Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Republicans for Rape and Internet "Freedom"

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Republicans for Rape and Internet "Freedom"

    I was just watching some Daily Show with Jon Stewart on Hulu, when I saw this segment:

    http://www.hulu.com/watch/102391/the...#x-4,vclip,1,0

    It really blew my mind. At first I thought it must be a joke, because there is no way anyone would vote that way. So I googled and it is of course true.

    There is actually a lot out there on it, including this site:

    http://www.republicansforrape.org/



    I'm just glad the bill passed. And I have a feeling those senators just lost a lot of the female votes in the next election.

    And to add to it, this morning all over the tech sites is news of this:
    John McCain's "Internet Freedom Act" Seeks to Block FCC's Net Neutrality Rules

    But no matter how it is named, with buzz words like freedom, the bottom line is still:

    apparently his view of "Internet Freedom" refers to big business freedom, not American citizens. It's strange, because I always thought that thriving competition was the best way to boost jobs and protect us consumers.
    If you haven't been keeping up with the debate, here is a quick review:

    FCC: ‘Comcast Blocked Torrent Traffic Outside of Peak Usage’

    basically:



    So instead of a flat rate, your ISP would much rather be charging you like this:



    Then let’s say Net Neutrality get’s abolished, Comcast would *love* to block all outbound torrent traffic and tighten the ‘tubes to only allow Web, Mail, IM through. These restrictions could be overridden with a fee. Realistically, this would probably be executed with varied tiers of service, old-school bandwidth caps, and lag-induced limits placed on rich-media Web sites like YouTube, for example.
    That concludes my

    LINKS

    * *


    Stoop and you'll be stepped on; stand tall and you'll be shot at.

    -Carlos A. Urbizo-


  • #2
    Re: Republicans for Rape and Internet "Freedom"

    Originally posted by Bamboo
    And I have a feeling those senators just lost a lot of the female votes in the next election.
    Not the female voters watching Faux News, I can tell you that. Some of the same politicians that railed so vehemently against Acorn stepped up in Haliburton/KBR's defense in this bill. They passed a measure to cut off Acorn's measely $1-2 million in public funding as a result of the 'scandal' that a random fraction of Acorn's low-waged office workers fell into. Meanwhile, Haliburton/KBR's annual taxpayer take is $1-2 billion, and it's just fine that they expressly permit the rape of their employees. No scandal there.

    On Net Neutrality, I'm intimately familiar with this issue, and I have a lot of experience both working for and studying both Internet (tier-1) backbone operators and content-carriers (basically, any network operator that also provides entertainment content).
    McCain and any other political derail attempts will fail on this. The republican wind machine is so obviously blowing in the wrong direction that it simply won't work. Futhermore, Congress has no place overriding FCC regulation, a regulatory body whose life work is generally viewed as highly successful, albeit sometimes a bit slow.

    Fortunately for the American public, the already heavily regulated major carriers (AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, etc) do not have anywhere near the political lobby that Haliburton/KBR has (or our wonderful banks, for that matter). The 'debate' over net neutrality has already taken place, an the FCC has rightfully sided largely with consumer interests.

    The graphic you post above explains it all to clearly - who has your (the consumers) best interests in mind - AT&T and Comcast or Technet and CPSR (of which I am a member)?

    Sorry republicans, this battle has already been won. Thank goodness we don't have a republican majority in congress though, I'm fairly certain things would not be moving as smoothly.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Republicans for Rape and Internet "Freedom"

      Originally posted by Bamboo View Post
      I was just watching some Daily Show with Jon Stewart on Hulu, when I saw this segment:
      The Daily Show video is hilarious.
      |TG-X| mp40x



      Register for the Forums! | Get on Teamspeak! | Play Squad! | Join Discord! | Support Tactical Gamer!

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Republicans for Rape and Internet "Freedom"

        I should add that Net Neutrality is not a done deal - write your representatives and tell them to support the FCC's regulatory authority on this and not John 'Innovation' McCain.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Republicans for Rape and Internet "Freedom"

          This was just posted and is a great easy to read explanation of why we HAVE to have neutrality!

          Net Neutrality: What It Could Mean

          Think about how stupid a plan would be that would limit where you could go on the net because you didn't pay enough. Want to buy something from Amazon.com? Sorry, you don't pay enough to the cable company to shop there. Want to check the weather on the weather channel? Sorry, you'll have to pay an extra $5 a month to Verizon to get that site.



          LINKS

          * *


          Stoop and you'll be stepped on; stand tall and you'll be shot at.

