THE Political Thread (ALL Political Discussion Here - See Rules, P. 1)
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 705, 706, 707 ... 3661, 3662, 3663  Next
 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Off Topic Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
lakerjoshua
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 28 Nov 2007
Posts: 11277
Location: Bay Area

PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 3:40 pm    Post subject:

ChefLinda wrote:
What if your ISP decided you don't really need LG that badly and puts in the slow lane and it takes a full minute for the page to load? Are the "both sides" people still on board?

/rhetorical question


That will only happen to lower income people who don't deserve faster internet speeds anyway. As some put it, we will have lower bills and A la Carte Internet options once we stop subsidizing the poor folk.

/Scarcasm
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
governator
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 28 Jan 2006
Posts: 24995

PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 3:46 pm    Post subject:

2016 Racism/sexism no longer a deal breaker
2017 Pedophilia no longer a deal breaker
2018 ...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ChefLinda
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Posts: 24112
Location: Boston

PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 3:48 pm    Post subject:

The Trump administration's effort to gut American Institutions from the inside out by appointing the worst possible candidate continues:

Leading Trump Census pick causes alarm. The 2020 count might be put in the hands of an inexperienced professor who wrote that 'Competitive Elections are Bad for America.'

Quote:
The Trump administration is leaning toward naming Thomas Brunell, a Texas professor with no government experience, to the top operational job at the U.S. Census Bureau, according to two people who have been briefed on the bureau’s plans.

Brunell, a political science professor, has testified more than half a dozen times on behalf of Republican efforts to redraw congressional districts, and is the author of a 2008 book titled “Redistricting and Representation: Why Competitive Elections Are Bad for America.”


Quote:
The pick would break with the long-standing precedent of choosing a nonpolitical government official as deputy director of the U.S. Census Bureau. The job has typically been held by a career civil servant with a background in statistics. It does not require Senate confirmation, so Congress would have no power to block the hire.


smh
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ChefLinda
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Posts: 24112
Location: Boston

PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 3:49 pm    Post subject:

Most. Corrupt. Administration. Ever.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ChefLinda
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Posts: 24112
Location: Boston

PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 3:58 pm    Post subject:

governator wrote:
2016 Racism/sexism no longer a deal breaker
2017 Pedophilia no longer a deal breaker
2018 ...


Being a Nazi not a deal breaker:

U.S. votes against anti-Nazi resolution at U.N.

Quote:
The resolution entitled "Combating glorification of Nazism, Neo-Nazism and other practices that contribute to fueling contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance," was approved by the U.N.'s human rights committee on Friday with 131 in favor, 3 against with 48 abstentions.


Our excuse was that we worried it would curb free speech. ::eyeroll::
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ContagiousInspiration
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 07 May 2014
Posts: 13811
Location: Boulder ;)

PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 4:07 pm    Post subject:

ChefLinda wrote:
governator wrote:
2016 Racism/sexism no longer a deal breaker
2017 Pedophilia no longer a deal breaker
2018 ...


Being a Nazi not a deal breaker:

U.S. votes against anti-Nazi resolution at U.N.

Quote:
The resolution entitled "Combating glorification of Nazism, Neo-Nazism and other practices that contribute to fueling contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance," was approved by the U.N.'s human rights committee on Friday with 131 in favor, 3 against with 48 abstentions.


Our excuse was that we worried it would curb free speech. ::eyeroll::


I was making it though the posts without my stomach turning too hard until this one...

How can he be this (bleep) weird...

It is like he takes his ideas from Conspiracy Theorists and anyone who will stroke his ego long enough..
https://www.mediamatters.org/research/2017/05/03/guide-donald-trump-s-relationship-alex-jones/216263
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ContagiousInspiration
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 07 May 2014
Posts: 13811
Location: Boulder ;)

PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 4:15 pm    Post subject:

Now we have Jeff Sessions offering Bounty Money to police forces for notifying ICE of undocumented aliens they encounter.. is this hiring local police as an arm of ICE?
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/11/21/1717622/-Sessions-wants-to-financially-reward-police-departments-that-turn-in-undocumented-immigrants


really liked this reply
Quote:

Such is the ideology of fascism: The most vulnerable, the most disenfranchised first. Then those who dare dissent. In the end no one is safe. There are impressive examples of that in not so distant history…...



reminds me of
Quote:
Niemöller is perhaps best remembered for the quotation:

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ChefLinda
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Posts: 24112
Location: Boston

PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 4:47 pm    Post subject:

Just another day of grifting big and small:

Trump Wine now being sold in gift shops of National Parks.

MAGA hats with "Merry Christmas" on the back being sold on Trump website for twice the price of regular MAGA hats - $45 bucks a pop.

Merry (bleep) Christmas.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
32
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 04 Nov 2009
Posts: 73038

PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 4:49 pm    Post subject:

ChefLinda wrote:
Most. Corrupt. Administration. Ever.


Drain the swamp.
_________________
Nobody in the NBA can touch the Laker brand, which, like the uniform color, is pure gold.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
trmiv
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 19 Nov 2001
Posts: 17654
Location: Orlando

PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 6:33 pm    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:


Ok, so you don't like pay-per-view then. You'd rather have it where everyone, including low income, have to subsidize and pay for you to be able to watch the MMA fight at a lower cost eh? Is that what it's about?


Wow dude really? It really says a lot about your thinking when I was talking about protecting unfettered access to the internet, and you immediately made it about low income folk wanting free (bleep). I know I'm not going to change your mind on this. But anyway since I'm a glutton for punishment...

Not sure how your pay per view thing is relevant here. I’m not opposed to someone providing an event or service for a fee. I’m not opposed to pay per view or Netflix or Hulu or any of that and I have no clue why you jumped to me wanting people to get stuff for free. What I would be opposed would be Comcast throttling my access to something because they have a disagreement contractually, or political with the event or service I'm trying to access. I would have a problem with them tacking on a "Streaming Access Fee" on top of what I'm already paying them for internet access and for the event or service

Take Netflix and Hulu for example. What I want is to not have to pay extra to my ISP to access them on top of what I already pay the ISP for internet access and what I already pay Netflix and Hulu. Also I don't want to suddenly lose my access to Hulu because Spectrum is having contract issues with Comcast, or decides that they want their new streaming service prioritized and decide to kill Hulu by blocking access from their network. Losing access to (bleep) over contractual issues happens all the time on cable TV. AMC had a battle with DirecTV not long ago, and both were spamming stuff about the other in the battle.

Quote:
It's funny because I hear everyone saying man, I sure wish I could sign up for cable a la carte, like, just pay for the channels I want but then they are for net neutrality. Huh? Can't have your cake and eat it too. Everyone is going to pay for access to NFL League Pass whether you watch it or not. You're going to pay for Bravo whether you want to or not. And Showtime. And MLB full season package streaming. And Golf channel. Bits are bits!


I don't get it. It's like you're arguing for net neutrality here. The (bleep) you're describing is why I don't have cable. I don't pay for NFL, or golf or bravo or any of that. I pay for internet access and just the services I need. I don't want to pay for a bundle. If I just want internet access to watch (bleep) cat videos and Lakers highlights on youtube and read LG, I should be able to do that without ponying up extra on top of what I already pay my ISP for internet access since those are free services (paid for through advertising). If I want Netflix, or Hulu or Amazon to buy something on iTunes I'll pay for that. But I don't want to pay for the "Media Bundle" to be able to access streaming media on top of what I pay the ISP and to the various media providers. And I don't want my ISP throttling the content of a competing ISP's streaming service.

Quote:
I always find it funny when people say well "this could happen". Ok, well, it COULD also happen that ISPs could offer a slower data option for lower income folks. Throttle that data, charge less, and up the price for for non-throttled data for heavier users. A good thing.



They do offer a slower option for people who want to pay less, but that isn't what this is about. That option has access to the same things as the other options, just at a slower speed to you. You want slow access speeds, fine pay $15 a month. You want fast access speeds? Ok pay whatever it is they charge for that. At that point though you should get access to whatever you want at the highest capable speed you're paying for. Now there may be peering agreements the content provider has with the ISP that help keep the speeds within their networks optimized, but Spectrum shouldn't be throttling or blocking my access to say Amazon Prime video because they have a disagreement Amazon over some AWS related issue, or because I'm not paying extra for the Media Access Package on top of what I'm paying Spectrum and Amazon already, or because they don't like Jeff Bezos political views.

