PDA

View Full Version : Does Ted Stevens know anything about the internet?


Ultra Peanut
07-02-2006, 04:34 PM
http://random-m.com/images/1359428627_tstevensmain.jpg
"NO!"

http://blog.wired.com/27BStroke6/?entry_id=1512499
Audio (http://media.publicknowledge.org/stevens-on-nn.mp3) :spock:

There's one company now you can sign up and you can get a movie delivered to your house daily by delivery service. Okay. And currently it comes to your house, it gets put in the mail box when you get home and you change your order but you pay for that, right.

But this service isn't going to go through the interent and what you do is you just go to a place on the internet and you order your movie and guess what you can order ten of them delivered to you and the delivery charge is free.

Ten of them streaming across that internet and what happens to your own personal internet?

I just the other day got, an internet was sent by my staff at 10 o'clock in the morning on Friday and I just got it yesterday. Why?

Because it got tangled up with all these things going on the internet commercially.

So you want to talk about the consumer? Let's talk about you and me. We use this internet to communicate and we aren't using it for commercial purposes.

We aren't earning anything by going on that internet. Now I'm not saying you have to or you want to discrimnate against those people [...]

The regulatory approach is wrong. Your approach is regulatory in the sense that it says "No one can charge anyone for massively invading this world of the internet". No, I'm not finished. I want people to understand my position, I'm not going to take a lot of time. [?]

They want to deliver vast amounts of information over the internet. And again, the internet is not something you just dump something on. It's not a truck.

It's a series of tubes.

And if you don't understand those tubes can be filled and if they are filled, when you put your message in, it gets in line and its going to be delayed by anyone that puts into that tube enormous amounts of material, enormous amounts of material.

Now we have a separate Department of Defense internet now, did you know that?

Do you know why?

Because they have to have theirs delivered immediately. They can't afford getting delayed by other people.

[...]

Now I think these people are arguing whether they should be able to dump all that stuff on the internet ought to consider if they should develop a system themselves.

Maybe there is a place for a commercial net but it's not using what consumers use every day.

It's not using the messaging service that is essential to small businesses, to our operation of families.

The whole concept is that we should not go into this until someone shows that there is something that has been done that really is a viloation of net neutraility that hits you and me.ROFL

Ultra Peanut
07-02-2006, 04:37 PM
NO! NOT A TRUCK!

Hydrae
07-02-2006, 06:19 PM
Ummmm :spock:

Eskimo Joe
07-02-2006, 06:42 PM
It sounds as if old Teddy knows as much about the internet as most people here know about politics! :)

Count Alex's Losses
07-02-2006, 08:20 PM
http://media.publicknowledge.org/stevens-on-nn.mp3

Ultra Peanut
07-03-2006, 05:36 AM
It sounds as if old Teddy knows as much about the internet as most people here know about politics! :)The sad/terrifying thing is, however, that he and his ilk are the ones who shape the laws regarding the internet.

He's opposed to net neutrality because people might order ten movies from Netflix or download A WHOLE BOOK (wow, that could take... seconds!). God Almighty.

the Talking Can
07-03-2006, 07:34 AM
delivering porn through a "series of tubes" is a sin...why, I clicked on a photo of a hairy female police officer taking a dump in Rhonda Moss' mouth and if took 4 days to be tube delivered...this is not why God created the intrawebnetfaxcapacitor...

the Talking Can
07-03-2006, 07:35 AM
ps

I hope Cheney shoots him the face real soon...he deserves it

FAX
07-03-2006, 08:15 AM
delivering porn through a "series of tubes" is a sin...why, I clicked on a photo of a hairy female police officer taking a dump in Rhonda Moss' mouth and if took 4 days to be tube delivered...this is not why God created the intrawebnetfaxcapacitor...

ROFL ROFL

FAX

Ultra Peanut
07-03-2006, 08:35 AM
delivering porn through a "series of tubes" is a sin...why, I clicked on a photo of a hairy female police officer taking a dump in Rhonda Moss' mouth and if took 4 days to be tube delivered...this is not why God created the intrawebnetfaxcapacitor...I'm going to have to send you an internet that shows you how to get things like that in a more expeditious manner.

banyon
07-03-2006, 08:58 AM
This net neutrality bill is pretty scary IMO. It could affect the future of the Planet. (the real one and CPlanet)

the Talking Can
07-03-2006, 10:23 AM
This net neutrality bill is pretty scary IMO. It could affect the future of the Planet. (the real one and CPlanet)

nah, we can all pitch in and just build a bigger tube for the Planet...kind of like a barn raising...I've got a bunch of plywood...we just need some nail guns and paint...voila! Tubes!

