Today, a conservative co-worker told me of the right's defintion of "net neutrality"...

The conversation I had to day shows the dire problem when it comes to ideas, the discussion of ideas and how their meaning gets scrubbed by partisans of the right.


It also shows why those that follow these nuts on the right are so set against "net neutrality."


So here's how it goes...this conservative co-worker demands of me that he bets I was in favor of "net neutrality" and when I told him that the exact definition of it was one thing I've never been sure of. He then went on to tell me that "net neutrality" is the lefts dream of making all CONTENT on the internet equal. That it means to make NPR an equal with all things conservative on the internet.

I told him that I didn't think that was what the true meaning of "net neutrality" was and the little I understood it was it was about keeping the internet available to everyone because internet providers wanted a sort of Pay-what-you use sort of thing.

So this showed me that all this time, the Limpballs of the right have been completely describing a different animal to their amen corners.

So...if I'm understanding that "definition" correctly, he thinks net neutrality means not allowing different/dissenting opinions? If that's the case, then it's an incredibly evil way of getting half of America to fight against net neutrality.

Your understanding is closer to, if not, the exact truth. If anyone ever asks, net neutrality is simply having no restrictions by internet providers or the government on anything concerned with the internet (content, sites, communication, equipment, etc).

Likely straight from a 'think tank' to your co-workers brain via a 'talk radio host'.

Net Neutrality is the opposite of what corporate sponsors $$$$ are feeding to his cerebellum.

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


He's kinda sad, but dangerous if he becomes fundamentalist in his belief.

S L O W

some content will be like dsl speed, and some will be like string and a can speed- and the provider decides.

Sux. It'll mean whoever is not on the good list will be so hard to access, people will give up. That's the plan anyway.

Net neutrality should be protected with every ounce of energy we have.

Net Neutrality means leaving the Internet exactly the way it is now. We should have termed it "Don't Fuck with the Internet" instead of "Net Neutrality". What the opposite of Net Neutrality means is allowing ISPs to set up pricing tiers to slow down/speed up/block certain Internet sites and services.

I thought I should have said to him, "It's pretty clear you are getting your information from the Linguistics School of Frank Luntz."

the "moran" probably would think that linguistic is a food and Luntz was a liberal cook.

Just tell the fool that to be in favor of net neutrality is to favor the internet as it is today ... which means that Billy Wingnut and Takey McMedicare's pathetic little teabagger website will be as accessible as the big GOP establishment ones and being against net neutrality means that the GOP establishment ones will be faster and easier to access since they can pay for the speed and the "real conservatives" website will be on "dial-up speed" because they can't pay the big bucks.

Play up the big bad establishment and "real conservatives" (aka "morans"/dumbasses) angle because a lack of net neutrality actually hurts the teabag (bowel) movement (of course being against their own interest is on par with these idiots.)

I'd love to hear that bill being introduced on the Senate floor.

true conservatives would be rolling in their graves if we really were to lose net neutrality, as the sites that would suffer are the small business sites, such as those on Yahoo small business or Go Daddy small business, all the home based business sites. That fact alone should scare them, but then, again, I could be wrong in my understanding of the whole thing