Forum Register TCG Mobile Casino Live Posting Feed Garage Arcade Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   The Chicago Garage > General Discussion > Off Topic

User Tag List

Like Tree94Likes

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 12-14-2017, 01:25 PM   #26
Harbor Master
 
Yaj Yak's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 87,144
Casino cash: $136819000
19.78 per day
Default

in4anonymousattackingshit
RICH17, ilikemtb999 and ragingclue like this.
__________________
01 525i
01 turbo pricks
13 gas 3500hd cclb

Quote:
Originally Posted by Outlaw View Post
TCG: We pull vanity fair models in our F150ís because Teslaís are unsafe.
Yaj Yak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2017, 01:37 PM   #27
rumble baby rumble
 
Blood on Blood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 35,652
Casino cash: $112490300
6.88 per day
Default

From what I’m gathering, the service provider can charge you for accessing any or particular sites.

The service provider can slow your bandwidth to particular sites, during times of day or as they see fit.
__________________
Dave
17 Mustang GT
17 Pilot AWD
15 Elantra
Blood on Blood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2017, 01:37 PM   #28
Harbor Master
 
Yaj Yak's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 87,144
Casino cash: $136819000
19.78 per day
Default

where's our @tinfoilhat update
Yaj Yak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2017, 02:04 PM   #29
 
cdh027's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,606
Casino cash: $24238000
0.65 per day
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blood on Blood View Post
Folks going to be charged to watch Pornhub, Redtube, etc.
Not my fucking redtube!!!!!

ktraver97ss, cacicgtp7 and DEEZUZ like this.
__________________
Fiber makes me sad.


1993 vibrant red Cobra - sold
2003 silver Cobra convertible - sold
2013 deep impact blue Shelby - sold
2018 admiral blue Z06/Z07

2017 Suburban Premier - wifes daily
2018 Denali HD - my junk
(CST 8" lift with FOX 2.0 LSC's)
2016 Cruze Limited - daily for the daily
cdh027 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2017, 02:10 PM   #30
 
ragingclue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,745
Casino cash: $25593500
0.87 per day
Default

Got damn, so glad I hoarded everybody else's porn DVDs while in the Corps.

Y'all were preparing for the wrong apocalypse.
ragingclue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2017, 02:13 PM   #31
Certified Dirty 'Ole Man & GM/Holden Nutswinger
 
cmntmxr57's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: CHICAGO
Posts: 8,945
Casino cash: $28414000
2.28 per day
Default

I was going to ask what happens to Pronhub?

Will I be having to dig out the good ole DVD's?
__________________


Cool GM Products
2004 Pontiac GTO - Mods? Yes.
2006 Cadillac STS-V - Mods? Yes.
2009 Pontiac G8 GT - Mods? Yes.
2009 Chevrolet Impala SS - Stock
1999 Chevrolet Suburban - Plow beast

Shitty Chrysler Products
2015 Chrysler Town & Country Limited Platinum Stow-N-Go owns all
2007 Chrysler Town & Country Limited Stow-N-Go owns all
cmntmxr57 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2017, 02:16 PM   #32
rumble baby rumble
 
Blood on Blood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 35,652
Casino cash: $112490300
6.88 per day
Default

Net neutrality: Here's what Thursday's vote to repeal is really all about - Dec. 14, 2017
Blood on Blood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2017, 02:29 PM   #33
Certified Dirty 'Ole Man & GM/Holden Nutswinger
 
cmntmxr57's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: CHICAGO
Posts: 8,945
Casino cash: $28414000
2.28 per day
Default

Will there be any appeals?

I mean in any legal case, no one just settles with the first verdict and appeal everything.
cmntmxr57 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2017, 02:30 PM   #34
Just Grazing
 
VenomInside's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: SFO
Posts: 24,187
Casino cash: $19317200
4.44 per day
Default

time to go find my porn dvds.

__________________
2018 WRX - Performance Pkg - Short Throw - etc.
2019 White Silver Metallic Jetta SEL
VenomInside is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2017, 02:32 PM   #35
Do people even read this? COCKSUCKAS
 
tinfoilhat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Riding the Hubble
Posts: 35,906
Casino cash: $168534501
8.23 per day
Default

Nothings gonna happen for months and there's still ways legally to stop it in the works.

