Page #: 102/375 |
@kimjongl | 15 August 18 | |
At the end of the day you either believe the government should be telling private companies who their customers can be and what their pricing structure can be (which is authoritarian) or you don't. Personally, even if it benefits me, I don't want the government having that type of control.
|
||
@3mel | 15 August 18 | |
who there customers can be ? not heard this in relation to any form of business save for arms dealing (edit: and in sanctions of course). governments have been intervening in pricing where practical monopolies exist for quite some time to the detriment of no-one. |
||
@kimjongl | 15 August 18 | |
You mentioned accessing Jones site. Putting the access of the internet and the pricing of it in the governments hands is never going to be the answer. Decentralization and deregulation coupled with improving the technology to where ISPs aren't even needed is the way to go.
|
||
@3mel | 15 August 18 | |
sounds like you don't understand what net neutrality was. to the best of my knowledge there was nothing in it that involved limiting who ISPs could provide to. it was about STOPPING ISPs from being selective in terms of which services they gave preferential access to. after it's repeal they can throttle connections to Alex Jones or ask you to pay more to be connected at normal speeds. if you think that's a better way for things to be where there are geographical monopolies, you are in the overwhelming minority. |
||
@kimjongl | 15 August 18 | |
I'm fully aware of what it was. Throttling or asking for more money for access to certain sites can be a way of choosing or abandoning customers based on how reasonable the action is. I might be in the minority but that's fine. The internet isn't a right. If you're in a geographical monopoly either move or don't do business with a company you don't agree with. This is why I'd rather the government move to help deregulate try and invest in technologies where ISPs won't be needed in the future. If they employ bad business practices the market should make them go out of business. |
||
@kimjongl | 15 August 18 | |
.
|
||
@obi_jon | 15 August 18 | |
So you believe that the kind of unregulated free markets that your advocating for will just regulate themselves through market forces, supply and demand, customer choice, etc? So you're placing the whole onus on the consumer/customers to avoid being fooled by unscrupulous business practices and the billions they spend on highly sophisticated(essentially weaponised) advertising and marketing campaigns specifically designed to manipulate and lure them into buying endless amounts of stuff(mainly composing of 'shit they don't need' and/or doesn't work as claimed/is poor quality/overpriced etc.). I've been describing Alex Jones as a 'snake oil' merchant for some time, selling his 'health supplements' to gullible idiots. You're essentially saying we should allow snake oil salesmen like him to manipulate people and it's our own fault if they succeed in manipulating us. |
||
@obi_jon | 15 August 18 | |
@ obi_jon - 15.08.18 - 11:38am So you believe that the kind of unregulated free markets that your advocating for will just regulate themselves through market forces, supply and demand, customer choice, etc? So you're placing the whole onus on the consumer/customers to avoid being fooled by unscrupulous business practices and the billions they spend on highly sophisticated(essentially weaponised) advertising and marketing campaigns specifically designed to manipulate and lure them into buying endless amounts of stuff(mainly composing of 'shit they don't need' and/or doesn't work as claimed/is poor quality/overpriced etc.). I've been describing Alex Jones as a 'snake oil' merchant for some time, selling his 'health supplements' to gullible idiots. You're essentially saying we should allow snake oil salesmen like him to manipulate people and it's our own fault if they succeed in manipulating us. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/11/upshot/faith-in-an-unregulated-free-market-dont-fall-for-it.html |
||
@3mel | 15 August 18 | |
@ kimjongl - 15.08.18 - 10:10am I'm fully aware of what it was. Throttling or asking for more money for access to certain sites can be a way of choosing or abandoning customers based on how reasonable the action is. I might be in the minority but that's fine. The internet isn't a right. If you're in a geographical monopoly either move or don't do business with a company you don't agree with. This is why I'd rather the government move to help deregulate try and invest in technologies where ISPs won't be needed in the future. If they employ bad business practices the market should make them go out of business. you raising points not seemingly connected to the issue and appearing not to grasp mine painted a different picture. in principle you believe our water and power companies should also be free to screw us over and the government should stand knowingly by and just watch until enough consumers have decided to go without if there's no other option to regulate their behaviour. |
||
@obi_jon | 15 August 18 | |
It requires a peculiar kind of 'faith' to believe that the kleptocratic Oligopoly that Trump wants and Putin already has will show any kind of benevolence to the people(everybody else but themselves and they're sycophants) that they actively seek to dominate and rule over with impunity. If you have a truly unregulated free market economy it creates a kind of 'most money wins' scenario that allows the greediest and most manipulative members of society to prosper and rise to positions of tremendous power and exploit them for themselves. So, if you're relying on those people to trickle their wealth down to others and not stash it all away for themselves in an offshore tax haven, then you're a special kind of stupid. |
||