Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| From | Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.misc |
| Subject | Re: POTUS backs net neutrality |
| Date | 2014-11-13 11:26 +0000 |
| Organization | Piglet's Pickles & Preserves |
| Message-ID | <ccjir2F3gslU2@mid.individual.net> (permalink) |
| References | (5 earlier) <20141112144629.47927cb5.rsw@therandymon.com> <87tx24l9ry.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> <slrnm67bvv.dt.anthonyg@ma.sdf.org> <87ioikqiua.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> <slrnm67j5a.f3l.anthonyg@ma.sdf.org> |
On 2014-11-12, Anthony Giacalone <anthonyg@invalid.sdf.nospam.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Nov 2014 22:12:13 +0200, Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> wrote:
>> Anthony Giacalone <anthonyg@invalid.sdf.nospam.org>:
[27 lines snipped]
>>> State legislation isn't going to solve this one. Net neutrality is one
>>> of those all or nothing things which needs to be handled on a federal
>>> level.
>>
>> You have a pretty limited view of the Internet. How do Canada,
>> Australia, France and Lithuania factor in the "federal level?"
>
> Thanks for telling me what I know. I'm so glad people like you exist to
> remind me of these things!
>
> Canada, Australia, France, and Lithuania are different countries. I
> doubt that Comcast operates there...but I could be wrong, I suppose. And
> not at all set up legally like the United States. That's what we're
> discussing here, right? US law?
You are aware that Telecommunications standards are defined by the ITU
who are an arm of the UN? They are *exactly* the people who should be
doing this stuff.
--
Today is Boomtime, the 25th day of The Aftermath in the YOLD 3180
"I do not want people to be agreeable, as it saves me that trouble of
liking them." – Jane Austen
Back to comp.misc | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
POTUS backs net neutrality Hils <hils@saynotospam.net> - 2014-11-10 23:31 +0000
Re: POTUS backs net neutrality RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-11-11 08:05 +0000
Re: POTUS backs net neutrality Hils <hils@saynotospam.net> - 2014-11-11 09:10 +0000
Re: POTUS backs net neutrality Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2014-11-11 14:08 +0000
Re: POTUS backs net neutrality Anthony Giacalone <anthonyg@invalid.sdf.nospam.org> - 2014-11-11 19:20 +0000
Re: POTUS backs net neutrality RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-11-12 14:46 +0000
Re: POTUS backs net neutrality Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-11-12 17:26 +0200
Re: POTUS backs net neutrality Anthony Giacalone <anthonyg@invalid.sdf.nospam.org> - 2014-11-12 19:07 +0000
Re: POTUS backs net neutrality Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-11-12 22:12 +0200
Re: POTUS backs net neutrality Anthony Giacalone <anthonyg@invalid.sdf.nospam.org> - 2014-11-12 21:09 +0000
Re: POTUS backs net neutrality Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-11-13 00:27 +0200
Re: POTUS backs net neutrality Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2014-11-13 11:26 +0000
Re: POTUS backs net neutrality Anthony Giacalone <anthonyg@invalid.sdf.nospam.org> - 2014-11-13 14:44 +0000
Re: POTUS backs net neutrality Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-11-13 17:02 +0200
Re: POTUS backs net neutrality RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-11-14 16:18 +0000
Re: POTUS backs net neutrality Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2014-11-13 16:21 -0800
csiph-web