0
43

[–] Kal 0 points 43 points (+43|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Patriot Act doesn't mean patriotic.

0
4

[–] Thisismyvoatusername 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

There is a huge misconception about this one. Many people mistakenly seem to think the purpose of making the law's name into the acronym USA PATRIOT was intended as a reference to patriotism. In fact, it is a reference to the Patriot missile system and intended as a signal that Raytheon is a preferred provider of military hardware to the US Army (USA).

1
17

[–] Greenzero86 1 points 17 points (+18|-1) ago 

Social security has nothing to do with security. The Federal reserve is neither federal nor a reserve.

1
17

[–] Phuck_Yu 1 points 17 points (+18|-1) ago 

2nd amendment doesn't mean number two.

1
1

[–] Little2934 1 points 1 points (+2|-1) ago 

I like your user name, and poignant point, goat.

0
9

[–] Metanoiac 0 points 9 points (+9|-0) ago  (edited ago)

War is Peace

Freedom is Slavery

Ignorance is Strength

0
8

[–] 22jam22 0 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago 

Why is every fucking goverment bill named exactly the oppisite of its true purpose! Thry literaly throw this shit in our face.

0
10

[–] ihaphleas 0 points 10 points (+10|-0) ago 

Because we live in an Orwellian world.

0
7

[–] koduu 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago 

OK, could someone pls explain why net neutrality somehow gets hate?

Like honestly, could someone give an ELI5 for me on the good and bad that Net Neutrality in its current form does and why the change would be better. Also, please no 42D chess BS.

3
15

[–] DestroyerOfSaturn 3 points 15 points (+18|-3) ago 

1
9

[–] uvulectomy 1 points 9 points (+10|-1) ago  (edited ago)

Someone will chime in with more details soon, I'm sure. But my issue is this:

If Reddit, Facebook, Google, Twitter, etc. are all pushing incredibly hard to make "Net Neutrality" a thing, why is that? All these companies have proven time and again they are hell bent on controlling everything we see online so that the only narrative allowed is the one they deem appropriate.

Why would the biggest censorship proponents be all-in for a policy that is supposed to make the internet immune to censorship? If the rules truly made the net free and neutral, they would be unable to stop "wrongthink".

So my aversion comes from that simple fact. If the companies who, through their actions, have shown to be actively hostile to the free and open exchange of ideas and information are for this policy, then it's a safe bet it's not good for anyone except them.

Edit: "from" to "to"

2
9

[–] NYC_LA 2 points 9 points (+11|-2) ago 

If Reddit, Facebook, Google, Twitter, etc. are all pushing incredibly hard to make "Net Neutrality" a thing, why is that?

And on the other side it’s Comcast, ATT, Time Warner and Virizon pushing to destroy net neutrality. The most tone-def monopolistic anti-consumer companies all united. Why is that?

1
2

[–] Wharleas 1 points 2 points (+3|-1) ago 

Also, it's not like we had actual net neutrality, just some regulation calling itself that.

1
1

[–] retprob 1 points 1 points (+2|-1) ago 

I applaud your logic. This is the whole NN thing in a nutshell.

4
1

[–] blipblipbeep 4 points 1 points (+5|-4) ago 

I am from Australia were there is no real policies forcing NN although, we have many internet providers all scrambling to get peoples attention by providing the equivalent of NN to their customers.

America has providers that monopolize internet services across entire states and lobby congress to maintain that monopoly. American NN was in place to stop those few monopolizing providers from monopolizing further by doing things like blocking upstart/new providers from offering better deals to the customers of the monopolizing providers over their networks without paying a fee, and that is literally just the tip of the iceberg.

American mega providers like Comcast are driven by greed and have little to no care for their customer base, and now with the abolition of NN, they are free to care even less.

Have you ever heard the saying, 'The enemy of my enemy is my friend'? The reason internet sites(not providers) like Google, reddit, Netflix and many more, are pro NN is because without NN the providers can and will over time use their monopoly of providing internet to the people to extort monies from the sites so the sites can have access to the provider customers. Once again just the tip of the iceberg.

This is truly a sad yet mostly unrecognized day for the majority of internet users in America.

peace...

0
4

[–] Charlez6 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

Why would you think that more regulation will fix the problems created by regulation?

The government must love people like you. No matter how badly they shaft you, you go back begging and pleading on your knees for them to save you.

1
3

[–] emtpayislow 1 points 3 points (+4|-1) ago 

Net neutrality makes it harder for small isp's to compete with comcast.

I laugh when i see comcast market / monopoly. I pay 160 a month for 12mb speed. I have 2 choices, satellite or my isp. My isp is at least unlimited.

0
0

[–] SquarebobSpongebutt 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

America has providers that monopolize internet services across entire states and lobby congress to maintain that monopoly.

That is not really true. The problem is not at the Congressional level. The problem is at the local level. Control over where companies can provide internet access is controlled by local boards that divide up territory. This is supposed to ensure all parts of town get access by giving companies some high income areas and some low income areas to balance things out, but the reality is that it ensures most people only have 1 decent provider. I have recently found that I have 3 available. Two of them have a 300GB limit per month and provide speeds of 10 or 50 Mb. One provides 500 Mb with no limit. In other parts of town the first two provide 100-500 Mb with those same limits while the no limit provider only has 10-25 Mb.

0
4

[–] acheron2012 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

You have to be a special kind of idiot to keep falling for government NEWSPEAK after all these decades.

0
0

[–] greycloud 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

some nuspeak is natural. for instance, the government didn't change the meaning of the word "bitch", the government didn't create the word "twerk" and the like. how people use words changes the meaning of the words over time. the government is sometimes responsible for this change in use of words, but more often small subcultures will coin a phrase and spread it to the world. for a while there was a manufactured attempt at nuspeak on voat, attempting to change the meaning of the word "google".

0
3

[–] ihaphleas 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Orwell, why did the wrong people learn the wrong lessons from you?

0
2

[–] psimonster 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

What wrong lessons? 1984 taught the control freaks that they can, and indeed will, have their way. Oh! you didn't like seeing Winston broken at the end and thought that everyone should see it the same way: that we should avoid going down the road to that pitiful end. The psychos read that and said, FUCK YES!

load more comments ▼ (13 remaining)