Quote:
Anyway, this is why I say, the optimal answer is somewhere in between. There should be a "fast lane" for content like video.


There is, they are called peering agreements and CDN's. The issue comes when they decide to intentionally slow down the other traffic to be anti-competitive. Or block it all together.

Quote:
There should be a "fast lane" or "high priority lane" perhaps for hospitals or other first responder type situations.

And the "slow lane" should be regulated to ensure it meets certain minimal standards.

That is not net neutrality, but that is better than net neutrality. It's just an "organic!" label people are glomming on to.


Not sure what you're saying here. A "fast lane" from and to where?

Also I noticed you left out what's probably the biggest issue with this, the political one I mentioned. When all data on the internet isn't equal, anything can be blocked or regulated by your ISP for any reason. Your ISP doesn't like Trump or Republicans? Acccess to Fox News, Breitbart are gone. Or maybe they'll get sly and slow down access, or redirect your traffic to more "acceptable" sites. Or on the other side, maybe the CEO of your ISP is buddies with Trump and decides that "fake news" isn't welcome on his network, so he decides they are blocking CNN or the Washington Post?

But I guess all that (bleep) is just a problem for "low income people"?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
governator
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 28 Jan 2006
Posts: 24995

PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 6:36 pm    Post subject:

ChefLinda wrote:
governator wrote:
2016 Racism/sexism no longer a deal breaker
2017 Pedophilia no longer a deal breaker
2018 ...


Being a Nazi not a deal breaker:

U.S. votes against anti-Nazi resolution at U.N.

Quote:
The resolution entitled "Combating glorification of Nazism, Neo-Nazism and other practices that contribute to fueling contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance," was approved by the U.N.'s human rights committee on Friday with 131 in favor, 3 against with 48 abstentions.


Our excuse was that we worried it would curb free speech. ::eyeroll::


US govt opposed it because it would curb Trump’s speech, not free speech, ‘there’s good people on both sides’. Curb free speech... good spin, the UN resolution is not a legal thing.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LakerSanity
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 33474
Location: Long Beach, California

PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 7:03 pm    Post subject:

ChefLinda wrote:
What if your ISP decided you don't really need LG that badly and puts in the slow lane and it takes a full minute for the page to load? Are the "both sides" people still on board?

/rhetorical question




Can we all still be friends?
_________________
LakersGround's Terms of Service

Twitter: @DeleteThisPost
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 7:28 pm    Post subject:

ChefLinda wrote:
What if your ISP decided you don't really need LG that badly and puts in the slow lane and it takes a full minute for the page to load? Are the "both sides" people still on board?

/rhetorical question


What if a healthcare profesional needs immediate access to a cloud based application or one of those remote surgeon applications but it buffers during surgery because of all the bandwidth being hogged by Netflix watchers? Are the net neutrality people still on board?

What you guys actually want is a non-neutral net, with caveats. Such as, minimum quality level for the slow lane. Priority for medical applications, and so on.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Hector the Pup
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 25 Jul 2002
Posts: 35946
Location: L.A.

PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 7:47 pm    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
ChefLinda wrote:
What if your ISP decided you don't really need LG that badly and puts in the slow lane and it takes a full minute for the page to load? Are the "both sides" people still on board?

/rhetorical question


What if a healthcare profesional needs immediate access to a cloud based application or one of those remote surgeon applications but it buffers during surgery because of all the bandwidth being hogged by Netflix watchers? Are the net neutrality people still on board?

What you guys actually want is a non-neutral net, with caveats. Such as, minimum quality level for the slow lane. Priority for medical applications, and so on.


Wow. You don't know how this works at all. LG has less of a burden on an isp than a pop-up.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 8:03 pm    Post subject:

Hector the Pup wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
ChefLinda wrote:
What if your ISP decided you don't really need LG that badly and puts in the slow lane and it takes a full minute for the page to load? Are the "both sides" people still on board?

