On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 1:29 AM, Mike Miller <mbmiller+l at gmail.com<mbmiller%2Bl at gmail.com> > wrote: > On Fri, 20 Aug 2010, Harry Penner wrote: > > > On Aug 19, 2010, at 16:48, Mike Miller <mbmiller+l at gmail.com<mbmiller%2Bl at gmail.com>> > wrote: > > > >> On Thu, 19 Aug 2010, Harry Penner wrote: > >> > >>> I'm making sweeping generalizations because although it may seem like a > >>> small technical issue it's subject to the same basic laws of > >>> governmental intervention as anything else. > >> > >> What are the "basic laws of governmental intervention?" You don't seem > >> like much of an expert to me, but maybe you can refer me to a text book > >> on this subject. Is this something that all experts in econ/poli-sci > >> agree on or is this just an idea that you are trying to promote in > >> opposition to the views of many experts? > > > > Who said I'm an expert, or that someone has to be an expert to ask you > > to think past the end of your nose? This is a LUG for crying out loud > > -- aren't we all independent thinkers here? > > You were telling us all how government works, what we ought to do with > regard to net neutrality, etc., but I think you don't know the first thing > about it. > > Actually I wasn't telling you what you ought to do with regard to net neutrality. I was asking you to think before doing anything. And maybe ease up a bit on the ad hominem. I'm not going to argue with you about who knows more about it -- neither of us has demonstrated any in-depth knowledge of it in this thread, but I'll grant you probably know more than I do about the specifics -- but I ask you again to think hard about what the consequences of such regulation might be. If we outlaw content meddling by ISPs, will it cause unmetered connection prices to go up or maybe be phased out more quickly than they otherwise would be? Will it affect the usability of VoIP or video streaming? If we're dead set on some regulation as the solution, is there a way to craft it to minimize those effects? Your point (in another thread) that we don't even know how the regulation would be worded isn't an argument for or against it, but it would certainly make me think twice. Surely you wouldn't support a regulation that would affect the entire Internet so broadly without knowing every letter of what's in it? > >>> Of course regulation is a double-edged sword. Some helps keep us > >>> safe, and some helps make us miserable. But all of it restricts our > >>> choices, because that's what regulations are designed to DO. > >> > >> If a government regulation prevents a corporation from poisoning your > >> drinking water and crippling you or killing your children, you actually > >> end up with more choices than you would have had if there had been no > >> regulation. > > > > No. > > Whatever. > > I spell "oops" differently, but your way is cooler. -Harry -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.mn-linux.org/pipermail/tclug-list/attachments/20100820/5435dfb6/attachment.htm