By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
badgenome said:
Normchacho said:

Uuuhhh? Why? You think it might be a good idea for ISPs to be able to control what content you have access to?

Who has a greater vested interest in preventing unfettered access to information: ISPs or the federal government?


ISPs cleary. The federal government is plenty good at keeping us from knowing things they don't want us to and are well aware of the consiquences of trying to censor the internet. ISPs on the other hand have a massive new opportunity to control there own market and choose the winners and losers on the internet all while pulling in mounds of previously untapped profits.

I understand the distrust of the federal government. But I am baffled at how many people think companies are any better. It should be obvious by now that a company will never go "ok, that's enough". There is also very little, if any guidlines that a company will stick to unless they are forced to. If a corporation were an animal and you stuck it in front of a mountain of food it would eat itself to death. A buisniness has one job, to have as much money coming in as possible while having as little go out as possible. Anything else is just an acessory to that goal.

If you need evidence I simply suggest you look up what happened the last time the banks collapsed.



Bet with Adamblaziken:

I bet that on launch the Nintendo Switch will have no built in in-game voice chat. He bets that it will. The winner gets six months of avatar control over the other user.