gbaji wrote:
Why? I
am a firm believer in free markets (and it isn't about religion. ...[]
Quote:
If the incredibly successful free-market model used as an argument does not point to a person who is a little too enamored with the concept I am not sure what does.
It's not about being enamored or not. It's about what I believe...[]
Yeah, so you are not a believer, but it is about what you believe. What do you believe Gbaji?
gbaji wrote:
The fact that they blocked the legislation doesn't mean that the legislation was good, or needed. Please tell me you understand that? Pretty please?
If someone tries to pass legislation forcing you to walk on your hands all day long, and it gets blocked, does that mean that the legislation was good and should have been passed? No, it doesn't. Therefore the fact that ISPs have been able to block net neutrality legislation to this point doesn't tell us a damn thing about whether the net neutrality legislation is good or bad. See how that works? So why do you mention this?
False equivalency is false. Who is using silly debate techniques now?
And even if it wasn't, consumers pay ISPs to deliver. If they can't deliver they should be penalized, also with legislation. Right now, they just buy legislation favorable to them. Please tell me you understand that? Pretty please?
gbaji wrote:
Huh? This is the US. You can always sue. Whether you succeed or not is a whole different matter. You know who else "binds you to a contract"? Um.... Every business you buy a product from. Again, you are making irrelevant statements which tell us nothing about whether net neutrality laws are needed. You're talking about every single thing except what the proposed laws do and whether you think that's good or bad.
Heh, yes. Are you familiar with the term: contract of adhesion? Then stop being an idiot.
The only power consumer has over a moloch like that is, realistically, regulation. And that is only because the said molochs managed to block the litigation part.
And no, arbitration courts are hardly avenues for the customer. In case you are wondering, this is where the contract of adhesion comes in.
gbaji wrote:
If we lived in 1930s Germany, would the fact that this up and coming **** regime and this Hitler guy were bad scary people mean that we should pass a law requiring everyone to shot themselves in the head? No. See, you have to look at the proposed law and see if it's a good thing. You can't just say "This thing over there is bad, so pass this law that maybe has nothing at all to do with that, and don't bother looking at it, cause look! Squirrel!!!".
You know... my opinion of you keeps changing. I keep wondering if you are some sort of new wave of a long term troll. It is a bad argument. Hell, it is not an argument at all.
gbaji wrote:
And again, that doesn't constitute a legitimate argument in support of net neutrality legislation. See, there's this big gap in your logic where you don't show how condition A requires response B (and that's ignoring the fact that you also haven't proven condition A even exists).
@#%^ing fine; I will show you why A ( ISP oligopoly ) requires B ( regulatory response ). Pay attention. It will get tricky.
Monopoly: ISP has your balls; it can squeeze it so tightly you don't even have a chance to say "!"
Duopoly: both ruling ISPs have your balls, but you can choose which one squeezes you before you say "!"
Oligopoly: there are several ISPs, they are kinda competing for your balls, but their overall squeeze is about the same; you might manage an "ow !"
Actual competition: all the companies want to have you by the balls, but because there are so many of them, they have to compete for a chance and so many of them try to entice you with services like free blowjobs.
Now, I understand that you want to have your balls tightly squeezed, but some of us like our blow jobs, thank you @#%^ing very much.
gbaji wrote:
Um... You think I'm the one failing at critical thinking here? That's hysterical.
I withdraw my sympathy. At least the companies have a simple a simple reason to want to squeeze your balls, money. As I am sure you have learned in HS, the function of the company is to earn money. What is your excuse for wanting to be fondled gently by the ISPs?
Edited, Jan 17th 2014 8:34pm by angrymnk