Federal court upholds net neutrality repeal, but rules that the FCC can't block state...

cliffordcooley

Posts: 12,691   +6,051
No, you were referring to a "portion" of the population as innocent
Your false interpretation is not my concern. First sentence was wishing. Second sentence was rescinding that wish because of the innocent. No where in my comment can you come to the conclusion I mentioned a ratio. I was even being sarcastic when responding to wiyosaya, because my comment was intentionally being misinterpreted. Seriously what part of rescinding my wish in the second sentence is hard to understand?

And yes I do not support NN because it in itself is a regulation. I do not support any regulations on Internet period. If there is a problem with corporate mishandling of service. That can be dealt with, without imposing Internet regulation on all. Here we have two agencies fighting for which one can impose their own regulations. I don't agree with either. Especially when one state thinks they are better than the other forty nine states. But then I have to remind myself. It is not the whole state, just a few dic-khead law officials. Now if you read my words the way I meant this time, you will see that also includes Pai.
 

wiyosaya

Posts: 5,778   +3,984
Your false interpretation is not my concern. First sentence was wishing. Second sentence was rescinding that wish because of the innocent. No where in my comment can you come to the conclusion I mentioned a ratio. I was even being sarcastic when responding to wiyosaya, because my comment was intentionally being misinterpreted. Seriously what part of rescinding my wish in the second sentence is hard to understand?

And yes I do not support NN because it in itself is a regulation. I do not support any regulations on Internet period. If there is a problem with corporate mishandling of service. That can be dealt with, without imposing Internet regulation on all. Here we have two agencies fighting for which one can impose their own regulations. I don't agree with either. Especially when one state thinks they are better than the other forty nine states. But then I have to remind myself. It is not the whole state, just a few dic-khead law officials. Now if you read my words the way I meant this time, you will see that also includes Pai.
With respect to NN, it is far more than one state suing to keep NN. https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/01/21-states-sue-fcc-to-restore-net-neutrality-rules/

I am not sure I get you with respect to corporations mishandling service, dealing with it, and not imposing regulations on all. As I see it, there has to be a standard/bar/whatever you want to cal it, that is a basis for measuring whether or not corporations are mishandling service, and that, in and of itself, seems to fit the definition of regulation. Saying one corp did something that warranted a corrective action would mean that if another does the same thing, they would also be subject to some sort of corrective action, too. Corporation two should not be left to its own devices and get off without some sort of corrective action; however, without some sort of standard, that is within the realm of possibility. Typically, the means to set such standards is a law or regulation, otherwise, there is no basis for a corrective action by the courts, FTC, FCC, or otherwise.

For now, my bet is that we have not seen any ISP seriously consider doing what Pai's FCC NN ruling allows them to do. This is going to take time to work its way through the courts. If Pai's FCC NN ruling is allowed to stand, my bet is that the :poop: will seriously flush out when ISPs implement whatever they please and post the fact that they are doing it - as Pai's NN ruling implores them to do for it to be legal.