Proto Posted October 17, 2018 Report Share Posted October 17, 2018 https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/10/comcast-complains-it-will-make-less-money-under-calif-net-neutrality-law/ ma'am can I please get some of that infrastructural monopoly? please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dad Posted October 17, 2018 Report Share Posted October 17, 2018 LOL Their service is so sheet, I'm surprised they haven't lost business sooner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordCowCowCowCowCowCowCowCow Posted October 17, 2018 Report Share Posted October 17, 2018 If this is meant to stay in Debates gonna need a bit more to the posts than thatThat being said unsure it needs to be in Debates Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dad Posted October 17, 2018 Report Share Posted October 17, 2018 It's a net neutrality topic centered around California. The title alone means it should stay in debates. Just look at the past two days of posts. California is at the top of the topics. You're gonna get the same traffic no matter where you move it. Myself, Roxas, I expect Winter, and maybe Jessie. Net neutrality is a volatile topic in terms of YCM's history. From the lobbyists behind anti-net neutrality to the "you don't need to watch porn" Christians and the "public utility" nuts, and YCM's "meh idc but here's why I'm right anyway" debaters. Just leave the thread alone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordCowCowCowCowCowCowCowCow Posted October 17, 2018 Report Share Posted October 17, 2018 It's a net neutrality topic centered around California. The title alone means it should stay in debates. Just look at the past two days of posts. California is at the top of the topics. You're gonna get the same traffic no matter where you move it. Myself, Roxas, I expect Winter, and maybe Jessie. Net neutrality is a volatile topic in terms of YCM's history. From the lobbyists behind anti-net neutrality to the "you don't need to watch porn" Christians and the "public utility" nuts, and YCM's "meh idc but here's why I'm right anyway" debaters. Just leave the thread alone.Well, if that's the case...then probably want to actually make posts suitable for the section. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dad Posted October 17, 2018 Report Share Posted October 17, 2018 Both posts were on topic and related to Comcast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proto Posted October 17, 2018 Author Report Share Posted October 17, 2018 Well, if that's the case...then probably want to actually make posts suitable for the section.Aye, winter started a thread with no commentary besides rage, I think I should in turn be able to start a giggle about a mega Corp tryna monopolize. It's in the right section to start off with too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantom Roxas Posted October 18, 2018 Report Share Posted October 18, 2018 Putting aside California specifically, I'm frankly not all that sympathetic to Comcast's plight here. The net neutrality repeal was handled in a completely underhanded manner, and had more to do with Ajit Pai's own personal ambitions and association with Verizon than any reasonable purpose that could benefit the country in any way. It was just a money grab, and nothing more. Just look at how Verizon throttled a fire department during a wildfire. The repeal allows companies like Verizon to do that "legally", so if this law can prevent a company like Comcast from throttling customers, then the problem isn't with California proposing this new law. It just means that Comcast is complaining that they can't get away with something that's already pretty scummy in the first place. Given how much money Comcast blew on those bidding wars against Disney, Comcast has generally been blowing all their money to begin with, so it's their own fault they've incurred a massive amount of debt. Don't blame the law when you can't pay off a debt that you have only yourself to blame for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dad Posted October 18, 2018 Report Share Posted October 18, 2018 Putting aside California specifically, I'm frankly not all that sympathetic to Comcast's plight here. The net neutrality repeal was handled in a completely underhanded manner, and had more to do with Ajit Pai's own personal ambitions and association with Verizon than any reasonable purpose that could benefit the country in any way. It was just a money grab, and nothing more. Just look at how Verizon throttled a fire department during a wildfire. The repeal allows companies like Verizon to do that "legally", so if this law can prevent a company like Comcast from throttling customers, then the problem isn't with California proposing this new law. It just means that Comcast is complaining that they can't get away with something that's already pretty scummy in the first place. Given how much money Comcast blew on those bidding wars against Disney, Comcast has generally been blowing all their money to begin with, so it's their own fault they've incurred a massive amount of debt. Don't blame the law when you can't pay off a debt that you have only yourself to blame for.The problem, in my opinion, isn't that they can do what they're doing, per say. Rather, that there are no measures in place to prevent this typeof throttling in the first funking place. Zero ethics. It's all horseshit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantom Roxas Posted October 19, 2018 Report Share Posted October 19, 2018 That's fair, and relates to what I'm getting at. California is trying to establish such a measure, and now Comcast is mad that they can't get away with it, but they're trying to appear more sympathetic by making it about the money they could lose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dad Posted October 19, 2018 Report Share Posted October 19, 2018 That's fair, and relates to what I'm getting at. California is trying to establish such a measure, and now Comcast is mad that they can't get away with it, but they're trying to appear more sympathetic by making it about the money they could lose.funk greedy ceo's. They throttled firefighters that could've lost their lives. I hope they lose every funking penny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantom Roxas Posted October 19, 2018 Report Share Posted October 19, 2018 funk greedy ceo's. They throttled firefighters that could've lost their lives. I hope they lose every funking penny. Exactly. I don't give a flying funk if Comcast loses money. If California's law can prevent any other company from doing what Verizon did, then Comcast deserves to lose as much as possible. They got themselves into their current debt, so they don't get to blame the law when it keeps them in the red. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nathanael D. Striker Posted November 5, 2018 Report Share Posted November 5, 2018 Reuters: U.S. Supreme Court ends fight over Obama-era net neutrality rules.https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-netneutrality/us-supreme-court-ends-fight-over-obama-era-net-neutrality-rules-idUSKCN1NA1UW Well, this may complicate the situation for California. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantom Roxas Posted November 7, 2018 Report Share Posted November 7, 2018 Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't this basically protect California's decision? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.