/rhetorical question


What if a healthcare profesional needs immediate access to a cloud based application or one of those remote surgeon applications but it buffers during surgery because of all the bandwidth being hogged by Netflix watchers? Are the net neutrality people still on board?

What you guys actually want is a non-neutral net, with caveats. Such as, minimum quality level for the slow lane. Priority for medical applications, and so on.


Wow. You don't know how this works at all. LG has less of a burden on an isp than a pop-up.


I never said anything about LG. ?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 8:10 pm    Post subject:

trmiv wrote:
Not sure what you're saying here. A "fast lane" from and to where?

Also I noticed you left out what's probably the biggest issue with this, the political one I mentioned. When all data on the internet isn't equal, anything can be blocked or regulated by your ISP for any reason. Your ISP doesn't like Trump or Republicans? Acccess to Fox News, Breitbart are gone. Or maybe they'll get sly and slow down access, or redirect your traffic to more "acceptable" sites. Or on the other side, maybe the CEO of your ISP is buddies with Trump and decides that "fake news" isn't welcome on his network, so he decides they are blocking CNN or the Washington Post?

But I guess all that (bleep) is just a problem for "low income people"?


Your post was long, and had valid points, but I cropped. Sorry.

If you want to pass a law that prevents ISPs from blocking or altering legal content or sites that passes through its network, I'm fine with that. Don't think it is necessary but no issues with that philosophically.

My biggest concerns relate mainly to abolishing fast/slow lanes. I think we need them in place, particularly for medical applications but also for applications that demand greater bandwidth.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ChefLinda
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Posts: 24112
Location: Boston

PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 9:03 pm    Post subject:

How To Deal With Trump Supporters Over The Holidays

Quote:
First….
If you’re a drinker, I strongly suggest you start drinking early.
This rule also applies if you can sneak in a nice fat joint or two. And once you’re sufficiently drunk, everything you say is acceptable. Well, to you anyway. Yep, it’s now your turn to be the “drunk uncle.”

Second….
Wear comfortable clothes.
Now I know this may sound silly, but trust me on this one. It serves a few different purposes. For one thing, there’s enough tension in the room already, don’t let an uncomfortable outfit make you even more stressed out. For another, some nice loose pants will allow you to eat more. And if you’re eating you’re not not flipping the table or cussing out your racist cousin. Also if you need to take a little “time-out” you don’t want uncomfortable clothes getting in the way of your brisk walk around the block….or run to the liquor store.

Third….
Find an ally.
You really need at least one person in the room to be on Team Sanity with you. When the Trump-talk starts you’ll need someone you can make eye-contact with. Clueless people who still support Trump aren’t exactly tuned in to reality. So they’ll likely never even notice that the enlightened people at the table are mercilessly mocking them through subliminal messages. Also you’ll feel so much better later when you can (bleep) and vent about ignorance among your loved ones with an ally. Oh, and don’t forget to remove your shoe before you kick your ally under the table every time someone says they love Trump.

(rest at link)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 52624
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 9:12 pm    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
ChefLinda wrote:
What if your ISP decided you don't really need LG that badly and puts in the slow lane and it takes a full minute for the page to load? Are the "both sides" people still on board?

/rhetorical question


What if a healthcare profesional needs immediate access to a cloud based application or one of those remote surgeon applications but it buffers during surgery because of all the bandwidth being hogged by Netflix watchers?


Eliminating Net-Neutrality has nothing to do with protecting bandwidth for medical purposes, nor any other fantasy of promoting socially responsible ways of dealing with the predominant flow of information at this point.

Eliminating Net-Neutrality is an obvious ploy by the ISP conglomerates to assume complete control of what information we get, at what speed it and at what price.

There is no reasonable defense of that, and certainly not by invoking obvious BS that getting rid of Net-Neutrality is about ensuring the free flow of important information. And you appear to be smart enough to know that, which makes your position even more insidious.
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
He’s something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built that’s all for show
goes up in flames
In 24 frames


Jason Isbell

Man, do those lyrics resonate right now
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
The Lebrons
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 30 Mar 2009
Posts: 4778

PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 9:15 pm    Post subject:

ChefLinda wrote:
How To Deal With Trump Supporters Over The Holidays

Quote:
First….
If you’re a drinker, I strongly suggest you start drinking early.
This rule also applies if you can sneak in a nice fat joint or two. And once you’re sufficiently drunk, everything you say is acceptable. Well, to you anyway. Yep, it’s now your turn to be the “drunk uncle.”

