Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: 1010RD
Government is the problem. Liberty, not force.

Taking the contrarian pov, fedgov does have a point. If you only have one broadband provider in your area, and they decide to filter some websites, like maybe this one, then what?

What happens when BOTH providers that run to your curb do it?

When the broadband folks went from being a pipe to being a "content provider", they went into competition with other content providers on the web and the trouble started....
40 posted on 05/05/2010 2:56:39 PM PDT by BikerJoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies ]


To: BikerJoe

OK, where has this happened? Which sites where filtered?


64 posted on 05/05/2010 4:25:41 PM PDT by 1010RD (First Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]

To: BikerJoe

Bullcrap. This is a ‘solution’ in search of a problem. Name for us what sites were slowed down and by whom, please.

All of the morons advocating this are just losers who are willing to sell out everyone’s one true platform for freedom of speech because they think their damn torrents will download a couple minutes sooner. They should all be ashamed.


77 posted on 05/05/2010 7:35:18 PM PDT by perfect_rovian_storm (The worst is behind us. Unfortunately it is really well endowed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]

To: BikerJoe
Taking the contrarian pov, fedgov does have a point. If you only have one broadband provider in your area, and they decide to filter some websites, like maybe this one, then what?

I think a better example might be something like voice over IP. If your broadband provider wants to sell you VoIP, it can't exploit its monopoly position to expand into that market by prioritizing its VoIP packets over those from potential competitors.

That said, fed will overreach, as usual.

82 posted on 05/05/2010 10:10:26 PM PDT by Darth Reardon (Im running for the US Senate for a simple reason, I want to win a Nobel Peace Prize - Rubio)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]

To: BikerJoe
Taking the contrarian pov, fedgov does have a point. If you only have one broadband provider in your area, and they decide to filter some websites, like maybe this one, then what?

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe cable companies still get protectionist/monopolist contracts from local government.

Assuming that is the case, the solution is to abolish the exclusive contracts between local governments and cable companies.

Meddling in the market is bad when the federal gov does it. It is bad when local gov does it. The only difference is scope. Fewer people's lives are made worse off when local gov does it.

90 posted on 05/06/2010 6:57:41 AM PDT by MichiganConservative (A government big enough to do unto the people you don't like will get to doing unto you soon enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson