Does this ruling not apply to the current Net Neutrality controversy?

Nov 25, 2017 2:14 AM

TogNK

Views

163087

Likes

4360

Dislikes

150

now it's about throttling content creating competition.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Run into yet another net neutrality post:

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

even if this was true, US government doesn't give a shit about UN, they can simply overrule anything and nobody can say anything

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Speed Rate and cost of access are not terms of denial.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

The comments about the UN on this post are fucking cluster fuck

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Just like *checks books* literally all of our history, it’s about the money.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

They also said having kids is a human right. Big deal.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

The UN isn't a governing body, any declarations it makes are not binding.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Yeah because the UN has that kinda pull and "WTF Fun Facts" is an excellent source of information.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

That's a cool diagram.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Heavily Throttling =/= disconnecting

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Dude wtf fun fact #7221 said this is illegal !!

8 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 0

it's easy to just say things

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

I need to get off my phone anyways.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I'm all for net neutrality, but this was literally just one committee giving recommendations. There was no vote at all.

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

I'm not a huge for the public good type of guy but the internet changed our lives! It should be available to everyone like water! I can hope

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

Can they just charge Ajit with crimes against humanity already and call it a day? Please?

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 2

Since they aren't "taking away" the internet, it isn't breaking the rule

8 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 3

Yep

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

PAI Doesn't want you disconnected...he wants you to pay more so you can get your corporate filtered internet.

8 years ago | Likes 18 Dislikes 1

The US views international laws as more of suggestions

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Treaties are international law. UN General Assembly resolutions are suggestions that are not binding on anyone.

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

internet is a utility, just like electricity, and needs to be regulated as such.

8 years ago | Likes 91 Dislikes 46

I need electricy to pay bills... sorta like THEY need ME to have it... so why am I payong for it? Just like internet. Think debit machines.

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 9

You don't need it to pay your bills you can do it all the old fashion way.

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

The internet should stay a free trade of unregulated information. Otherwise we lose our voice and abilty to choose what info we get.

8 years ago | Likes 20 Dislikes 2

If the internet is a utility, then all of the internet should be regulated as such, not just 1 end point.

8 years ago | Likes 33 Dislikes 0

exactly.

8 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 1

I say hand over all internet regulations to IEEE. Every country should let IEEE determine regulations.

8 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 2

Bruh, the internet would be absolutely fantastic.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I think so. An organization that cares only about the advancement of technology should do well regulating it.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

do you pay more for better electricity or better water or better firemen or better police or better roads (fuck toll roads)

8 years ago | Likes 26 Dislikes 1

I mean, its about options. I wouldn't mind having a choice between a well-maintained toll rode or a free road that needs work

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The system we have now, most of the roads (at least near me) are shit. And they often have tolls too.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Why are you using WTF Facts as a source of info?

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

I'm going to go with "Was browsing wtf facts, saw this and figured it was worth posting." over "Oh man I need some facts on topic x, lets >

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

> go to WTF facts for info!"

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Yeah, I was cleaning my phone, saw this and legit wondered if it applied

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Go go gadget logic thoughts!

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

And right to healthcare is a human right. Doesn't mean anything in USA either

8 years ago | Likes 234 Dislikes 26

Broke my hand, needed an op, all I paid was my cab fare to and from because I can’t drive and my £2 painkillers. Less than £20 in total.

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 2

To give someone else healthcare should be an innate desire, but no one is owed services from another person.

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 15

Build my highway bitch

8 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 2

Public roads are a wonderful thing and I think it's a thing the government should do....but it's not a human right either.

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 9

How about the right to fair and speedy trial?

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Habius corpus, that’s customary int’ law and is a fundamental, no derogable right

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Unless you are accused of terrorism that is...

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Just because you have a right to it doesn’t mean it’s free.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

*laughs Canadianly* ...oh, I'm sorry. It just seems enough of you want it that way. Sorry. But seriously, it's fucked. Sorry.

8 years ago | Likes 35 Dislikes 12

Majority of us want a single payer system that doesn't fuck us all over with overinflated prices on an inelastic commodity like

8 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 2

staying alive. Polls show upwards of 70% of Americans are in favor, but it's the politicans that ardently oppose.

8 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 1

Few can be enough, as long as they're the ones with all the power, and stand to benefit from the current system more.

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

The whole thing makes me sad. Like genuinely sad.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Lol, the UN has zero authority over the US decision to regulate the backbone of the Internet (all located in the US).

8 years ago | Likes 369 Dislikes 34

You self centered idiot. The backbone of the internet can't all be in the us. Do you even think before you open your mouth?

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

Backbone of the internet? You watch too much South Park?

