4 ms·
This presumes that must votes were cast with net neutrality in mind. It's difficult to argue that any aspect of Trump's agenda received a popular mandate, as h
by giaour 9y ago
This presumes that must votes were cast with net neutrality in mind.
It's difficult to argue that any aspect of Trump's agenda received a popular mandate, as he lost the popular vote by millions, but it seems an especially big stretch to claim he has a mandate to gut net neutrality protections when it wasn't a centerpiece of his campaign. (I don't recall him mentioning it a single time.)
- davidw 9y agoElections matter, I guess. The view that "they're all the same" is even more maddening these days. 'crankylinuxuser' is essentially correct.
- crankylinuxuser 9y agoI wish I wasn't correct. Early on, in some twisted way, I was hoping that Trump was going to be immune to money effects. I didn't particularly care for Clinton. I was hoping Trump would start telling companies to "Fuck off" - you can't pay off a billionaire... The opposite happened. Someone who has love of money only further seeks love of money. I completely expect that monied interests will further their agenda. I think it's pretty clear where that leads. As for us, I'm looking at technologies to mitigate that. IPFS works well, as long as you can populate the cache and not delete it. Tor is a good way to anonymize and privatize content the monied interests don't like (or will soon discriminate against). I also live in a trailer park. We have the density. It's certainly doable to create a small network between all of us, combined with something like Freifunk for automatic handling of routing.
- balthasar 9y agoNow we see how meaningless the concept of a mandate is.