SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the so-long,-interwebs,-it-was-nice-knowing-you dept.
The U.S. Federal Communications Commission next month is planning a vote to kill Obama-era rules demanding fair treatment of web traffic and may decide to vacate the regulations altogether, according to people familiar with the plans.
The move would reignite a years-long debate that has seen Republicans and broadband providers seeking to eliminate the rules, while Democrats and technology companies support them. The regulations passed in 2015 bar broadband providers such as AT&T Inc. and Comcast Corp. from interfering with web traffic sent by Google, Facebook Inc. and others.
[...] Pai plans to seek a vote in December, said two people who asked not to be identified because the matter hasn't been made public. As the head of a Republican majority, he is likely to win a vote on whatever he proposes.
[...] The agency declined to comment on the timing of a vote. "We don't have anything to report at this point," said Tina Pelkey, a spokeswoman for the commission.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 16 2017, @08:37PM (3 children)
You're missing some detail about how voluntary contracts and multiple enforcement agencies would work here.
I'm coining a new word for people like you, "evolutiotard": people who have a narrow understanding of evolution, generalizing with "survival of the fittest", and apply such concepts to every aspect of life.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 16 2017, @08:47PM (2 children)
It is YOUR implication that there must be an Intelligent Designer—you know, at least to get things started with a single cell or something.
That is what sounds like the conclusion of someone who has a narrow understanding.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 16 2017, @09:54PM (1 child)
Just when you think I couldn't "WTF??" any harder you chime in and prove me wrong. My point had nothing to do with religious beliefs or any other kind of "intelligent design".
I'll be kind enough to explain: some people view evolution as "survival of the fittest" and take only the competition / meritocracy aspect as a result. This is a narrow view that makes people think there is some Universal Law that means greed is good and people should be able to do whatever they want, thus creating an "optimal" society through this process of "evolution". It is narrow minded and we even have a term for it, Social Darwinists. For more info see: Survival of the fittest [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 17 2017, @05:54AM
I'm sorry that you don't understand what the other poster is saying.
Survival of the Fittest does not imply an inhuman process; after all, humans are part of that process.
Evolution just means variation and selection, which are 2 aspects of the process provided by a free market.