttle you to give you bad video quality?

Its a little more complex than that. Level 3 supports net neutrality. As do most Tier 3 networks

[The_Albatross]

That is regulating. Regulating the regulators.

But regardless, you honestly think they wouldn't expand there influence on the internet once they get there dirty little paws inside with this?

We are screwed

What influence? They are suggesting a total hands-off approach to the internet.

The exact thing you are worried about the government doing, regulating and restricting the internet, is already happening and will get much worse in the future, at the hands of the ISPs and their parent companies.

You fundamentally do not understand the issue.

[Shortstop36]

You don't think there's a problem with the way ISPs operate in the USA? Comcast is **** now, but I can't even imagine what kind of nonsense they'll be up to if they don't face stricter regulation. Internet should be considered a utility.

yea i was under the assumption that comcast was good. Got it this year, and this **** sucks dick.

[Ratfish]

You don't think there's a problem with the way ISPs operate in the USA? Comcast is **** now, but I can't even imagine what kind of nonsense they'll be up to if they don't face stricter regulation. Internet should be considered a utility.

comcast is the GOAT where i live. i pay like 60 a month and get perfect service 99.9% of the time and the speeds are ridiculous. torrents at 6MB/s ho lee fukk

[AlphaSproles]

His tweet made me switch from Republican to Democrat again (srs).

Can't be in the same bracket as a moron who is against net neutrality. What a corrupt scumbag. Gives every good Republican a bad image. Goodbye, Republicans.

[Efre]

How is someone an "idiot" for pointing out that Big Government intervention and regulation rarely produces the promised results?

Is that why Rick Snyder passed legislation for banning direct sales by Tesla?

I thought you didn't want intervention, wanted a free market and competition?

[royflagg00]

ITT: people who don't know $hit about the way the internet works arguing with people who do just because they have been conditioned to be opposed to anything the government wants to do while a Democrat is president.

While president Chimpanzee W. Fetalalchoholpoisioning was in office, probably didn't oppose $hit, now want to be policy experts.

[LieutenantGains]

Holy fuark some people are dumb. Our internet in the US is a complete joke compared to other parts of the world. What I pay for 25mpbs with Comcast is the same as what gets you 200mbps in Poland. We gave the telecom companies BILLIONS to upgrade their infrastructure for fiber and they fuarking pocketed it. Comcast throttled Netflix earlier this year in order to strong arm them into paying huge fees just to not throttle them. If you think the current setup we have in the US is ok and you for some stupid reason think net neutrality is bad you're a moron. Stop being partisan phuckheads and actually do some research for once.

[MasterYomega]

"Net Neutrality" is Obamacare for the Internet; the Internet should not operate at the speed of government.

- Senator Ted Cruz

Oh god. How the **** do these idiots get elected?

Cruz said that in response to this:

http://www.theverge.com/2014/11/10/7...made-life-hell

U fukn wot m8? What a dumbass.

Feel bad for anyone working for him too lol how do you respond to press questions about derp like that?

[MasterYomega]

I think it depends on the amount of regulation. Setting some kind of guideline on speed/price or whatever is one thing, maybe handled at a local level like energy/water/sewer is...creating another bloated federal agency would be ridiculous.

Do you even know what we're talking about here?

Net neutrality means companies are prohibited from purposefully slowing down and speeding up sites based on who gives them $$$ for more exposure. It's preventing exactly the type of bullchit you think you're preventing by arbitrarily siding against "government."

Ted Cruz's statement doesn't even mean anything.

brb stop signs shouldn't operate at the speed of government, let's privatize street lights and allow companies to offer instant green light remotes to their buddies.