7 ms·

One part of me hates this because the idea of our government dipping their hands into what has become the major source of information, entertainment, conducting

One part of me hates this because the idea of our government dipping their hands into what has become the major source of information, entertainment, conducting business, etc. is quite scary. We all know their tendency to fuck things up because of politics, money, stupidity, or a combination of any and all of these. On the other hand, I look at my other utilities and realize I have absolutely no complaints. Yeah, the power goes out from time to time, but that is just an inconvenience. As it stands, my internet is just as reliable as my power in terms of outages (not including the occasional speed fluctuation). As long as it doesn't turn into a pay for use type deal and sticks with the current model of pay for bandwidth I suppose I'd be ok with this. There are just too many different moving parts for the cynical and rational parts of my brain to agree on. Edit: Oh, and as long as censorship never becomes a thing.

donatj 12y ago
You have no complaints about your utilities sure but when was the last time home phone for instance did anything new. Have you ever been excited about your power? I know I've been excited about my internet. Regulation just stands in the way of change.
- TheHypnotist 12y ago
  This is true. But that's my point. It frightens me in some ways and in others I can see it not being so bad.
johnchristopher 12y ago
> One part of me hates this because the idea of our government dipping their hands into what has become the major source of information, entertainment, conducting business, etc. is quite scary. We all know their tendency to fuck things up because of politics, money, stupidity, or a combination of any and all of these. 1. Who built the Internet, landlines and lobbied for electricity in the countryside in the 30's ? 2. Right, because politics, money and stupidity are nowhere to be found in the `private` world.
- TheHypnotist 12y ago
  None of what you said puts me at ease. All I sense is smugness over what should be a real concern.
jchendy 12y ago
I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm honestly curious: why is pay-for-use bad for internet access but okay for water, electricity, and phone?
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
  - jchendy 12y ago
    That would be covered by net neutrality, wouldn't it? If all data has to be treated equally, that type of abuse wouldn't be possible regardless of whether you're paying by bandwidth or by usage.
    - ep103 12y ago
      yeah, you're right, I misunderstood the question
- WillPostForFood 12y ago
  Pay for use for water and electricity is good because the resources are finite, and you want to conserve them. The advantage of unlimited internet use is it promotes the creation of services that need more bandwidth.
  - jchendy 12y ago
    Isn't network usage also finite? I.e. wouldn't there be issues if every device connected to an ISP simultaneously tried to stream large data?
    - WillPostForFood 12y ago
      At any given moment it is finite, but it is always expandable, and not a consumable resource. Using more bandwidth helps push the expansion. If we had extremely high rates, and low caps, you'd never get things like video services, and bandwidth providers would never have incentive to expand the network. So the more use the better.
greggyb 12y ago
> Edit: Oh, and as long as censorship never becomes a thing. It is literally illegal to say certain words on television....
- cypher543 12y ago
  It is literally illegal to say certain words on free-to-air television between 6 a.m. and 10 p.m.
  - greggyb 12y ago
    So, are we disagreeing about the degree to which there is censorship on a media platform regulated by the government or the existence?
- obsurveyor 12y ago
  It is literally NOT illegal. There are no laws censoring certain words on television in the United States, free air or otherwise. It is against FCC regulations and you can be fined though. All of the laws and rulings have to do with the FCC being able to enforce these regulations and levy fines for breaking them.
  - greggyb 12y ago
    "It is a violation of federal law to air obscene programming at any time. It is also a violation of federal law to broadcast indecent or profane programming during certain hours."[0] " In addition, a federal district court may impose fines and/or imprisonment for up to two years on those who are convicted of criminal violations of the law."[0] (Emphasis mine) [0]http://transition.fcc.gov/eb/oip/ http://transition.fcc.gov/eb/oip/
- TheHypnotist 12y ago
  Right. I was thinking more in line with censorship of certain content. I honestly don't know where to make the comparison between profanity censorship on TV to any degree of censorship on the web.

donatj 12y ago

You have no complaints about your utilities sure but when was the last time home phone for instance did anything new. Have you ever been excited about your power? I know I've been excited about my internet. Regulation just stands in the way of change.

TheHypnotist 12y ago
This is true. But that's my point. It frightens me in some ways and in others I can see it not being so bad.

johnchristopher 12y ago

> One part of me hates this because the idea of our government dipping their hands into what has become the major source of information, entertainment, conducting business, etc. is quite scary. We all know their tendency to fuck things up because of politics, money, stupidity, or a combination of any and all of these. 1. Who built the Internet, landlines and lobbied for electricity in the countryside in the 30's ? 2. Right, because politics, money and stupidity are nowhere to be found in the `private` world.

TheHypnotist 12y ago
None of what you said puts me at ease. All I sense is smugness over what should be a real concern.

jchendy 12y ago

I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm honestly curious: why is pay-for-use bad for internet access but okay for water, electricity, and phone?

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
- jchendy 12y ago
  That would be covered by net neutrality, wouldn't it? If all data has to be treated equally, that type of abuse wouldn't be possible regardless of whether you're paying by bandwidth or by usage.
  - ep103 12y ago
    yeah, you're right, I misunderstood the question
WillPostForFood 12y ago
Pay for use for water and electricity is good because the resources are finite, and you want to conserve them. The advantage of unlimited internet use is it promotes the creation of services that need more bandwidth.
- jchendy 12y ago
  Isn't network usage also finite? I.e. wouldn't there be issues if every device connected to an ISP simultaneously tried to stream large data?
  - WillPostForFood 12y ago
    At any given moment it is finite, but it is always expandable, and not a consumable resource. Using more bandwidth helps push the expansion. If we had extremely high rates, and low caps, you'd never get things like video services, and bandwidth providers would never have incentive to expand the network. So the more use the better.

greggyb 12y ago

> Edit: Oh, and as long as censorship never becomes a thing. It is literally illegal to say certain words on television....

cypher543 12y ago
It is literally illegal to say certain words on free-to-air television between 6 a.m. and 10 p.m.
- greggyb 12y ago
  So, are we disagreeing about the degree to which there is censorship on a media platform regulated by the government or the existence?
obsurveyor 12y ago
It is literally NOT illegal. There are no laws censoring certain words on television in the United States, free air or otherwise. It is against FCC regulations and you can be fined though. All of the laws and rulings have to do with the FCC being able to enforce these regulations and levy fines for breaking them.
- greggyb 12y ago
  "It is a violation of federal law to air obscene programming at any time. It is also a violation of federal law to broadcast indecent or profane programming during certain hours."[0] " In addition, a federal district court may impose fines and/or imprisonment for up to two years on those who are convicted of criminal violations of the law."[0] (Emphasis mine) [0]http://transition.fcc.gov/eb/oip/ http://transition.fcc.gov/eb/oip/
TheHypnotist 12y ago
Right. I was thinking more in line with censorship of certain content. I honestly don't know where to make the comparison between profanity censorship on TV to any degree of censorship on the web.