          -Carlos A. Urbizo-

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Republicans for Rape and Internet "Freedom"

            Flip the pricing model on its head: When you pay the big amount, that's "normal". Paying the lesser amounts is a discount. It's the same as when you buy a magazine full of ads. If you have to pay for a magazine free of ads, you have to pay a lot more, because it's not heavily subsidized.

            You might as well gripe about TG's "Supporting Member" system, that you don't get all the nice features like reserved slots unless you pay more.
            Dude, seriously, WHAT handkerchief?

            snooggums' density principal: "The more dense a population, the more dense a population."

            Iliana: "You're a great friend but if we're ever chased by zombies I'm tripping you."

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Republicans for Rape and Internet "Freedom"

              Originally posted by ScratchMonkey View Post
              Flip the pricing model on its head: When you pay the big amount, that's "normal". Paying the lesser amounts is a discount. It's the same as when you buy a magazine full of ads. If you have to pay for a magazine free of ads, you have to pay a lot more, because it's not heavily subsidized.

              You might as well gripe about TG's "Supporting Member" system, that you don't get all the nice features like reserved slots unless you pay more.
              No, it isn't a discount when the cost is added at the time that the 'discount' is added.

              When cable companies switched from ad free to ads they didn't lower prices.

              When the KS insurance for state employees listed their prices this happened.
              Last year after employer contributions: 5.88 per paycheck
              This year after employer contributions: 26.12 per paycheck
              Non-smokers and those enrolling in a stop smoking program get a 20 dollar discount to bring the paycheck cost down to 6.12 per paycheck.

              The non-smoker discount is not a discount, it is a penalty for smokers named as a discount for non-smokers.

              The supporting member is an alternate way to pay with perks, so it is an alternate payment method (paying cash instead of ads) that you have control over. If google wants to charge for access to their site google can charge me. If my internet provider is charging for my connection and the sites I'm connecting to then they are charging twice for the same service, double dipping.
              |TG-6th|Snooggums

              Just because everyone does something does not mean that it is right to do.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Republicans for Rape and Internet "Freedom"

                If you pay less for something, that's a discount. You can view it as someone else having to pay more, but that's just perspective. (In Sesame Street's Grover's voice: ) If you're at the bottom of the dam, the dam is above you. If you're at the top, it's below you.
                Dude, seriously, WHAT handkerchief?

                snooggums' density principal: "The more dense a population, the more dense a population."

                Iliana: "You're a great friend but if we're ever chased by zombies I'm tripping you."

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Republicans for Rape and Internet "Freedom"

                  Originally posted by ScratchMonkey View Post
                  If you pay less for something, that's a discount. You can view it as someone else having to pay more, but that's just perspective. (In Sesame Street's Grover's voice: ) If you're at the bottom of the dam, the dam is above you. If you're at the top, it's below you.
                  While the wording is 'discount' in the paperwork, a discount is a drop from the listed price. Raising the listed price and giving a discount to must customers that takes it down to the original amount is a price increase for that minority of users.

                  To use your argument in a different situation:
                  You and I walk into a store and there are no tags on the items. I inquire about the price and he asks my religion and says he will sell it to me for $30 based on my answer. You inquire and based on your answer and he will sell it to you for $40 based on your answer. Are you implying that because of the difference in price I got a discount and you didn't simply get charged more? If he normally sold the item to people for $30 did I still get a discount?

                  On a tangent: If the item was tagged at $40 and everyone bought it at $30 was there a discount or was the item simply being sold at $30 with misleading pricing?
                  |TG-6th|Snooggums

                  Just because everyone does something does not mean that it is right to do.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Republicans for Rape and Internet "Freedom"

                    In a market where transaction costs are zero, every pair of actors will come up with a unique price, matching their relative valuation of the items they want to trade. The reason we settle on uniform prices across a broad range of actors is because the cost is high to identify what should be the optimal price between a given pair.

                    "Discount" is really just a marketing term used by a seller to induce a buyer to close, by suggesting that the buyer is getting a better price than other buyers. Ideally a seller will get as much money out of you as he can, without you walking away from the trade. But the cost of identifying that price may be high, so he sells at a single common price to everybody and you get a "discount" relative to the ideal price between just you and him.

                    I've posted this before in other threads:

                    http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articl...erDuckies.html
                    Dude, seriously, WHAT handkerchief?

                    snooggums' density principal: "The more dense a population, the more dense a population."

                    Iliana: "You're a great friend but if we're ever chased by zombies I'm tripping you."

                    Comment

                    Connect

                    Collapse

                    TeamSpeak 3 Server

                    Collapse

                    Advertisement

                    Collapse

                    Twitter Feed

                    Collapse

                    Working...
                    X