Shane... stop miming everything I say I know what I said... its directly above what you said. Seriously... I'm not to stupid to use a scroll bar. Stop. At least take out your own quoted material.
Considering that the internet should be more free after the government losses control. The only thing that would oppress it is if the companies do it themselves. That is the debate point in the end.
Granted Norway has a point. They will have to police it more for crimes or face law suits. Which is just a symptom of the largest problem with internet. Children.
All the oppression software is to protect children. The most publicized crimes on the net are people trying to date/abduct children. The regulation on the net is to protect children.
The stuff that isn't about children is all about copyright protection issues. Seriously... the man who invented the internet had a large hand in putting in unfiltered in every class room in America. His boss had a hand in making it unsafe for the children flooding the internet.
The money in nerfing the internet is in selling software to protect children. Selling the keys to the not children area is a limited market. Selling endless nerfing of the internet instead is a guaranteed large market. Not only can you sell to parents, but the government itself. Glee a twofer. And fees per computer. That is hundreds of guaranteed packages per school.
It is more profitable to the let the internet run more wild. Then sell security software to concerned parents. Children are the problem with the internet. The largest bit of the rest is a matter of the fallout of Napster refusing to take stolen recordings of their next album. That was the issue. The rest is blood in the water from that.
An example is that when taxes lower, lower taxes mean that people do more deals. More deals... more tax revenue. Higher taxes, means less deals. Less taxes collected.
Feeing to death the internet is not in the best interests of the companies. They make more money with lower fees on far more transactions, then high fees on a decreasing level of sales. Promoting the growth of the internet will do great things for their bottom line. Nerfing it to death will not. You do not kill the goose that lays the golden eggs.
Quote:Err... what? The fact these nebulous standards are enforceable only because the government makes it so... and the government is losing control. That means that there will be MORE porn and politics on the internet. It will make the internet less regulated... like cable TV and pay radio.
This isnt paranoia at all; merely good business.
Considering that the internet should be more free after the government losses control. The only thing that would oppress it is if the companies do it themselves. That is the debate point in the end.
Granted Norway has a point. They will have to police it more for crimes or face law suits. Which is just a symptom of the largest problem with internet. Children.
All the oppression software is to protect children. The most publicized crimes on the net are people trying to date/abduct children. The regulation on the net is to protect children.
The stuff that isn't about children is all about copyright protection issues. Seriously... the man who invented the internet had a large hand in putting in unfiltered in every class room in America. His boss had a hand in making it unsafe for the children flooding the internet.
The money in nerfing the internet is in selling software to protect children. Selling the keys to the not children area is a limited market. Selling endless nerfing of the internet instead is a guaranteed large market. Not only can you sell to parents, but the government itself. Glee a twofer. And fees per computer. That is hundreds of guaranteed packages per school.
It is more profitable to the let the internet run more wild. Then sell security software to concerned parents. Children are the problem with the internet. The largest bit of the rest is a matter of the fallout of Napster refusing to take stolen recordings of their next album. That was the issue. The rest is blood in the water from that.
Quote:This segment is drivel... seriously. I'm paying for the bandwidth... not the E-mail. You logic exscapes me. The AOL plan this is related to was the AOL wanted to charge for both. I'm starting to think the miming is for your benefit not anyone elses. Keep up with your own points at least.
Yep. More sheets to a bed-wetter.
Quote:What benifits the company then? Making more money. To make more money from the internet... have more business on it. That is reality.
It is law that is not written for the benefit of the consumer, but for the benefit of the corporations.
An example is that when taxes lower, lower taxes mean that people do more deals. More deals... more tax revenue. Higher taxes, means less deals. Less taxes collected.
Feeing to death the internet is not in the best interests of the companies. They make more money with lower fees on far more transactions, then high fees on a decreasing level of sales. Promoting the growth of the internet will do great things for their bottom line. Nerfing it to death will not. You do not kill the goose that lays the golden eggs.