Second….
Wear comfortable clothes.
Now I know this may sound silly, but trust me on this one. It serves a few different purposes. For one thing, there’s enough tension in the room already, don’t let an uncomfortable outfit make you even more stressed out. For another, some nice loose pants will allow you to eat more. And if you’re eating you’re not not flipping the table or cussing out your racist cousin. Also if you need to take a little “time-out” you don’t want uncomfortable clothes getting in the way of your brisk walk around the block….or run to the liquor store.

Third….
Find an ally.
You really need at least one person in the room to be on Team Sanity with you. When the Trump-talk starts you’ll need someone you can make eye-contact with. Clueless people who still support Trump aren’t exactly tuned in to reality. So they’ll likely never even notice that the enlightened people at the table are mercilessly mocking them through subliminal messages. Also you’ll feel so much better later when you can (bleep) and vent about ignorance among your loved ones with an ally. Oh, and don’t forget to remove your shoe before you kick your ally under the table every time someone says they love Trump.

(rest at link)


Or have Thanksgiving with mom's side and not dad's.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Omar Little
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 90299
Location: Formerly Known As 24

PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 9:53 pm    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
ChefLinda wrote:
What if your ISP decided you don't really need LG that badly and puts in the slow lane and it takes a full minute for the page to load? Are the "both sides" people still on board?

/rhetorical question


What if a healthcare profesional needs immediate access to a cloud based application or one of those remote surgeon applications but it buffers during surgery because of all the bandwidth being hogged by Netflix watchers? Are the net neutrality people still on board?

What you guys actually want is a non-neutral net, with caveats. Such as, minimum quality level for the slow lane. Priority for medical applications, and so on.


Sure, just like we want speed limits and red lights, while we accept emergency vehicles getting special access. What we don't like is if you buy a Toyota instead of a Chevy, you can get pulled over for driving half the speed of Toyota drivers, or if your vehicle triggers every red light.
_________________
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 10:46 pm    Post subject:

DaMuleRules wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
ChefLinda wrote:
What if your ISP decided you don't really need LG that badly and puts in the slow lane and it takes a full minute for the page to load? Are the "both sides" people still on board?

/rhetorical question


What if a healthcare profesional needs immediate access to a cloud based application or one of those remote surgeon applications but it buffers during surgery because of all the bandwidth being hogged by Netflix watchers?


Eliminating Net-Neutrality has nothing to do with protecting bandwidth for medical purposes, nor any other fantasy of promoting socially responsible ways of dealing with the predominant flow of information at this point.

Eliminating Net-Neutrality is an obvious ploy by the ISP conglomerates to assume complete control of what information we get, at what speed it and at what price.

There is no reasonable defense of that, and certainly not by invoking obvious BS that getting rid of Net-Neutrality is about ensuring the free flow of important information. And you appear to be smart enough to know that, which makes your position even more insidious.


Net neutrality has nearly everything to do with paid prioritization aka slow/fast lanes. The fear tactic being used is "they could arbitrarily choose to block LG" but ultimately it is about whether or not to treat all data equally, or prioritize.

I have already said that content blocking should be prohibited and if a law is necessary to do so then we should do that.

So you can ensure prioritization for appropriate applications (non neutral net) but still ensure you can peruse your political blog without barriers.

Here: https://www.savetheinternet.com/net-neutrality-what-you-need-know-now
Quote:
Without Net Neutrality, cable and phone companies could carve the internet into fast and slow lanes.


You probably don't need to click on it though as you appear smart enough to know this.

In any case, we want slow, medium, and fast lanes for specific applications like medical, video, etc. If someone just wants to check email and do basic web browsing, they can pay much less and use the slow lane just like how you don't have to pay for Showtime if you don't want. It's all data transmission. Bits are bits.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Omar Little
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 90299
Location: Formerly Known As 24

PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 10:52 pm    Post subject:

No, we dont want a world where isp providers, many of which have de facto monopolies, get to make decisions that affect the access of their customers to content of competitors or companies thst don't pay them for the privilege if access, not to mention small content vs corporate. It's a license to exclude and coerce.
_________________
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LakerSanity
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 33474
Location: Long Beach, California

PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 10:54 pm    Post subject:

Here's a conversation between my mom and I following a discussion about Roy Moore...

