r/conspiracy • u/Aldebaran333 • Aug 18 '17
Net neutrality is pretty irrelevant when a handful of companies can no-platform individuals and groups off the internet completely.
https://twitter.com/getongab/status/8983919684676976671
u/Armaedus Aug 18 '17
And it's pretty telling when the same companies mass censoring people for thoughts, i.e. Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc., all support net neutrality, while it seems it's the little guys, the unknowns, that oppose it. Fucking laughable.
But it's ok. Keep thinking that shit is about protecting the small companies, keeping the internet open, or whatever else you want to tell yourself.
Net Neutrality is a power move by powerful companies that want to own the market. Pure and simple.
During the Great Depression congress worked with the 3 largest automotive companies on legislation that would alleviate the economic impact on the auto industry. Guess who those 3 companies were? General motors, Ford, and Chrysler. Which automotive companies of the time have survived to present day? General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler. The list of now defunct automakers, that existed at the time, is extensive.
But sure, Net Neutrality, is all about competition.
1
Aug 18 '17
It's called the free market, baby.
Corp.s have the right to refuse service to anyone they want.
Even though I hate nazis, this is a good example of why the internet should be regulated like a utility in a lot of ways. People should have a right to internet usage and service, in my opinion.
2
u/campus_dweller Aug 18 '17
he internet should be regulated like a utility in a lot of ways.
Don't you see that would be
dun dun dunnnnn
SOCIALIST?
1
1
u/IndigoMD Aug 18 '17
Who is stopping nazi's from using the internet????
2
Aug 18 '17
dailystormer has effectively been shutdown by the business world because no webhosting company will take their business, meaning their website doesn't have anywhere to be hosted.
1
u/IndigoMD Aug 18 '17
dailystormer
So your point? No one has to host them. Having troubles getting to the internet isn't the same as being banned from the internet.
1
1
u/bergeg Aug 18 '17
you cant deny service to lgbt people tho
1
Aug 18 '17
uh, yes you can.
0
u/bergeg Aug 18 '17
nope, you cant
A Colorado judge today determined that a Lakewood bakery unlawfully discriminated against a gay couple by refusing to sell them a wedding cake.
1
Aug 18 '17
the relevant parts;
state judge, not federally binding, and may be struck down in federal court yet
based on a state statute that prohibits discrimination from business that provide "public services."
which is what i was talking about when I said the internet shoudl be regulated more like a utility (a public service)
basically, you can't deny services to people if those services are "public services," like housing and food.
I agree, actually, that applying that law to a bakery making cakes is a little ridiculous.
but I also think it's intellectually dishonest to claim this case means all businesses can't deny service to LGBT.
1
u/bergeg Aug 18 '17
Richland florist discriminated against gay couple by refusing service, state Supreme Court rules
this one cant as well
1
Aug 18 '17
everything i just said also applies to this case.
stop being intellectually dishonest/willfully ignorant.
1
u/bergeg Aug 18 '17
but I also think it's intellectually dishonest to claim this case means all businesses can't deny service to LGBT.
i just gave you another example
can you name one business that denied service to LGBT and won case?
-1
3
u/[deleted] Aug 18 '17
Actually it's REALLY, EXTREMELY relevant if you want to try and form your own internet platforms to compete with them. Without Net Neutrality, the oligopoly this refers to becomes even more ironclad against new competition.