Quote:Good, Good. I already have you guys down as not wanting to let corporations scrap the internet. You have all made the abundantly clear, repeatedly. However your missing something very important I have said:
Conjecture I'll grant you, but honestly, why give the corpoerations the opportunity?
Quote:So... Besides angsting over the social doomsday... and declaring Coca-Cola imaginary. The company has managed to exist for over a century, under the only business models that you guys have stated corporations this is impossible. I see a lot of credit given to people that who illegally scrap businesses... and absolutely none to the ones that build them up in the first place.
So just for the sake of argument what specifically do you want added to the bill by your congress person?
Again... What can be added to the bill? What can be done to avert the social apocalypse? Can you tell me this? Do you even have an idea yourself? Please... do something useful. Tell me a solution and not give me a list of complaints and woes. If you are unable to do so... I will have to declare you insane under the following definition:
"Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."
So far I've got lots people channeling Inferno and not actually able to come up with a counter proposal for the bill in question. By channeling Inferno I mean that your point is that of of Inferno. Inferno being the fire ant predicon from Beast Wars. He considered Megratron his queen. His credo is: 'BURN!!! BURN!!! FOR THE COLONY!!!' This involved liberal and frequent use of his flame-thrower.
Please... if you wish to discus my view that the environmentalist movement in America is controlled by Communist party leftovers... please keep it in the thread on if Iran is a threat that is now about how America is causing global warming. Because these are so not the same topic and one thread has already been co-opted to this purpose.
Once again how would you alter the bill in question given a choice?
Quote:That could be their defense perhaps. However it would be a comically tragic one. The company in question would have to insist that either the Internet consists of only that one website in total or that the person in question only visits that one website in total. If it only one website is effected the website in question needs new servers or is very, very busy. Which is not the Internet companies problem to solve, thus a frivolous lawsuit. Barring the prosecution being stupid or greed and the defense being harassed, any judge that rules for that corporate malarkey of a craptastical defense is one of two things bribed and very, very bad at hiding his/her case of chemically induced brain damage.
then their obligation in regard to your speed is met; even if you cannot get that speed from the service you wish to use.
On a more personal note I called you deluded (deluding yourself, believing things that are true only in that you want the to be), because you insisted that dial-up is not just a slower internet connection than cable. Specifically referencing one thing. You responded by challenging total general level of intelligence, my bladder control and get increasingly hostile.
Im not challenging you to an insult contest here. Im just saying that you need to reread your posts, before posting them in order see if your just starting a fight or escalating one, instead of addressing the issue at hand. As it is I often feel your going to try and bite my fingers off if I get too close. This is a stylistic comment not a challenge to a fight.