Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 61 to 90 of 108

Thread: Net Neutrality is BS

  1. #61
    That's no moon. EyeKhan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    5,997
    Quote Originally Posted by Lewkowski View Post
    Seat belt laws are ridiculous.
    It's ridiculous that they were/are needed to get people to use their seatbelts...

    There are only two things that prevent crime. A person's moral code (and we know that has never in the history of the world stopped crime fully) and the threat of consequences.
    Having a job that both A. keeps you busy and B. pays you well probably goes a long way toward preventing crime too.

    Is it ever moral to steal?
    The Rules
    Copper- behave toward others to elicit treatment you would like (the manipulative rule)
    Gold- treat others how you would like them to treat you (the self regard rule)
    Platinum - treat others the way they would like to be treated (the PC rule)

  2. #62
    Senior Member Flixy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    5,740
    Quote Originally Posted by EyeKhan View Post

    Having a job that both A. keeps you busy and B. pays you well probably goes a long way toward preventing crime too.

    Is it ever moral to steal?
    On two levels, A. if you have a job you're less likely to be tempted by 'easy money' in crime, and B. you have more to lose (job, house, family). Though I guess the latter falls under the threat of consequences catagory.
    Keep on keepin' the beat alive!

  3. #63
    https://www.google.com/webhp?sourcei...bs+lower+crime

    Google cause there are so many sources that point to the same study.
    "In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."

  4. #64
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,188
    Quote Originally Posted by Flixy View Post
    On two levels, A. if you have a job you're less likely to be tempted by 'easy money' in crime, and B. you have more to lose (job, house, family). Though I guess the latter falls under the threat of consequences catagory.
    Ding Ding Ding! If you have a job there are more consequences to theft. Not only do you face potential prison and bodily you harm you also could get fired.

    Also not everyone places the same value on self. When people look at things through an internal cost/benefit if you have more lose you would be less likely to take greater risks. This is why someone with a terminal illness might do stuff they never would have done if they didn't have it. They only got X months to live as opposed to someone who might have X years to live.

    In any event my original statement stands - people either don't do crime due to perceived consequences or due to their moral compass. Since we know not everyone's moral compass is that great it requires us to have law enforcement in order to increase the consequences pushing some people into the "won't do crime due to fear of consequences" decision making bracket.

  5. #65
    Senior Member Flixy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    5,740
    Or, you know, trying to also make life better so that people have more to lose and less reason to commit a crime, instead of just stricter punishment. Prevention isn't a bad thing.
    Keep on keepin' the beat alive!

  6. #66
    Let sleeping tigers lie Khendraja'aro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    In the forests of the night
    Posts
    5,349
    Cheaper, too!

    In the long run, at least.
    When the stars threw down their spears
    And watered heaven with their tears:
    Did he smile his work to see?
    Did he who made the lamb make thee?

  7. #67
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreadnaught View Post
    Has anyone here been harmed by the lack of de-jure net neutrality in Amerika?
    Not that we needed yet another example that would force your ignorant ass to stick his head in the sand about, but:

    Comcast Blocks HBO Go From Working On Playstation 4

    "HBO Go availability on PS3 (and some other devices) are business decisions and deal with business terms that have not yet been agreed to between the parties. Thanks for your continued patience."

    Yeah, its never worked on the PS3 either, they are just now admitting its because they want more money from someone.
    "In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."

  8. #68
    That's no moon. EyeKhan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    5,997
    Quote Originally Posted by Lewkowski View Post
    Ding Ding Ding! If you have a job there are more consequences to theft. Not only do you face potential prison and bodily you harm you also could get fired.
    Don't forget meeting needs and wants. People with good jobs don't (feel like they) need to steal - crime can be about believing you don't have any good alternatives.

    In any event my original statement stands - people either don't do crime due to perceived consequences or due to their moral compass. Since we know not everyone's moral compass is that great it requires us to have law enforcement in order to increase the consequences pushing some people into the "won't do crime due to fear of consequences" decision making bracket.
    Your statement is too narrow. You only understand the stick, not the carrot, and in a very simplistic way at that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Khendraja'aro View Post
    Cheaper, too!

    In the long run, at least.
    You don't need to qualify it with 'long run.' Reducing crime with opportunity not only lowers law enforcement and incarceration expense but also increases the tax base through employment. It's HUGELY superior to Lewk's draconian police state utopia.
    The Rules
    Copper- behave toward others to elicit treatment you would like (the manipulative rule)
    Gold- treat others how you would like them to treat you (the self regard rule)
    Platinum - treat others the way they would like to be treated (the PC rule)

  9. #69
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,188
    Most theft in America occurs for non-essential items. People are not stealing because they 'need' to.

    Carrots and stacks are all about consequences. People act on a moral compass or they act on a positive consequence or negative consequence (and we humans tend to be imperfect so really most people with a moral compass still do both). The ultimate point being is that law enforcement IS needed because there will be more crime if there isn't any. That makes law enforcement a necessary evil - evil in the sense that they have the ability to take away people's freedom and there is asymmetrical power which leads to the potential of corruption abuse. Necessary because society cannot function without a way to reign in the shit stains of the world.

  10. #70
    That's no moon. EyeKhan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    5,997
    Quote Originally Posted by Lewkowski View Post
    Most theft in America occurs for non-essential items. People are not stealing because they 'need' to.

    Carrots and stacks are all about consequences. People act on a moral compass or they act on a positive consequence or negative consequence (and we humans tend to be imperfect so really most people with a moral compass still do both). The ultimate point being is that law enforcement IS needed because there will be more crime if there isn't any. That makes law enforcement a necessary evil - evil in the sense that they have the ability to take away people's freedom and there is asymmetrical power which leads to the potential of corruption abuse. Necessary because society cannot function without a way to reign in the shit stains of the world.
    Of course law enforcement is necessary. What isn't is kill-you-for-stealing draconian police state law enforcement. There are ways to reduce crime that benefit the society far more.
    The Rules
    Copper- behave toward others to elicit treatment you would like (the manipulative rule)
    Gold- treat others how you would like them to treat you (the self regard rule)
    Platinum - treat others the way they would like to be treated (the PC rule)

  11. #71
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,188
    Quote Originally Posted by EyeKhan View Post
    Of course law enforcement is necessary. What isn't is kill-you-for-stealing draconian police state law enforcement. There are ways to reduce crime that benefit the society far more.
    There will be less thieves. Frankly if we killed thieves there would be an uptick in deaths in the short term and probably a decline in deaths in the long term.

    In any event - the entire topic was brought up with me because I'm against government overreach and then I was being implicated as hypocritical because I support strong laws. What I'm attempting to do is clarify that police are *necessary* while net neutrality is *not necessary.* When we talk about government even if a law does more good than harm (on the surface) if it isn't necessary it shouldn't be passed.

  12. #72
    That's no moon. EyeKhan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    5,997
    Quote Originally Posted by Lewkowski View Post
    There will be less thieves. Frankly if we killed thieves there would be an uptick in deaths in the short term and probably a decline in deaths in the long term.

    In any event - the entire topic was brought up with me because I'm against government overreach and then I was being implicated as hypocritical because I support strong laws. What I'm attempting to do is clarify that police are *necessary* while net neutrality is *not necessary.* When we talk about government even if a law does more good than harm (on the surface) if it isn't necessary it shouldn't be passed.
    Both are obviously necessary. And murdering people for stealing is obviously not necessary.
    The Rules
    Copper- behave toward others to elicit treatment you would like (the manipulative rule)
    Gold- treat others how you would like them to treat you (the self regard rule)
    Platinum - treat others the way they would like to be treated (the PC rule)

  13. #73
    Senior Member GGT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    18,113
    To be honest, I'm not quite sure what "net neutrality" even means. I thought I did....but that was when Visa was a credit card company, ATT was a phone company, and Apple was a computer company.

  14. #74
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,188
    Quote Originally Posted by EyeKhan View Post
    Both are obviously necessary. And murdering people for stealing is obviously not necessary.
    How is Net Neutrality necessary when we don't currently have it now and the world hasn't ground to a halt?

    It's not murder if it is legally justified. But the argument is flawed because where would you draw the line in sentencing? All right you stole you get a year in jail. Well what if we did 364 days? Clearly 365 isn't 'necessary' after all what would one day be? Where exactly would this stop? No, enforcement is clearly necessary. Sentencing is fudge-able however it doesn't have to require the necessary test.

  15. #75
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,188
    Quote Originally Posted by GGT View Post
    To be honest, I'm not quite sure what "net neutrality" even means. I thought I did....but that was when Visa was a credit card company, ATT was a phone company, and Apple was a computer company.
    Seriously?

  16. #76
    SEÑOR Member Aimless's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    12,447
    It's murder if it's wrong and deliberate.
    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  17. #77
    Senior Member Flixy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    5,740
    Quote Originally Posted by Lewkowski View Post
    How is Net Neutrality necessary when we don't currently have it now and the world hasn't ground to a halt?
    Because you previously de facto had it, since it wasn't really technically feasable at first.
    Keep on keepin' the beat alive!

  18. #78
    Senior Member GGT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    18,113
    Quote Originally Posted by Lewkowski View Post
    Seriously?
    Yeah, seriously. We can't agree that access to water/shelter/food/medicine are fundamental rights.....so what makes you think the internet is any different?

    Oh wait, you think freedom and liberty means people doing stupid stuff (like signing up with ISIS)....and tyranny means any governmental intervention against stupid stuff?

  19. #79
    Resiste et Mords! Steely Glint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    4,262
    Quote Originally Posted by Lewkowski View Post
    How is Net Neutrality necessary when we don't currently have it now and the world hasn't ground to a halt?
    That's your criteria for things being necessary? The world not grinding to a halt?
    The walls are coming down.
    All we need is one to fail, one to break, one to take it all away.
    What if we crumble, what if we fall? Where's the flame that torch the soul?
    Truth, when spoken, dies down to nothing.

  20. #80
    That's no moon. EyeKhan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    5,997
    Quote Originally Posted by Lewkowski View Post
    How is Net Neutrality necessary when we don't currently have it now and the world hasn't ground to a halt?
    Have you read this thread?

    It's not murder if it is legally justified. But the argument is flawed because where would you draw the line in sentencing? All right you stole you get a year in jail. Well what if we did 364 days? Clearly 365 isn't 'necessary' after all what would one day be? Where exactly would this stop? No, enforcement is clearly necessary. Sentencing is fudge-able however it doesn't have to require the necessary test.
    I assume by your wink you do agree murdering people for stealing really isn't necessary. I don't understand the rest of your post... (seriously).
    The Rules
    Copper- behave toward others to elicit treatment you would like (the manipulative rule)
    Gold- treat others how you would like them to treat you (the self regard rule)
    Platinum - treat others the way they would like to be treated (the PC rule)

  21. #81
    Administrator Dreadnaught's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    9,168
    Quote Originally Posted by earthJoker View Post
    Netflix pays for the infrastructure server side. And the Netflix users pay for the infrastructure client side. If the ISP offer flat rates that they cannot implement it's their own fault. You cannot offer a 250 Mbit/s line and than not provide what you offered. Period.
    If enforced honestly, Netflix won't be allowed to to pay for the same server-side infrastructure they are paying for now. People talk about "rates" as if the Internet were a water utility.

  22. #82
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreadnaught View Post
    If enforced honestly, Netflix won't be allowed to to pay for the same server-side infrastructure they are paying for now. People talk about "rates" as if the Internet were a water utility.
    I think I see what you're referring to, abit if you're seriously confused and ignorant of the actual events going on (netflix's own CDNs or the blackmail they paid comcast to properly connect to those CDNs?), but I'm going to ask you to explain more fully before its pointed out again how ridiculous you appear.
    "In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."

  23. #83
    Local talking head LittleFuzzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    5,494
    I don't know what Dread's thinking, but I know that my prediction, if the suggestion to declare the telecoms to be utilities ends up being followed, is that in the long run we'll end up back with purely metered usage generally and it'll probably cost major traffic sources (like Netflix and Hulu but also game companies like Valve or various MMO-servicers, and hell probably Google) more than the current set-up even including shakedowns like the ones you've been bemoaning.
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  24. #84
    Let sleeping tigers lie Khendraja'aro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    In the forests of the night
    Posts
    5,349
    Quote Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy View Post
    I don't know what Dread's thinking, but I know that my prediction, if the suggestion to declare the telecoms to be utilities ends up being followed, is that in the long run we'll end up back with purely metered usage generally and it'll probably cost major traffic sources (like Netflix and Hulu but also game companies like Valve or various MMO-servicers, and hell probably Google) more than the current set-up even including shakedowns like the ones you've been bemoaning.
    You're obviously still believing in the adverts of ISPs that espouse "unlimited internet access". Pretty much all the players have traffic limits, either a hard cap or a bandwidth limiter after a certain amount of traffic.
    When the stars threw down their spears
    And watered heaven with their tears:
    Did he smile his work to see?
    Did he who made the lamb make thee?

  25. #85
    Quote Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy View Post
    in the long run we'll end up back with purely metered usage
    back?
    Comcast has been testing a service that charges $1 for every GB over 5, and my friend in Texas has been hard locked at 40GB a month since she moved there.

    but why would you blame net neutrality for this when history has shown the ISPs, especially wireless providers, were more than eager to introduce data caps long before the FCC did anything? Data caps have been in the works for years, if anything by putting the ISPs on a level playing fielding and allowing increased competition net neutrality has delayed their eventual rollout.
    Last edited by Ominous Gamer; 03-10-2015 at 01:14 PM.
    "In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."

  26. #86
    Senior Member earthJoker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Gone
    Posts
    3,653
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreadnaught View Post
    If enforced honestly, Netflix won't be allowed to to pay for the same server-side infrastructure they are paying for now.
    Please elaborate. And don't try to pull of a GGT redefinition trick.
    People talk about "rates" as if the Internet were a water utility.
    People? Which people? People I care about?
    "Wer Visionen hat, sollte zum Arzt gehen." - Helmut Schmidt

  27. #87
    Local talking head LittleFuzzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    5,494
    Quote Originally Posted by Khendraja'aro View Post
    You're obviously still believing in the adverts of ISPs that espouse "unlimited internet access". Pretty much all the players have traffic limits, either a hard cap or a bandwidth limiter after a certain amount of traffic.
    No one has unlimited access but the major players aren't being charged what their usage costs either. Most people and most companies underutilize for what they're paying (not that households are paying the same thing as many businesses) by a large margin and their costs will probably come down. People with high relative bandwidth use for their categories (like Netflix for internet companies), or like myself and I kinda suspect OG for households, will be paying more when that time comes.

    And OG, I didn't say anything about a high cap. I said pure metered usage. In the long run we'd end up with flat fees (probably smaller than currently but it depends on the regulatory commissions) and paying for every bit sent or requested.
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  28. #88
    Quote Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy View Post
    And OG, I didn't say anything about a high cap. I said pure metered usage.
    Which is why I brought up wireless carriers (ie: verizon's 250mb limit) and comcast's laughably low 5gb limit . These metered usage ideas under the guise of caps or thresholds have been rolling out for years, you're not going to get to blame this on net neutrality, not that I suspect it will get as bad as you claim within the time frame of current technology being relevant.
    Last edited by Ominous Gamer; 03-10-2015 at 11:24 PM.
    "In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."

  29. #89
    Let sleeping tigers lie Khendraja'aro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    In the forests of the night
    Posts
    5,349
    Quote Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy View Post
    No one has unlimited access but the major players aren't being charged what their usage costs either. Most people and most companies underutilize for what they're paying (not that households are paying the same thing as many businesses) by a large margin and their costs will probably come down. People with high relative bandwidth use for their categories (like Netflix for internet companies), or like myself and I kinda suspect OG for households, will be paying more when that time comes.
    I don't see the problem. What does that have to do with Net Neutrality?
    When the stars threw down their spears
    And watered heaven with their tears:
    Did he smile his work to see?
    Did he who made the lamb make thee?

  30. #90
    Local talking head LittleFuzzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    5,494
    It doesn't particularly, except inasmuch as there's a link between Net Neutrality and the current push to have the telecoms declared public utilities. It's just something I'd been thinking about that Dread's comment and the replies to it made relevant to bring up.
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •