SomeDetroitGuy
120819
2092
96
Nov 22, 2017 2:37 PM
SomeDetroitGuy
120819
2092
96
god0fthunder
No we don’t.
snarflex
My goodness, it's almost like we've offloaded too much power to the executive!
HereIGoLurkingAgain
We just need 67/100 of Senate to agree, and the House to pass it as well...
KamSolastor
On the face of it, I agree. We need both parties working together to protect Net Neutrality.
dennydorko
Good luck preventing a filibuster by pro-big business senators, and then overriding Trump's inevitable veto.
Shoutrr
and how about adding it to your constitution ? In some scandinavian countries it became a basic human right
GrammarPoliceSergeant
Does this mean we like him?
Beleg7
Oh, one Republican wants it, so it's not a partisan issue? BS. Democrats are pro, Republicans are against. A few outliers doesn't change it.
MasterPrime
You know something is up when this asshat agrees with reasonable people.
vpock
That's actually smart.
PleaseDisperseNothingToSeeHere
His photo is tilted and angled up at him. That must mean that this website dislikes him. C'est la mass media.
arthurwolf
https://gizmodo.com/the-fcc-is-full-of-shit-1797124634
momoee
http://thehill.com/policy/technology/341605-senate-republican-we-need-bipartisan-net-neutrality-legislation Kinda old article but yes
StaticXster70
This should be an amendment to the Constitution, as an extension of the freedom of speech. It wouldn't be the dumbest amendment we've made.
nibbley
okay it is tho. the dismantling of net neutrality legislation has been a policy goal of the republican party for years. voting matters.
antifolkhero
Why no a constitutional amendment guaranteeing the right to a free internet?
mavisbdoing
It’s not a partisan issue at all? Essentially nobody wants this
apolloin
Most legislation IS Bi-Partisan - it's all controlled by the corporations that pay the lobbyists.
CityYeti
What worries me the most is that our heads of states don't even realize what this bill means, and what the consequences are when it passes
CityYeti
How many other bills get passed through without anyone understanding it?
LosPer
The first paragraph of his article
LosPer
And a link https://www.recode.net/2017/7/12/15949778/net-neutrality-day-of-action-open-internet-bipartisan-law-fcc-regulation
whatspaulplayingtoday
This motherfucker's talkin' some sense.
Gustie13
It’s worth pointing out this isn’t necessarily Pro-NN. Thune is only saying he wants the regulations to be decided by congress, not FCC.
SomeDetroitGuy
He's explicitly said that he wants the force of law - not administrative rulemaking - to support net neutrality and explicitly ban anti-
SomeDetroitGuy
net neutrality behaviors like throttling, tiered access, denial of service, etc.
azazyel
Yeah but it looks like he wants to remove it from the FCC which is the only think keeping Net Neutrality in place. So, he's scamming you.
DVSBSTrD
I'd also like to point out that "solidifying" regulations doesn't mean shit until we know exactly what sort of regulations he wants.
SomeDetroitGuy
He wants to make violation of net neutrality a crime, not a civil enforcement that can be arbitrarily ignored by a different FCC chair.
worldsokayestspeler
I feel like this issue should not be associated with any party
ServantOfTheGodEmperorOfUsersub
Polls indicate that it's about 60% NN support for both parties and 20% against.
DVSBSTrD
Well it is, if you actually look at the voting record.
worldsokayestspeler
Is there a trend?
ItWasCool
yeah both sides from voters perspective/choice if i remember correctly predominantly decided NN is good once they understood it better.
DVSBSTrD
Just like Obamacare. And we know who tried to kill that.
dropandgivemesexy
Serious question: is there even an argument AGAINST net nutrality? Or is it just money grabbing
Raptor052
Its literally just because of money grabbing and lobbying. There is not a valid reason to end Net Neutrality.
twistedviking
Why not research the opposing side yourself and come to your own conclusion?
init3
The tl;dr is more money for ISPs will supposedly mean more investment in infrastructure and better and faster service for everyone.
init3
It's trickle-down economics applied to the internet. The US does lag behind in internet speeds, but countries that are cutting-edge have NN
myotherusernameismyotherusername
They just conveniently forget all the money ISPs were given in the 90s to lay down fiber optics across the country.
myotherusernameismyotherusername
Which, of course, vanished. With no repercussions for the companies, obviously.
init3
Right. What hasn't vanished is their ability to monopolize/duopolize areas. If they want to continue to enjoy that, NN must be a trade off.
