Hi, meet me.

I support internet fast lanes "if" they can be implemented without slowing any other connection speeds down to below what the customer actually pays for. I also support QOS prioritization of VoIP traffic.

I also think net neutrality can be realized today by enforcement of existing laws and rules. When an ISP sells you service advertised at 10 megs or up to 10 megs, if they purposely and intentionally slow any part of it below that 10 megs, they are not delivering the goods sold to the consumer. And no, up to is not a cop out because the up to number will never be above what they limit. That means if they limit a connection to 1 meg, regardless of what they sold you, they are delivering goods of up to 1 meg. But if they sell a 4 meg connection and Youtube wants to stream at 10 megs, I have no problem with them paying to do so as long as it doesn't slow anyone else speeds to below what they purchased.

Also, many of these ISPs get money from the governments to roll out broadband or service areas not profitable to them. Well, if they limit their service or any parts of the service to below 4 megs, it is technically not broadband and they would be in default. Also, if they manipulate packets in ways like with the bit torrent in which they injected packets to cause the connection to reset, wouldn't that be a copyright violation as well as under the fraud abuse laws? For instance, Ohio law considers it bait advertising to " Delivering offered goods or services which are unusable or impractical for the purposes represented or materially different from the offered goods or services. ".

But more than all, I think the way the FCC is trying to create and or change law by wrangling reinterpretations and classifications without any intervention of congress (elected officials) is dangerous to freedom and directly contradictory to democracy. This should be true whether you support it or not. Get it done right and get congress or even your local state governments to pass the laws. Even at the state level, the state can extend it's jurisdiction to actions by the same company in other states so if Verizon in Indian is barred from restricting packets based on payments from any third party, Verizon in California doing so for traffic originating from or destined for Indiana would put them in violation and under jurisdiction.

Looks like someone likes the troll mod.. That's critical thinking for ya, squash answers to questions asked- the mod must be a product of outcome based education.

We shouldn't challenge student's fixed beliefs? Or undermine parental authority? Those sound like usual and desired outcomes of critical thinking skills.

Yes, because the last thing we want is the child to possibly believe there is or may be a god, or that sharing is good, stealing is bad, murder is bad and you will be locked up for life unless you live in a state that will kill you too, that you should look both ways before crossing a street, cussing and swearing around people you do not know is impolite and still rude with ones you do know, or anything else parents instill as fixed beliefs with their authority. Well, that unless the child comes to those conclusions on their own through trial and error or whatever process he/she may choose to develop an understanding of them.

Yes, that sounds like a great thing.

And I'll admit that "focus on behavior modification" sounds like a code phrase. You seem to like this statement; could you translate it into language that I can understand?

Politifact has a writeup on it that explains it. Some of the links are dead though but it drops the meat right in the analysis.

From this write up

Opponents said the outcome-based approach was antithetical to critical thinking. They claimed it "dumbed down" curricula and influenced students to adopt liberal attitudes because the "outcome" of their studies was predetermined by academia.

In case you did not know, most conservatives think academia is fraught with liberals pushing their agenda which is why you can get Mumia Abu-Jamal speaking at a commencement ceremony and Condoleezza Rice and Ayaan Hirsi Ali, protested to the point they withdrew from speaking. The lists goes on.

Part of this is from The Naked Communist (1958) and School of Darkness by Bella V. Dodd but more recent claims have been made

You don't have to believe those claims, but you should believe that other do. That is what is meant by behavior modification as stated.

Nope, my theory is that the internet was indeed created for porn.

The integrated part was only to clarify that the bunk mate was not a woman. I also shouldn't have to remind you that don't ask don't tell came after arpanet, the internet, and openly serving gays happens only recently.

Bull.. The internet was specifically designed to get Asian porn on US shores and US bases as quickly as possible. People think it was about national security with arpanet but it was really about cold war soldiers needing something to look at besides their bunkmate. And this was before women were "integrated" in the military.

And? Is there a problem with that, morally? If so, can you please articulate it?

A "girly" UI? What, are you eight and stuck in a playground where that's actually a cutting insult? Grow up.

There has been what- 8 people associated with abprtion clinics who have been killed for that asdociation? I have found no indication that any church or church leadership was behind it or endorsed it or encouraged it either.

The Klan never was a church either. Of course christians made up the KKK and they attempted to use the bible yo justify their hatred but i do not exactly think it is the same.

Westboro is interesting though. As vile and insane as they were, they never advocated violence.

I think you missed an operative statement the parent made. "And try to kill in the name of". While the KKK might fit in there, or maybe at one time they would have, its only the idiots who try to kill in the name of that could be comparable.

So this excludes westboro. Would include a number of but not all klansmen, and about five anti abortionist in the US. I think you missed the limiter he put there "kill in the name off".

Yes it is sort of

It should be no different than any other evidence of a crime. If your car was stolen and used to rob a bank- or they just think it was-, similar circumstances would happen.

However, with the cash and asset forfieture it is a little backwards where the only evidence of any crime is the fact that it is in your posession and few times are there any charges filed at all.

But nontheless., there is a legal process no matter how horrid or abstract it may be. This does make it different than a law enforcement officer stealing identities and trying to impersonate people in order to ensnare people they otherwise would have no clue existed.

Oh.. and you do not have to convince me about how evil asset seizure is. I'm just saying at least there is a process.

They most certainly did vote to change the rules in the recent past. No one but you in this thread is denying that and we are actually discussing the fact it may have been limited to hudicial nominies and can just as easily be done again to seat a Surgeon General. My claim is the reason it has not happened is because even if they did, not enough democrats would vote for him to pass.

You mean except when they did it about a year ago to get around needing a super majority?

If it wasn't just done, your point would have more weight. But then i would point out that the position is not unmaned, there is an acting S.G. in place and has been ever since the post became vacant. Its just not a political shill doing the job right now.

Nice straw man. You have a lot to learn about liberty, but that goes without saying.

Enjoy your next coup. Maybe the next dictator will be the one who brings prosperity.

Appointing a political hack as "Ebola Czar" to shut the GOP up is the real world version of telling everyone to calm the fuck down and go the fuck home.

That's an interesting strategy.

1. Prove you're incompetent by appointing an unqualified person to an important leadership role during a crisis.
2. ???
3. Stay calm and PROFIT!