Powered By IdeaScale
Login / Signup
Fcc.Gov About Open Internet Get Informed about the Open Internet and Open Internet Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) Read the Speech Workshops OpenInternet Blog Open Internet
« Back To OpenInternet.gov

ar103

User Profile Image ar103
Member since : Oct-23-2009 (Verified)
2 Ideas, 5 Comments, 19 Votes

User Activity Stream

Ideas Posted

These laws will keep privately owned companies, who are not accountable to the public, from limiting and controlling your internet access. Can you imagine trying to log onto, for example, GOP.com one day and getting a blank page because your internet service provider, which is owned by a democratic activist, has been paid by the DNC to stifle republican communication?
Opposing net neutrality because it "regulates the internet" is like opposing rape laws because they "regulate private relationships".

These laws are very clearly designed to keep privately owned internet providers such as Comcast or Time Warner from controlling what information you can access. In no way do they allow "evil government regulators" from "controlling the internet", regardless of what your Republican politicians have told you.
Displaying 1 - 25 of 323 Ideas
12345678910….1213Next »

Comments Posted

ar103 2 months ago
"Always look at the people behind the movement. Robert McChesney is the man working with Obama to develop these Internet regulations. McChesney is tied to the hip with Van Jones (self-avowed Communist) and Mark Lloyd (Marxist). McChesney founded a group called "Free Press" which was anything but free. He was the former editor of "Monthly Review" which he describes as "one of the most important Marxist publications in the world." He is also a backer of Hugo Chavez and thought the members of the news station who opposed him should have been arrested. He further states, "Any serious effort to reform the media system would have to be part of a revolutionary program to overthrow capitalism and rebuilding the entire system on a socialist platform. We need to regulate capitalist propaganda - regulate it, minimalize it and perhaps even eliminate it. This becomes especially pronounced in the era of digital communications." Just look at the person in charge - his intents are nefarious and the "neutrality" means putting together a system where government propaganda can rule uninhibited by protest!"

Look everyone McCarty's back from the dead! Hurray!




"Comparing internet regulation to rape laws is tantamount to saying you're an idiot.

The web costs money to maintain, and these laws effectively strip the providers of their ability to manage the infrastructure. If you want to see what happens when you "selflessly remove profits", swing over to wikipedia where they're constantly begging for money.

As it stands right now, the internet is the most free form of communication on the planet. If you want to post your brains off about the "evil, repulican, corporate, satanic forces that be," feel free. I'll think you're a moron, but I won't oppose you.

Neutrality rules have an ominous tone to them; especially since the people most gun hoe about them are the same people who would very much like it if I wasn't presently on this site calling you dumb."

You are absolutely right. You have no idea how dumb I am. Every time I see a door marked "push" I try to pull it, and vice-versa. You should see it, it's hilarious.

Anyways since you know everything, and I know nothing, maybe you could explain to me exactly how net neutrality would "effectively strip the providers of their ability to manage the infrastructure". Also when did anyone every even mention anything about removing profits?
ar103 2 months ago
"These so-called "Privately held companies" are mostly "publicly held", i.e., have shares traded in a stock market. Time Warner is traded under the symbol TWX on the NYSE. Comcast is traded on NASDAQ with symbol CMCSA. You can buy shares in these companies.... They are accountable to their shareholders-- it may not be EVERYONE, but they are accountable to SOMEONE you may even know.... You name me a cable company that is NOT publicly traded, and I would be SHOCKED! Your pro-socialist logic is therefore faulty from the beginning...."

ssfahrer, If you think publicly traded corporations are accountable to their shareholders you are terribly naive. The only thing the shareholders are guaranteed is to be ripped off and swindled by the board of directors. Also, could you please explain to me how defending freedom of speech is "socialist", because clearly I am too stupid to understand your definition of "socialism". Please enlighten us with your oh-so superior understanding of political science.

"First it is, the administration that stated.. they want control.. what does that mean?
the government wants control over the web.. means if they decide they do not want you to
see something you won't.. look at singapore they do not let the public get to US sites
they want to watch a US tv show they have to go on the web and search and then
they cannot get to see what they want.. IS THAT REALLY WHAT YOU WANT?
Right now if you do not like your ISP you can go to another one without any problems, unless you create your own.
What will happen if the government takes control? If you give the government control..
you do not know what will happen, and again I say FREEDOM IS MORE IMPORTANT TO ME
than to trust our government with my computer... I do not trust our government enough to let them take control.
THEY HAVE ENOUGH CONTROL ALREADY!!!!! Our Government is tooo big already!!!!! "

ntom, how is the government trying to control the internet? Could you explain that to me? They are trying to prevent private corporations from controlling the internet. I'm sorry to say this but you sound like a paranoid lunatic. Now I know everyone keeps talking about keeping the discussion "civil" but I was raised to be honest and truthful and when I see a fool I call them a fool; and you sir, or ma'am, are a fool.

"We don't have a democracy. We have a republic, with private property and individual rights - at least so far."

openinternet, a republic is a form of democracy. Just like a sedan is a kind car. And unfortunately the U.S. is not a republic but an idiocracy. A nation of idiots, for idiots, by idiots.

p.s. CLEAN WATER IS SOCIALISM!!! TELL THE GOVERNMENT TO STOP REGULATING THE WATER!!
ar103 4 months ago
The government is not trying to control or expand the internet. Nor are they paying for anything.

All these laws do is prevent privately owned companies, who are not accountable to the public, from limiting and controlling your internet access.

Can you imagine trying to log onto, for example, GOP.com one day and getting a blank page because your internet service provider, which is owned by a democratic activist, has been paid by the DNC to stifle republican communication?

These laws would prevent that.
ar103 4 months ago
What are you talking about?
The government is not trying to control or expand the internet. Nor are they paying for anything.

All these laws do is prevent privately owned companies, who are not accountable to the public, from limiting and controlling your internet access.

Can you imagine trying to log onto, for example, GOP.com one day and getting a blank page because your internet service provider, which is owned by a democratic activist, has been paid by the DNC to stifle republican communication?
ar103 4 months ago
"If you mean free as in the classic sense of freedom, wouldn't imposing FCC regulation be the complete opposite?"

No, these laws will keep privately owned companies, who are not accountable to the public, from limiting and controlling your internet access.

Can you imagine trying to log onto, for example, GOP.com one day and getting a blank page because your internet service provider, which is owned by a democratic activist, has been paid by the DNC to stifle republican communication?