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

“The U.N. Has zero authority” there fixed it

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Actually we dont the largest and most buisy internet exchange is in Amsterdam.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

That's the thing. The US isn't opting to regulate the backbone. They are opting to deregulate the last mile providers. Tier 3 providers

8 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 0

are not the backbone of the internet. They just build hardware up in the "last mile" and have agreements with tier 1 and tier 2 operators

8 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

to work things out. They run lines/nodes regionally to tap into the actual backbones of level 3 and other tier 1 providers.

8 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

ICANN has been moving pretty heavily away from.the US since like 2014 I think, specifically so the internet isn't tied to one country.

8 years ago | Likes 65 Dislikes 1

But thats not the backbone of the Internet, which is still based in the US.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Well, what do you mean by the backbone of the internet? I'd say the DNS system management and IP address assignments would be it.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Thanks Obama

8 years ago | Likes 17 Dislikes 3

For real though, thanks Obama

8 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 2

If it's reclassified as a utility like water & electricity then providers can regulate how the utility is used.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

[deleted]

[deleted]

8 years ago (deleted Aug 9, 2022 9:55 PM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

That's the significance of the ruling. Water companies can't charge you more to wash car or bathe. As a utility it nullifies net neutrality

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

How? Isn't that the point of net neutrality?

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

As a leading country in internet activity, it would be irresponsible to ignore it as a utility. Human rights violation.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Couldn't Facebook, Apple and Google and Netflix just move out of the usa though?

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

They could but they would have to pinky swear to stop using tax havens depending where they move to.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Yeah but with exception of google they don’t provide internet service. I’m lucky to be in a place with google fiber but the options are very

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Limited in most of the country. Comcast and AT&T will fuck you over any chance they can

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

I'm currently wondering just how many internet companies are going to relocate to nations with more amenable net neutrality legislation.

8 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

Zero

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It wouldnt matter. The ISPs would (theoretically) throttle whatever URL any company provides for US users, and they can easily monitor this

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 2

That's because USA doesn't sign International treaties because it breaks them all, mainly warm crimes and human rights.

8 years ago | Likes 87 Dislikes 22

They’ve actually signed many treaties but human rights ones have the least and weakest enforcement so US takes advantage all the time.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

So sad, so true

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

You sign them, you just don't ratify them.

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Damn them and those warm crimes, fiddling with the thermostat and what not

8 years ago | Likes 85 Dislikes 3

This is why europe is so much better than the US of A. EIGHTEEN DEGREES IS EIGHTEEN DEGREES.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

v

8 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

Warm crimes are now a thing

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

You are hereby charged with crimes against the warmth. How do you plead?

8 years ago | Likes 25 Dislikes 1

"Cool."

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Not warmly your honour

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

8 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

Not chilly.

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

You can't break a treat you're not a signatory too though.

8 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

If it’s customary international law then yes you can.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Stop right there. If you're a sovereign country, how can you break a treaty you're not a part of?

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It's not so much a treaty as it is a norm. Parts of a treaty can become a norm and even other countries' laws can become a norm. 1/2

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I'd break a treat, and give you half.

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

It's very early, I haven't had enough sleep, and I can't quite English yet. :(

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Our government can’t even formally define terrorism because every definition they come up with would technically apply to us also

8 years ago | Likes 20 Dislikes 2

America. Founded by terrorists for terrorists.

8 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 5

Theres not many countries that weren't founded by terrorists. Keep that in mind when you blow up the senate.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

Joint Publication 1-02, DOD Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms, page 232 has the official US Government Definition for you.

8 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

Lmao i actually went and downloaded the pdf haha, what is it actually blank for?

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

Oh wait i looked at 202 in my pdf viewer I'm stupid

8 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

No it doesn't. They don't want to disconnect anyone

8 years ago | Likes 699 Dislikes 12

Exactly. How else would they make all of the money?

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

They want to connect everyone but only to very specific things at grossly inflated prices to maximize their bottom line

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

For a UN ruling to affect the US, it needs a 2/3rds majority vote by the Senate.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

THATS LIKE CUTTING THE LEGS OFF AND SAYING YOURE STILL ALIVE !

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

They want to control information, not disconnect it. You'll have access to whatever they deem appropriate, like helicopter parents...

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

That is debatable. If these things were that simple, there wouldn't be a need for professors of law, or the study of law in general.

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Btw, I'm not saying you are wrong, because I wouldn't know. But it is at least not at simple as your comment presents it :)

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

No. They just want to control what you see, take your information, sell your information, overcharge you, and brainwash people.

8 years ago | Likes 33 Dislikes 8

"just"

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Sounds like they found a loophole.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The current "government" in the us (if you can call it that) is doing everything in it's power to turn it into a communist dictatorship.

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 14

son, do you know what words mean?

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

I do werdz gud.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

They only want the ability to control what information you see

8 years ago | Likes 143 Dislikes 9

I do wish politicians would stop seeing 1984 as a how to guide, I’m still waiting on trump to revise the dictionary -

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

And the government to stamp out terrorism by saying terrorism is caused by wrong think, he’s how not to commit a thought crime.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I mean... in a way, all the internet is about that. There is censorship all over the web. There's so much content, something has to be 1st.

8 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 2

Yeah but "the best stuff rises to the top" is much different than "watch/read this because you picked us as a provider"

8 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

That's cute that you think Google puts only the best result at the top.

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 9

You don't have to use just google. People use Bing for porn.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Yeah, thats like comparing a car scratch to a train smashing into that same car and saying its the same thing so no bother.

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

(Warning: Long) You're right plus: the UN didn't actually declare this. A UN appointee: stated in a report (not actually legally binding:1/?

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

it's an argument for a series of suggestions) that it is against UN law for a government to cut access to the Internet from people is 2/?

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

*for a series of suggestions he was making)

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

against article 19, paragraph 3 of the OHCHR: which basically says you have the right to share your ideas and speech/writing, but with 3/?

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

paragraph 3 stating (and I'm writing it in plain English here:) the government of a country can and has the right to remove access to 4/?

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

platforms for expressing ideas if: it is violating intellectual property rights, libelous, a threat to national security, illegal, 5/?

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

like the UN means anything

8 years ago | Likes 1626 Dislikes 59

It sets legal precedent which will be used in actual court cases

8 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 19

How r u being downvoted?

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

The only time the UN means anything is when powerful nations like the US enforce their rulings. Without the US itself....good luck.

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Love to meet up punk. Time for you to take knap

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 7

You’re a daisy if you do

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Um. What does that mean?

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

8 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

oh hey its the time machine

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

UN = Useful for Nothing

8 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 4

Yeah totally, fuck CEDAW and UNCAT right?

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Yes. They UN-Nazi'd the world. Brought to you by Carls Jr.

8 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 4

Idiocracy

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Welcome to Costco. I love you.

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Sanction me. Sanction me with your army.... This is yellow cake bitch.

8 years ago | Likes 109 Dislikes 2

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

Don't drop that shit

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Dont worry. I got it wrapped up in this special CIA napkin

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It means United Nations look it up

8 years ago | Likes 871 Dislikes 27

burn

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

8 years ago | Likes 19 Dislikes 1

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Got em

8 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 1

8 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

Source?

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

8 years ago | Likes 53 Dislikes 1

8 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

This reply is gold.

8 years ago | Likes 30 Dislikes 2

8 years ago | Likes 71 Dislikes 1

I just want you to know that if this comment is sincere you’re incredibly wrong and just don’t understand int’ law or the UN.

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 6

Mugabe as good will ambassador

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

140 characters isn't nearly enough to explain, but suffice it to say the UN is effectively powerless to enforce anything.

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Then what about all the courts, tribunals and jurisprudence? Have you not heard of customary int’ law?

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Any country can choose not to do what the UN says. It's fear of the power of other countries that enforces international law.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

What do you mean by power? States settle disputes in the International court of justice

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It's just a club for the kids to talk about stuff they couldn't act on.

8 years ago | Likes 61 Dislikes 11

This is not right.

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

The United Nations does a lot.. from promoting women rights, to fighting hunger. I am astounded your comment has gotten so many points.

8 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

(1) The UN does a lot, just not as much as it could. A lot of conflict is likely averted due to communication possible through the UN.

8 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

(2/2) There's also the matter of sharing resources & occasional combined military action (like in Somalia during the Black Hawk incident).

8 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

The UN acts on stuff all the time

8 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 23

Just not well and on most of the big problems

8 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 3

lol like wha

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 3

Once they said "hey guys can we not have nuclear weapons" but nobody cares so...

8 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

Like the gulf and Korean wars

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

You mean the US and some people they came with them? Talkong more about how nearly the entire continent of Africa has been war and poverty

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

It's because nobody wants it to. If it had more teeth people would throw a fit about the UN interfering with sovereignty, more than already.

8 years ago | Likes 51 Dislikes 3

The main reason the UN exists is to facilitate diplomacy between the 5 permanent security council members. Anything else is just a bonus

8 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Int’ law is about compromise and working together.

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Its also because they do ridiculous shit like the Durban conferences. Supposed to be about racism but ends up just bashing Israel every time

8 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 11

Agreed

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The word you are looking for is "discrimination" at most..racism does not apply to nationality or religious belief.

8 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad gave am address at Durban II, in which is said the holocaust was an "ambiguous and dubious question"

8 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 4

Huh what does your statement mean? Can you rephrase it for clarity?

8 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

Ambiguous means inexact, and dubious is not reliable/doubtable. Basically calling into question if the holocaust happened.

8 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1