4 ms·
How would this be materially different from just walking over to Ajit Pai's house and physically cutting his cable? It's targeting a specific individual to deny
by promanescu 9y ago
How would this be materially different from just walking over to Ajit Pai's house and physically cutting his cable? It's targeting a specific individual to deny them the use of their property; pretty sure that's a felony, but either way it has nothing to do with Net Neutrality.
Corporations using their power and resources to threaten and manipulate the federal government - yeah, that's something we need lots more of.
- kazagistar 9y ago> Corporations using their power and resources to threaten and manipulate the federal government - yeah, that's something we need lots more of. Ajit seems to think so, seeing as he is trying to get rid of net neutrality which protects against this.
- dreamcompiler 9y agoIt's not the same. Ajit Pai says "We no longer need a law that prevents ISPs from saying 'Nice Internet you got there. Be a shame if something were to happen to it.'" So then an ISP comes along and says 'Hey there Mr. Pai. Nice Internet you got there. Be a shame if something were to happen to it.' That ISP is simply demonstrating what it means not to have such a law any more.
- vidarh 9y agoWhat law is it you are suggesting they would break, and how? If you cut his cable, unless you're his ISP you're either carrying out criminal damage and/or trespassing, and if you're his ISP it boils down to what your contract allows. But Cloudflare has no contract with Ajit Pai. So how is it anywhere remotely comparable? There may be other issues, such as Cloudflare's contracts with their customers, but nothing that compares to physically cutting his cable.