I was insinuating that the Verizon reps building would be on fire, and would still throttle and upsell the FD service plans.
Edit: I forgot to add, that SCCFD submitted an addendum to said brief.
A LOT WORSE. Remember when Pai said that the internet isn't broken and that ISPs weren't throttling or blocking traffic... TO CONGRESS. LAST WEEK?
It turns out THAT was a lie too. TLDR: Verizon throttled Santa Clara County Fire Dept's Internet until they "Upgraded" (read: Pay more) for unlimited internet WHILE BATTLING DEADLY WILDFIRES.
Now this started July 29th of this year. Weeks before Pai's congressional report.
Twitter allows quite a lot of egregious behavior and people Like James Woods (Note: Woods QUIT twitter, but was not BANNED from it.)
U.S. District Judge Otis D. Wright II - for not putting up with Prenda's courtroom BS.
That was Commissioner Rosenworcel.
Now there was a lot more to that shit show than just the NN/Comment scandal. Like actual internet coverage, overcoverage, etc.
Yes, with NN repealed, the internet has not burned down...yet. Remember kids, Telco's play the long game, they play years, even decades into the future, not 60 days.
I keep imagining the internet of the future being like Ready Player One or Summer Wars.
Unfortunately, Those two movies also demonstrate why that's a bad idea.
A platform (Facebook, Twitter, Periscope, etc) has the right to refuse business to individuals or group, The reason being, is two-fold, That does not mean that these groups can go to Fox news or Sinclair to peddle their poison.
And 2 (and probably more importantly) There ARE federal laws, Felonies at that, against inciting violence and riots. There is NOT however any Federal laws against incitement of ethnic hatred (which I guess is what they are counting on).
what CAN congress do? I mean, lying to Congress under oath seems like a pretty serious offence.
I see NY's plan, and i approve of it. Make it so costly for Charter (or any company that abuses it's state privileges) that it is no longer a sound business operation.
Wedding cakes: "Companies have the right to refuse service to anyone!"
Twitter Shadowbanning (even though it isn't): "THIS IS DISCRIMINATION!"
no, that's what I was saying essentially. you can have a position, but make sure it's backed up by facts. And not cherry picked facts either.
so there are a couple of things I think needs addressing.
1) There are some less-partisan/totally neutral news wires and organizations out there, AP, BBC (when regarding US politics, I think), Rueters, ABC and NBC (yes they have leanings, but they aren't overly skewed).
That being said,
2) As famously said in The Newsroom (2012): "Anchors having an opinion isn't a new phenomenon. Murrow had one and that was the end of McCarthy. Cronkite had one and that was the end of Vietnam." - Charlie Skinner
And finally, 3) Look at /r/Politics, especially the "New" Section. it is filled with tripe, lies, and outright propaganda. And the reason the mods will not put a blanket ban on Breitbart, NYPost, Daily Caller, Drudge Report, and Fox news? (Even Whitehouse.gov rarely makes it to the front page due to it's... administration.) It's because "there needs to be balance to news." Which is total bullsit, like this post pointed out. It's one thing to be unbiased, it is another thing to allow.. and I HATE to use this term, but "Fake news" (In regards to Fox, Drudge, Breitbart, etc.) to be allowed.
Actually... now that I think about this. There is a term for Right (and left wing) sites. It's roughly 130 year old term. It's called Yellow Journalism.
is this the same one owned by russian investors?
Oh so it is perfectly fine to march with a (presumably, but not necessarily) loaded rifle? It's fine to march in order to provoke a reaction, and then to start something just half a step short of a riot? Oh and let's not forget about your boys wearing white Halloween Ghost costumes while burning crosses in Alabama, this affects them too.
When is The Rolling Stones going to sue Ruby Tuesday's for trademark infringement and past royalties/profits?
Is this what you are really advocating? Irregardless of how it LOOKS, this is flat out UNSAFE, for the workers, the the cities involved, for EVERYONE. And THIS, is what you are advocating. Instead of Treating all data as equal, you are advocating EVERYONE put up their own lines. You, sir, are an idiot.
what i meant was that absent federal regulation, either state regulation steps in, and absent that ISP's steps in, but the truth is someone is in charge of how the isp's operate, including the isp's themselves.
Okay I need to weigh in here before "OMG GOOGLE APPOLOGISTS!"
NEWS sites predominate Google when you search for Donald Trump NEWS. This would be CNN, NYT, AP, BBC, and WaPo.
PROPAGANDA sites don't make the cut: This would be Redstate, Townhall, Breitbart, Infowars, Washington Examiner (Barely, but still propaganda imo), Truthdig, etc.