Starw1nd
Wait wait wait.... Thune not being a replubican tool? As a South Dakotan, this is a pleasant surprise.
KurgerBing
Rounds is still a NN hating bitch though. Feel free to give him a call
xccvbnm
Same.
soban
I was thinking about how he's such an embarrassment most of the time, so this is nice. Huh...
TheseAreTheirStoriesDUNDUN
Right? He's usually such a douche. I wonder where Noem stands.
Starw1nd
She's with whatever the other Republicans say. She has no thought of her own.
CaffeineManic
The belief that every Democratic idea must be opposed with a Republican idea, and vice versa, is destroying the U.S.
DVSBSTrD
Well it's a fact.
ImgursLibertarian
You'll often find, the worst ideas: Are the ones that the GOP and DNC agree on.
HorsefaceBeeguy
Net neutrality affects democrats, republicans, liberals, and everyone else. This affects everyone no matter who they support
spiceass9000
A good rule to follow is just don’t identify with a party. Listen to all candidates and pick the one you like
Donttouchthatwithoutgloves
The "my team vs your team" attitude people have is just crazy.
dejavutoyoutoo
"Two parties, both alike in lack of dignity in the US Political system where we lay our scene..." - Romeo & Julliette
dmax12
Ok, this is pretty dumb. We agree on TONNNES of stuff, but what would we get by talking about the stuff we agree on?
BubblesSayingDecent
Happens in most countries but you guys do seem to make it your own. Political divides are too extreme.
gusblack1
Grid lock
ontopofspaghetti
We all agree grown person sex with children is bad ...wait ...shit.
RideTheStimutacs
When you get to the point where you'd rather vote for a pedophile than a Democrat, it's time to reexamine your values.
CaffeineManic
Upvote for you!
homoerection
Called the gov of Alabama to say that she has no morals since she supports the pedo JUST because she doesn’t like democrats. So stupid.
LosPer
But...he 's suggesting neutrality legislation - not an opposite idea? LOL
BoneThatTrombone
George Washington told Jefferson not to move to a two party system and what did jefferson do? He made a two party system because he hated 1/
BoneThatTrombone
Burr so much his opponent, the original way was the election loser is the vice president that way 51% AND 48% of the country is represented
Arsikere
yup. we have become a culture of spite. honestly i feel like it's gets worse the more the internet grows
soulman901
Both sides have good ideas but the problem comes down to Ego. So technically everyones an Egocrat.
GadenKerensky
Well, Democratic Ideas shouldn't be opposed too often. Democrat ideas, maybe, but not so much democratic. /s Sorta.
CrazyGuyOnABike
Support ranked choice voting! It eliminates the spoiler effect, meaning that there can be more than two parties.
snarflex
That's not how it works. The things we agree on have become law (or not), which means by definition the only things left are controversial.
dmax12
This, I would imagine we agree on about 70%+ of basic human existence, but coming together to affirm "Killing is bad" isn't exactly useful
CaffeineManic
Many would not affirm "Killing is bad". Consider the death penalty, or drone killing of terrorists.
dmax12
and we are back to talking about difference. See how that works?
Halflingflinger
It's almost like party-based systems are inherently divisive and corporatism and integralism are a lot better.
CaffeineManic
Integralism: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integralism
Retsam19
No kidding. We've got a corruption problem on both sides, but everyone pretends it's just something the other side does.
LessanderoCortez
Thaaaat's politics!
Gallus1985
Don't play false equivalency please. The left has far less problems than the right.
McPopplers
Parroting false equivalency every time someone brings up this point is just helping the divide you fuckwit.
coolkidwestern
Yeah because Hillary won the DNC fairly right?
BingleyBingleyBeep
If one side has 70% corruption, and the other has 50%, your statement is still true, and misses the point that both sides are still shit.
Gallus1985
Here's an idea, how about we give them dems a chance to legislate before you talk shit. GOP have been cock blockers in control since the 90s
Redbulloth
Looking at the house alone: 1990-D; '92-D; '94-R; '96-R; '98-R; '00-R; '02-R; '04-R; '06-D; '08-D; '10-R; '12-R; '14-R; '16-R
CaffeineManic
Voting choices have come down to choosing either the devil with sharpest fangs, or the devil with the best manicured talons.
Gallus1985
Except justice dems are fighting against corruption, and it's a central voting issue for left wing voters.
GeekusPrimus
Both are about to self-implode from corruption and being out of touch with Americans. A turd is still a turd, no matter how you slice it.
Gallus1985
Wrong. Nice try, Paul Ryan
prolificchicken
Damn you really got him this time . You really found Paul Ryans secret imgur account he uses to corrupt the youths congratulations
GeekusPrimus
The only thing uniting the left right now is a hatred for Trump. Once that goes away, they'll fall apart as fast as the right.
PropainAndPropainAccesories
And it's people like this why we can literally never fucking accomplish anything to make things right..
dthninja2
Before I agree or disagree...are you a Democrat or a Republican?
CapttainKillJoy
Yes
Tsyganka
I'm a nihilist
lysani
I'm Republican, and I believe the "us vs them" mentality on both sides is dragging things down for everyone.
Ijustwannagohomeandeatcalzones
true true
LoveAnew
I catch myself doing it. It's a problem.
dthninja2
Damn it, if only you weren't a Republican!
TheGreyKnightsBANNED
i think the act of putting the labels on opinions fucked us over.
MOTHERFUCKING
Tribalism is dangerous yo.
m45k5
Ron Paul 2222
dthninja2
The "n" word.
RIIIIIIGGS
DougsdomeDimmadale
i'm a vegan
ASMRuVeganYet
Good for you friend, me too buddy
schmidy
Lol, I chortled
MDavidsonJutland
How dare you. Im gluten intolerant.
AHornyHivemind
I vape kale and do crossfit
HowsYourMommaAndDem
I vape and have a boyfriend
PipeandSlippers
I don't vaccinate my vegetable
CoffeeMakesMeTwitchy
Hahaha
auserwithaname
I don't vegetate my vaccinations
FieryFarts
Sadly, I am a vegetable.
bigdickdalrymple
Me neither, that's why he's a vegetable now
reeceska
Zinger
DoomSkuller
I feel like the Founding Fathers would personally start a second revolution if they saw the shit happening these days
DarkCrawler901
The Founding Fathers thought only rich white landowning men should have the vote so yeah probably
BrownskinOriental
Common misconception...the system was set up for 2-party (first horse to post wins, 50%+) and will always be contentious.
AngryRaven
Wrong. They didn't want nor design our system for political parties, they just naturally formed and they accepted they couldn't stop it.
BrownskinOriental
I understand not wanting, but the design was clear.
AngryRaven
the design was deliberately built around the political idea of a philosophical republic with nation states governed by a central office
AngryRaven
wherein the most popular idea/person as decided by debate would be the one carried forth. it become political parties due to human tribalism
BrownskinOriental
Ahhh, if the elections for representation was setup first to post, then it's designed for a 2-party, otherwise multi-party setup.
DVSBSTrD
Actually, they'd be wondering why people think trying to have sex with a 14 year old is a bad thing.
GaySocialistLiberalMuslimCommieAtheist
Well you are not wrong.
Jokeykilla
Why is that the first thing you think of wtf
DVSBSTrD
Because the go to lines about racial slurs and gender equality have been done to death.
DoomSkuller
DVSBSTrD
Have you ever heard of Sally Hemings?
ILikeCuteGifsAndICannotLie
I found out last night my husband is ok with no NN. He is so against government regs he thinks there must be something bad about it. HELP!!!
jamesttgrays
It very slow for people to access Google 3/3
italyball
Have him try to use the internet going slow as fuck.
Wauphale
Ask him if they should legalize murder. Only murderers murder, so the law is redundant for everyone else.
sirclesam
Check out battleforthenet.com - lots of explanation videos there
PassiveAggressiveHotdogVendor
Every time he tries to logon to his favourite website, unplug the router and demand $10 for access to the website for a day.
jamesttgrays
NN ensures that ISPs can't limit/functionally block access to sites they prefer we not access. Ie if Yahoo paid Comcast they could make 2/?
VodkaReindeer
That's about as bad as not believing in Santa... https://www.bloomberg.com/gadfly/articles/2017-11-21/net-neutrality-already-ended
Vorstedt08
Ouch.
DVSBSTrD
You married a Republican, or worse, a Libertarian. There's no hope for him until he losses his health insurance.
ILikeCuteGifsAndICannotLie
I honestly thought he was moving towards the middle and then POW.
DVSBSTrD
Then I'm guessing he didn't do very well in history class. If he ever attended one at all.
sirclesam
My go-to is the cluster fuck that is cable TV packages
jamesttgrays
If he is a fan of free speech and free access to information he likely supports net neutrality without realizing it. 1/?
zackofspades
He voted GOP.
PleaseDisperseNothingToSeeHere
See if he'll change his opinion. If not, you might have to divorce him on account of him being an idiot.
Thornaxe
So he's for monopolies and price gouging? Ask him if he'd be ok with his power bill going up 10 fold next month. Govt regs prevent this.
jsi8
Somalia has no regulations. They seem to be doing quite well.
VictimAndVillain
I view it as a utility, basic like water and electricity. I want my water quality monitored and regulated, and in the event of a "Flint" /1
VictimAndVillain
I want a government entity to have sufficient power to enforce the regulations. Businesses are efficient but also self-interested. /2
VictimAndVillain
Something this central to 21st-century life deserves to be ubiquitous and available. This isn't cable TV, this is a basic utility.
Rogahar
There are countries which consider it a basic human right.
benovere
In a capitalist world, regulations are important to preserve competition. Without regulations, large monopolies would kill small businesses.
PossibleSarcasm
I would try to explain that this is a very special case where government regulation is going to save businesses and prevent monopoly
AddictedToCycling
"No Net Neutrality means the ISP could charge you extra so you can watch your porn."
Roit2003
Look him straight in the eye and tell him that if there is no NN then there is no sexy time ever again.
OverpricedCrayon
Start regulating sexy time the same way ISPs wants to regulate the internet to make him see the error of his ways.
StringVariable
Pinch all the traffic that is coming from a specific source? :-x
OverpricedCrayon
No start charging for individual moves/articles of clothing, or else he pays the big bucks and can have it all at once.
rosekith
To keep gvt as small as possible and legislation as simple and straightforward as possible, he needs to support net neutrality in the form1
rosekith
It's in now, because internet carriers are currently listed as common carriers, meaning they can't legally throttle/microtransaction us to 2
rosekith
Death. If that gets overturned by the FCC, then we just need one teensy law classifying internet as a common carrier now and forever. 3/3
StringVariable
Well said! That's exactly the problem. Once ISPs start doing shitty things , smaller specific laws will need to come into place.
MatrimBloodyCauthon
It's your job to explain it to him! He trusts you.
ILikeCuteGifsAndICannotLie
I’ve said everything people here have. He thinks we’re all brainwashed.
RandomActOfConfusion
Tell him the free market only works when you have consumer choice. Right now there are too many places where there is a monopoly on internet
RandomActOfConfusion
Service. Imagine that your local power company starts charging you differently based on the appliances you use in your home. (Yes, I know
Misora
I related it to Dominos paying your electric carrier to put a camera in your oven and doubling your rate when you bake a pizza.
RandomActOfConfusion
The analogy wasn't important. The point is that there is no recourse for the consumer in a monopoly.
RandomActOfConfusion
This is the case for large industrial customers, but that's a more complex (ha!) situation.) You as a consumer don't have a free market to
RandomActOfConfusion
Switch to another provider. When a monopoly exists, strict regulations are necessary to protect consumers.
god0fthunder
You have a smart husband. Don’t buy the propaganda.
LoveAndCoffeeButNotNecessarilyInThatOrder
I hope for everyone's sake that you are trolling. You sound like flat-earther, or someone who believes in "chemtrails".
god0fthunder
Or, someone who disagrees with the conclusions that many have bought into via propaganda (both sides of every issue use propaganda).
LoveAndCoffeeButNotNecessarilyInThatOrder
By equating "propaganda" on both sides, you are resorting to fallacious logic. Are you willfully ignorant, or is it unintentional?
god0fthunder
No. I just know what propaganda is. You don’t seem to.
god0fthunder
Propaganda is the spreading of information in support of a cause. It’s not so important whether the information is true or false or if the..
god0fthunder
...cause is just or not — it’s all propaganda.
god0fthunder
Of course I’m not trolling. I disagree with you and many others because the federal government should keep its hands off of the internet.
LoveAndCoffeeButNotNecessarilyInThatOrder
The government's NN involvement was purely an action to prevent businesses from trying to "control" the internet. That's not "propaganda".
god0fthunder
That is the claim, yes. Spreading the claim (whether true or not) to influence public opinion is propaganda.
LoveAndCoffeeButNotNecessarilyInThatOrder
The ISPs were trying to tamper with the Internet, which is why the government had to step in, in the first place.
god0fthunder
Show me evidence of the ISPs doing what you are alleging they were doing previous to NN being put through.
HolyCringeLordBatman
What about current Title 2 protections allows the government to do anything to "your internet"
god0fthunder
Who laid claim to the internet?