Me: We've gotten to this point where so many stories of sexual harassment haven't been told because, for generations, we've questioned and dismissed the accusers outright. Really, the largest problem, as you've experienced yourself (which my mom has), is that those in power have kept it this way and nothing will change until those at the top feel real consequences for letting these types of behaviors persist.

Mom: Yea, well we need to start by putting that rapist President in jail.

Me: Well, I'll just take getting him out of the office.

Mom: Bill Clinton's already out of the office.

Me:
_________________
LakersGround's Terms of Service

Twitter: @DeleteThisPost
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 10:56 pm    Post subject:

Omar Little wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
ChefLinda wrote:
What if your ISP decided you don't really need LG that badly and puts in the slow lane and it takes a full minute for the page to load? Are the "both sides" people still on board?

/rhetorical question


What if a healthcare profesional needs immediate access to a cloud based application or one of those remote surgeon applications but it buffers during surgery because of all the bandwidth being hogged by Netflix watchers? Are the net neutrality people still on board?

What you guys actually want is a non-neutral net, with caveats. Such as, minimum quality level for the slow lane. Priority for medical applications, and so on.


Sure, just like we want speed limits and red lights, while we accept emergency vehicles getting special access. What we don't like is if you buy a Toyota instead of a Chevy, you can get pulled over for driving half the speed of Toyota drivers, or if your vehicle triggers every red light.


Right. And we can pass laws to prevent that if we want to. Has that even happened?

And what are your thoughts on toll roads?

I just think it makes sense that if you consume massive amounts of data, you pay more than he/she who consumes little. Bandwidth is finite. But net neutrality opposes that. Thats why i'm against it. That does not mean I am in favor of content blocking.

In short, you cannot have net neutrality with a slow/fast lane. But you can have slow/fast lanes while ensuring all legal content is.made equally accesible.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
tlim
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 26 Jun 2002
Posts: 6648

PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 10:58 pm    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
trmiv wrote:
Not sure what you're saying here. A "fast lane" from and to where?

Also I noticed you left out what's probably the biggest issue with this, the political one I mentioned. When all data on the internet isn't equal, anything can be blocked or regulated by your ISP for any reason. Your ISP doesn't like Trump or Republicans? Acccess to Fox News, Breitbart are gone. Or maybe they'll get sly and slow down access, or redirect your traffic to more "acceptable" sites. Or on the other side, maybe the CEO of your ISP is buddies with Trump and decides that "fake news" isn't welcome on his network, so he decides they are blocking CNN or the Washington Post?

But I guess all that (bleep) is just a problem for "low income people"?


Your post was long, and had valid points, but I cropped. Sorry.

If you want to pass a law that prevents ISPs from blocking or altering legal content or sites that passes through its network, I'm fine with that. Don't think it is necessary but no issues with that philosophically.

My biggest concerns relate mainly to abolishing fast/slow lanes. I think we need them in place, particularly for medical applications but also for applications that demand greater bandwidth.


its a lot of FUD. It’s totally bogus.

Business purchase a completely different package than home owners. Inexpensive ones run to the curb, running bundled fiber. So whatever you want to purchase, it’s likely you will. It hit any limits. Businesses also pay for it, with costs of $1K a month or more. Usually, if it is mission critical, you have a secondary provider and your routing is through both, running hot.

If it’s critical data, you, as a company, pay for the data to get to the headend.

Although, tbh, surgery over the internet is the stupidest thing you can ever do. Why? Fiber cuts. Your network could simply be cut due to some jerk putting in their own equipment at the colo.

Net Neutrality just meant that website X gets the same preference as website B when you get to the hospital. It the other way around.

Everything you’re concerned about currently doesn’t exist with net neutrality, so worrying that it might is simply silly.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Off Topic All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 705, 706, 707 ... 3661, 3662, 3663  Next
Page 706 of 3663
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2018 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB