you dont HAVE a choice now… thats the point!!! you can either pay for what you get or dont use it at all… if you call that resistance then I can perfectly understand why we are where we are as a society.
What is it you think Im paying for?
control. you pay, you give consent to control you. we already lost… i wish people could make this connection.
let me ask you something. If i say, you can choose left or right… what choice do you really think you have?
someone like me would be like, “well ■■■■ you asshole im going forward”
But you would say… ?>
1 Like
I would ask who gave you the authority to limit my choice?
And by what power do you enact that limit?
You gave me the authority to limit your choice. and by the power of national security we enact this limit…
may i ask you another question? what difference do you think it would make to ask a question or questions that are irrelevant?
Here is my point. do you think it changes the fact that Kennedy is dead, whether the people ask if he was shot in the front of the head or the back of the head? It wouldnt make any difference because POWER doenst ask for your permission… ITS ALREADY DONE so asking doesnt CHANGE anything.
This is my point. We gave them the power by asking needless questions instead of acting to secure our diving rights, Im on your side, I really am… I only hope to help pinpoint these issues due to the fact that the the source of the problem isnt them, the ones who take what they can with no regard to the consequences of the whole?
the FCC is just another branch of that corruption and control, consolidation of power, driven by greed. the people have given them the power, and authority by various means. simply a wild west with no sheriff in town. people get slapped around enough they just do what they are told.
How did I do that? You ask me did I want to go left or right and I say “by what power do you enforce me not choosing to stay put or go up?”
How is that me giving you any power? There is no inherent transfer of power in my skepticism of your abilty to enforce limiting my choice.
“what difference do you think it would make to ask a question or questions that are irrelevant?”
Difference to whom/what? You? Me? A hypothetic situation? Something irrelevant to you may be vital to me or vice versa.
Given that you in other places argue the perception of historical events is inaccurate, I put it to you that yes it does matter. If the shot is impossible, there is possibility that he is not, in fact, dead at all.
Ah and here we have the issue. I am not from a place where they have authority, and so I am not bound in any way by their rulings.
Not that I would feel bound if I did live in that country, though others may try to force their bindings on me, I am not able to be coerced into obeying.
I am by nature a creature who lives contrary to what is “popular”.
If the majority of people like it, I am inclined to distrust it.
follow that money and you shall have your answers. Kennedy is dead. The point I made was maybe not clear, asking questions regardless wont bring him back and it wont prove who killed him. That is the position of power. you can ask and protest all you want but he is dead and “they” killed him. This is no different than the FREEDOM of the Internet.
If I accept he is dead because you say so, then I would be giving you my free will to decide for myself.
Its teh idea that you have a choice, thats the illusion. you already made the choice. you are only here to understand why you made the choice. i thought youd figure that out by now.
A good summary on page two of this article:
The main take away being this:
'If people are genuinely in favor of making sure that history bends faster in the correct direction, it might be helpful to reflect on history and put more effort into winning the argument rationally rather than screaming in people’s faces.
Because the more the issue of net neutrality falls into a partisan ravine, the harder it will be to climb out in future.’
The difference is amazon and google became big without imposing content control on internet users. The big cable companies are just mad they didn’t get a piece of the pie and want to change the rules of the game so they don’t die off, it shouldn’t be allowed under any circumstances if you believe in true capitalism.
well yea, now that they see everything you do and think is online. Think about it, a huge exploit only to make you buy more crap you dont need… so they get fat n rich and we consume more and more… like we already arent in a ■■■■■■■ social or cultural decline lmao… and yet people want to save this? its too late imho… and the only way is thru it. but thats just my opinion.
Has this, like other “true” versions of other systems, existed yet? Asking for a friend.
The government should be there only to keep a level playing field. There is no reason why it can’t exist apart from government corruption. The idea itself is not bad, so I don’t know what the troll comment is for.
yea but this and eve online… come on. you know that is FAR from the truth…
or youve been drinking the coolaids again. come on man, I bet you believe that official 9/11 ■■■■■■■■ story they changed 7 times… LMAO
I don’t really understand what point you are trying to make. Can you be more clear?
I found from experience trying to “help others understand” doesnt really work. I shouldnt have said anything to begin with. Everyone will find out soon enough. human behavior is rather predictable when you study humans, culture and society, and history. The sphere is too big here… How can I help you to relate when you dont have the foundational understanding of how corruption, power and greed, AND humans for that matter, work. all you need to do is pick up a few history books mate.
It’s not what you said, it’s the way you was saying it that didn’t make any sense. Anyway, that’s not really the point I was making, nor do I disagree. What I was saying is that big companies should be allowed to die, rather than imposing rules to ensure they don’t, like the net neutrality repeal does.
atm it looks like its ‘supposedly’ only affecting USA, i dont see that model applying to Europe especially since we have so many free wifi spots and even more to come next year. Maybe in a few years we’d follow suit to a certain degree but only if its actually needed.
So I wouldnt state that it effects each and everyone of us as you are trying to do.
Nah, we have the equivalent of Net Neutrality as European law.
Don’t you know that that is the predominant viewpoint of US citizens? The world begins and ends in their country. Everyone outside of it are just lesser beings that can be invaded whenever it furthers the interests of the US.
That is exactly what capitalism is you insensitive clod. The government imposing rules on your free market is contrary to true capitalism. You want a market free of government interference? Then feel free to also deal with the consequences.
Hint: They won’t be pretty.
You know, you could just move out of your tiny bubble of greatest country in the world and move to another country.
I know, right?
Ahahhahahahaha, as if that would ever happen in the US. Thanks, I needed a good laugh.
*for US citizens. Most of the rest of the countries on this planet will be better off.
Now if you tell me you’re a US citizen and perhaps also believe in the free market, then I won’t be able to stop laughing for literally hours!
1 Like