3 ms·

Ah, a member of the mythical "coastal liberal ideological vacuum," where anyone who brings up the slightest anti-government sentiment gets bombarded with ad hom

Ah, a member of the mythical "coastal liberal ideological vacuum," where anyone who brings up the slightest anti-government sentiment gets bombarded with ad hominem attacks and logical fallacies, instead of facts and reason. Is that because the coastal liberal is uneducated, or simply immature? If we generously assume the latter, it's important for you to know that the sort of thinking that let Trump win the white house is echoed in your entire comment. Congratulations! I've got to run, but in the meantime, perhaps you can educate yourself on some of the potential shortcomings associated with regulating the internet. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality#Reduction_in_innovation_and_investments https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality#Reduction_in_in... Edit: Oh look! Downvotes for observations. What an amazing display of irony.

wonder_er 10y ago
I'm with you. I still feel a bit surprised at the cognitive dissonance required to support internet privacy (on one hand) and on the other, recommend having a government body regulate _the entire internet_. I wonder if this breakdown is at least in part between populations in the USA and everyone else. I've sat down with some pro-nn folks, honestly trying to understand how they reconcile the two, and have not made much progress.
- ludston 10y ago
  I do not understand why there is cognitive dissonance here? NN gives users power. Privacy gives users power. There is no dissonance in wanting both of these things that have the same end. Are you suggesting that all government regulation is a violation of user privacy? (If so, I would suggest you share a different definition of privacy to most people)
- orthecreedence 10y ago
  The government can say "all ships using a federally funded port must follow these docking procedures" without knowing what's in the ships, no? Does the solve the cognitive dissonance issue for you?
- dragonwriter 10y ago
  > I still feel a bit surprised at the cognitive dissonance required to support internet privacy (on one hand) and on the other, recommend having a government body regulate _the entire internet_. Supporters of Open Internet regulation do not want the government "regulating the entire internet".

wonder_er 10y ago

I'm with you. I still feel a bit surprised at the cognitive dissonance required to support internet privacy (on one hand) and on the other, recommend having a government body regulate _the entire internet_. I wonder if this breakdown is at least in part between populations in the USA and everyone else. I've sat down with some pro-nn folks, honestly trying to understand how they reconcile the two, and have not made much progress.

ludston 10y ago
I do not understand why there is cognitive dissonance here? NN gives users power. Privacy gives users power. There is no dissonance in wanting both of these things that have the same end. Are you suggesting that all government regulation is a violation of user privacy? (If so, I would suggest you share a different definition of privacy to most people)
orthecreedence 10y ago
The government can say "all ships using a federally funded port must follow these docking procedures" without knowing what's in the ships, no? Does the solve the cognitive dissonance issue for you?
dragonwriter 10y ago
> I still feel a bit surprised at the cognitive dissonance required to support internet privacy (on one hand) and on the other, recommend having a government body regulate _the entire internet_. Supporters of Open Internet regulation do not want the government "regulating the entire internet".