{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
11/21/2017 10:00:51 PM
76
Leftists have asked for the internet to be controlled for years. Over and over again that "extreme" or " Far-Right" or "dangerous" content should be stopped and censored. You are getting what you asked for.
DEAL WITH IT.
English
-
Look. I may not be extreme right or left winged, but everyone else deserves their voices. Without Net Neutrality, you will lose your freedom right now of expressing your voice here in the D2 forums. Your provider will throttle your speeds so won't be able to post efficiently or even at all. We do not want to silence you, this is a bipartisan issue
-
[quote]this is a bipartisan issue[/quote]Unfortunately it isn't a bipartisan issue. Every time we have a vote on these issues, it's split down party lines.
-
Then it's time for the moderates to rise and purge the left and right.
-
[quote]Then it's time for the moderates to rise and purge the left and right.[/quote] What moderates? There isn't a moderate party.
-
I never said a moderate party was needed.
-
You do realize that there's a difference between censorship and Net Neutrality?
-
Nope, he clearly has no idea that the difference exists. That's because he's a vacuous moron.
-
[quote]Leftists have asked for the internet to be controlled for years. [/quote]Never by private corporation though.
-
Editado por Bieltan: 11/22/2017 10:35:26 AMNope, wrong. From what I've seen Twitter etc have been under pressure to actually enforce their ToS as harassment has been allowed to run rampant for far too long. Funnily enough, overtly racist people such as Richard Spencer have suddenly found themselves on the receiving end of what should have happened to them years ago. Youtube is a hot -blam!-ing mess, I dont think [i]anyone[/i] agrees with their incompetant shitshow of late. The Internet is a utility - its actually something people need to function effectively in life nowadays. Arguing for NN to be repealed is effectively arguing that your power supplier should be able to charge you more for using other appliances than what they deem fit, or even worse their OWN brand. This is opening the door for genuine monopolies, if you dont see that then you're blind.
-
No that’s... no that’s... that’s really not true
-
Let's reiterate, based off of the uninformed drivel you've been spouting off in this thread, that you have absolutely no idea what Net Neutrality is. Net Neutrality dictates that ISPs aren't allowed to "throttle" (slow down) or block content. So if AT&T wants to make me buy their new, more expensive plan by shutting Netflix off, they'll run into plenty of legal trouble. Many people in the U.S. only have one ISP to choose from -- the East Coast and parts of California are the only large areas where some form of competition exists. A veritable monopoly once NN dies. Internet prices go up, Internet providers singularly become rich, and nobody in the common populace benefits in the slightest, even though the negatives of such a change are widespread. The biggest detractors of net neutrality are, as you might have guessed, ISPs. Wonder why? You're not going to be very happy when this goes down.
-
Don't like the conditions that come with a service? Don't use it. Your argument that a business has a near monopoly providing your internet also applies to the near monopolies that provide social media. You keep arguing that in one case a business is allowed to set its own conditions and in another they are not. Which is it? Losing net neutrality isn't what I want, or what you want, but it is what you deserve, for the leftists trying to de-legitamise right wing points of view by merely removing them.
-
[quote]Losing net neutrality isn't what I want, or what you want, but it is what you deserve, for the leftists trying to de-legitamise right wing points of view by merely removing them.[/quote] Imagine being this partisan. Sad.
-
Editado por Samantha: 11/22/2017 8:39:03 AMWhy don't we just drop the persecution complex as it's completely irrelevant to the topic at hand. There's a difference between pointlessly throttling connections to make money and removing posts that violate the terms that everyone agrees to when registering. With Internet, if you violate the terms of your contract, or fail to make a payment, your internet is going to likely be shut off. But with no net neutrality, AT&T can decide that if I want to watch Netflix, I have to pay another chunk of money for an additional package. There is a big difference. I still don't think you quite comprehend what we're talking about here.
-
[Social media platform] Near monopoly service provider chooses what content is available to their customers through the service they provide. <leftists ok with this> [ISP] Near monopoly service provider chooses what content is available to their customers through the service they provide. <leftists not ok with this>
-
That's an impressive display of mental gymnastics. Social media sites don't have a near monopoly as they are not vital. And you're failing to differentiate between objectionable content and ISPs wanting to get richer.
-
ISPs aren't vital. You won't keel over and die if your internet goes down. Here is how you are wrong: The social media sites shun "objectionable content" [most of which is perfectly innocuous] because they are either paid to do so, or have majority shareholders who are pushing an agenda, i.e the money has already changed hands. This is driven by an individual, or organisation, that wants to get richer.
-
Editado por Samantha: 11/23/2017 12:24:29 AMI'm not going to lend credence to your paranoia by arguing with you so let's debate this: economically, ISPs are vital.
-
Innocuous right wing content being censored. You don't give a -blam!- about right wing having their place to talk? I don't care your cat videos will no longer be free.
-
I don't give a -blam!- because there's nothing to give a -blam!- about. Nobody is persecuting you. You can breathe. Relax.
-
Haha. If that's true, why are Congress so interested in Facebook and Twitter doing exactly that? In the end, I can afford a couple extra bucks for my internet, and I'm willing to sacrifice that for how upset left wingers will be!
-
You're a fool.
-
Why? Because I have strong enough principles I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is?
-
Define "strong principles". I somehow doubt that your "principles" are that strong, considering that you're willing to take a monetary hit just to "piss off liberals", even though Net Neutrality is not a partisan issue at all.
-
What's stronger than being willing to give up your money for your ideals? Are you proposing it's better to be rich but fold like a wet paper towel to anyone who offers you a free lunch?