Baby Lee
07-03-2006, 10:25 AM
delivering porn through a "series of tubes" is a sin...why, I clicked on a photo of a hairy female police officer taking a dump in Rhonda Moss' mouth and if took 4 days to be tube delivered...this is not why God created the intrawebnetfaxcapacitor...
It's like the dang thing was built by Benrus and Buffcoat.

listopencil
07-03-2006, 10:10 PM
http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=143102

jAZ
07-03-2006, 11:20 PM
http://media.publicknowledge.org/stevens-on-nn.mp3
The stupidity on this audio clip is unmatched in the history of ChiefsPlanet. Can there be a bigger advertisment for term limits than this windbag?

jspchief
07-03-2006, 11:40 PM
http://media.publicknowledge.org/stevens-on-nn.mp3I'd like that 10 minutes and 36 seconds of my life back, please.

htismaqe
07-04-2006, 05:45 AM
The sad/terrifying thing is, however, that he and his ilk are the ones who shape the laws regarding the internet.

He's opposed to net neutrality because people might order ten movies from Netflix or download A WHOLE BOOK (wow, that could take... seconds!). God Almighty.

Read the last few lines. I'm pretty sure he's arguing FOR net neutrality.

htismaqe
07-04-2006, 05:49 AM
This net neutrality bill is pretty scary IMO. It could affect the future of the Planet. (the real one and CPlanet)

What's scary about it is how clever it is. In fact, I think the telecom giants may be in on it.

You do realize that keeping the net NEUTRAL means MORE regulation, not less? The bill that would allow ISP's to charge more for content is a DEREGULATION bill.

The government has gotten the entire "Internet freedom" community in an uproar about this. The bill won't pass and everybody will be cheering.

Until the realize that we've unwittingly handed to government free reign to shpae the internet however they see fit...

jAZ
07-04-2006, 11:43 AM
Read the last few lines. I'm pretty sure he's arguing FOR net neutrality.
He has no idea what he's arguing for, but he's not in favor a any Net Neutrality legislation.

banyon
07-04-2006, 11:59 AM
What's scary about it is how clever it is. In fact, I think the telecom giants may be in on it.

You do realize that keeping the net NEUTRAL means MORE regulation, not less? The bill that would allow ISP's to charge more for content is a DEREGULATION bill.

The government has gotten the entire "Internet freedom" community in an uproar about this. The bill won't pass and everybody will be cheering.

Until the realize that we've unwittingly handed to government free reign to shpae the internet however they see fit...


Yes, I prefer that level of government regulation to having the internet go to the highest bidder like the rest of available media.

People love markets, but markets don't respond to any values save supply and demand. Having the internet be a place where anyone, anywhere can read or create content of their choice is not a value that a completely free market will protect.

"Imagine if you called 1-800-L.L.-Bean and your phone company said, 'Sorry, we're not going to connect your call because we have a deal with Land's End.'" For telephone service, that would be preposterous; the phone company is prevented both by laws and by customer outrage from limiting your calls to specific phone numbers...A cable company is used to operating in the cable world, and it's routine for them to pick and choose content(a recently quoted example from Salon.com)

jAZ
07-04-2006, 12:07 PM
What's scary about it is how clever it is. In fact, I think the telecom giants may be in on it.

You do realize that keeping the net NEUTRAL means MORE regulation, not less? The bill that would allow ISP's to charge more for content is a DEREGULATION bill.

The government has gotten the entire "Internet freedom" community in an uproar about this. The bill won't pass and everybody will be cheering.

Until the realize that we've unwittingly handed to government free reign to shpae the internet however they see fit...
Baloney... Net Neutrality has been in place since the beginning of the internet. It's a question of extending the policy or removing the policy and turn that control over to the telcos.

It's a policy (yes, a regulation) that's encouraged and is directly responsible for the massive competitive environment that exists on the internet. It's limited regulation to ensure a healthy and competitive environment that's not controlled and restricted by the telcos who have monopoly power over the the pipes that control the flow of data over the internet.

htismaqe
07-04-2006, 05:17 PM
Baloney... Net Neutrality has been in place since the beginning of the internet. It's a question of extending the policy or removing the policy and turn that control over to the telcos.

No, it hasn't. You might want to read up.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality

It's an "observed" practice at this point.

listopencil
07-05-2006, 05:36 PM
Bump.

SLAG
07-23-2006, 12:08 AM
ROFL

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/DClkE64nFDY"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/DClkE64nFDY" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

patteeu
07-23-2006, 09:09 AM
It's limited regulation to ensure a healthy and competitive environment that's not controlled and restricted by the telcos who have monopoly power over the the pipes that control the flow of data over the internet.

ROFL Ted Stevens thinks the internet is a bunch of tubes and jAZ thinks it's a bunch of pipes.

listopencil
07-23-2006, 09:12 PM
ROFL Ted Stevens thinks the internet is a bunch of tubes and jAZ thinks it's a bunch of pipes.

So is it pipes or tubes? I know it's not a truck.

Bowser
07-23-2006, 11:33 PM
nah, we can all pitch in and just build a bigger tube for the Planet...kind of like a barn raising...I've got a bunch of plywood...we just need some nail guns and paint...voila! Tubes!

An Amish intraweb! Genious!