I hope ISPs dont be fucking retards about this. But if they do, i can see an Internet 2.0 booming up fairly quickly to get around ISPs
__________________
"It's never too cold for swamp ass."

XBO - NinjaTurtlThong
DD - 06 Cobalt SS/SC

tinfoilhat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2017, 02:39 PM   #36
I'm not one of your 'shit-hole' buddies!
 
blakbearddelite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: South Elgin, IL
Posts: 24,193
Casino cash: $9374504
5.54 per day
Default

If my wife thinks we have too much sexy time now, just wait until I can't get free pr0n anymore. She may end up consenting to having a girl on the side.
__________________
2015 Mustang GT - KB2.8 and other goodies
2015 Infiniti Q50
blakbearddelite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2017, 03:45 PM   #37
Not Politically Correct
 
nytebyte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 7,243
Casino cash: $36823800
1.30 per day
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VenomInside View Post
time to go find my porn dvds.

You have DVD's?!!

I gotta dust off these suckers. This was before boob implants were invented.

VenomInside and ragingclue like this.
nytebyte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2017, 03:56 PM   #38
Just Grazing
 
VenomInside's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: SFO
Posts: 24,187
Casino cash: $19317200
4.44 per day
Default

I still have VHS somewhere.
VenomInside is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2017, 04:18 PM   #39
 
Maro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 127
Casino cash: $9683596
0.03 per day
Default

Thanks, Trump.
Maro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2017, 04:19 PM   #40
Banned
 
SMKE EM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: NWI
Posts: 717
Casino cash: $8015000
0.76 per day
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maro View Post
Thanks, Pai.
*fixed
SMKE EM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2017, 04:27 PM   #41
 
Maro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 127
Casino cash: $9683596
0.03 per day
Default

Their mistake was not naming Net Neutrality The Internet Freedom act, or something similar. No one would dare repealing anything with freedom in the title.
Maro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2017, 04:33 PM   #42
Banned
 
SMKE EM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: NWI
Posts: 717
Casino cash: $8015000
0.76 per day
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maro View Post
Their mistake was not naming Net Neutrality The Internet Freedom act, or something similar. No one would dare repealing anything with freedom in the title.
Lol, Usually things with the word "Freedom" or "Liberty" or "Restoration" etc etc mean literally exactly the opposite for legislative purposes, sad isn't it?
blck10th likes this.
SMKE EM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2017, 04:52 PM   #43
I say what everyone thinks
 
ktraver97ss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Roselle, IL
Posts: 13,440
Casino cash: $29931213
3.12 per day
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blakbearddelite View Post
If my wife thinks we have too much sexy time now, just wait until I can't get free pr0n anymore. She may end up consenting to having a girl on the side.
See, my insider sources just got me ahead of the game.
__________________
ktraver97ss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2017, 04:58 PM   #44
Go ahead. I'll catch up.
 
Flyn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Selling homes on the Gulf Coast of Florida
Posts: 45,089
Casino cash: $225061900
8.07 per day
Default

ISPs won't be quick to use the new rules to limit customers.

That said, the FCC needs to be reminded who they work for.
Flyn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2017, 05:01 PM   #45
 
Maro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 127
Casino cash: $9683596
0.03 per day
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyn View Post
That said, the FCC needs to be reminded who they work for.
Verizon? Comcast?
Mook, Yaj Yak, radioguy6 and 6 others like this.
Maro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2017, 05:28 PM   #46
Doing the jobs nobody wants to
 
Mr_Roboto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Joliet
Posts: 11,214
Casino cash: $19024000
4.17 per day
Default

The thing I find funny is that companies like Twitter, Yahoo, Apple, Amazon, Google etc. all have/want to have their own walled gardens where they censor people with virtually no consequence then complain about the ISPs being able to do the same to them.

What I don't like about that is now they can do the same PC douche shit that the above companies have done forever. "We think that this is against some SJW agenda we have, null route for you."
Ryan02Stang likes this.
Mr_Roboto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2017, 06:28 PM   #47
And doggone it, people like me.
 
Jean Ralphio's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 16,768
Casino cash: $35173580
4.15 per day
Default

In an event that marked the end of Western civilization and the simultaneous destruction of capacity for human happiness, the FCC voted 3-2 to end net neutrality on Thursday. Immediately, Leftist Twitter leapt to the worst possible conclusions:





Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY), whose state is covered with toll roads, tweeted this:




The level of panic set off by the end of net neutrality is utterly out of proportion to the actual effect that end is likely to have. The basic debate over net neutrality is actually a reasonable one: is the best way to ensure a better internet for consumers to ban internet service providers (ISPs) from charging certain content providers more for their use of bandwidth than others, or is it to free ISPs to charge what they want, thereby incentivizing ISPs to compete with one another to offer different services at different prices?

On the one hand, there are those who argue that the current ISP oligopoly that exists in many areas of the country must be curbed to prevent monopolistic practices; on the other hand, there are those who argue that regulating ISPs as public utilities prevents new, small ISPs from entering the market, and stops current oligopoly beneficiaries from investing in new technology to forestall such competition. Ajit Pai, current head of the FCC, argues that ďamong our nationís 12 largest Internet service providers, domestic broadband capital expenditures decreased by 5.6%, or $3.6 billion, between 2014 and 2016, the first two years of the Title II era.Ē For making this point, Pai has been subjected to serious threats to safety.

This is a reasonable debate. Hereís whatís not reasonable: the suggestion that your internet use is likely to change radically from what it was in 2015, before net neutrality went into effect. Hereís what else isnít reasonable: people of the Left who think that Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter operate fine in the free market, and that consumers donít have to worry about discrimination thanks to open competition, but that the same doesnít apply to ISPs.

In any case, the doom and gloom are wildly overstated. If we really wanted to open up the internet, weíd truly need to focus not on national policy and major corporations, but on local regulatory regimes that restrict the building of new broadband networks.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/24691...ts-ben-shapiro
Jean Ralphio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2017, 07:18 PM   #48
And doggone it, people like me.
 
Jean Ralphio's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 16,768
Casino cash: $35173580
4.15 per day
Default

Ben Shapiro's Interview With FCC Chairman Ajit Pai

Pai: "Hell hath no fury like a regulator bored."

On Wednesday, on the eve of the huge vote regarding net neutrality, Daily Wire Editor-in-Chief Ben Shapiro interviewed FCC chairman Ajit Pai, who is in favor of revoking the regulatory regime put in place by the Obama administration in 2015.

After noting Pai has received death threats catalyzed by his support of reversing net neutrality, Shapiro asked Pai about the basics of the issue: what is net neutrality and why should anyone care about it?

Pai responded:

The first part of that is a very difficult question. Itís one of the most successful marketing slogans of all time; after all, who could be against neutrality? The other problem is that itís been around for a number of years and itís morphed to mean essentially whatever people want it to mean. But at the end of the day, what it means to most advocates is putting the government, bureaucrats and lawyers here in Washington, in charge of how the internet is governed. And thatís the basic question. If you want the government to start running the internet, then you favor net neutrality; if you favor a free market, as I do, and as many of the other people do, then you want the light touch approach we had prior to 2015, when these regulations were imposed.


Shapiro said that what he understood was that net neutrality is designed so that all of the people putting content online pay the same amount for putting their content online, regardless of how much bandwidth they are using. Thus a company like Netflix pays the same amount as a single individual, and so ending net neutrality would allow internet providers to charge differently for various pieces of content uploaded to the internet, and would allow people to download content differently to get a different subscription plan from different providers.

Pai answered:

Thatís basically correct; essentially, net neutrality involves regulating all of these companies like a utility, treating your internet service provider as you would your water company or electric company or subway system Ö the internet is not like any of those things; itís certainly important, increasingly, in our daily lives; but the internet also scales dramatically over time. Twenty years ago, you were talking about 28k modems and AOL CD-Roms in the mail and e-mail being the killer app; now weíre talking about gigabit fiber and 4G LTE and high-definition wireless streaming. The way the internet has developed is scalable, so to speak; in the way that utilities, as we traditionally think about them, are not.

And the argument that Iíve made is that treating the internet like another slow-moving utility guarantees that what youíre going to have is a slow-moving utility providing the internet. Thatís the last thing that I think consumers want. They seem to want better, faster, cheaper internet access, not another DMV in their lives.


Shapiro stated that the opposition to reversing net neutrality is based in part on dismissing the claim that reversing net neutrality would lead to more open competition, that local monopolies and local regulations make it impossible to have numerous internet providers in a given area.

Pai responded:

Two different points: I agree that we need to have more competition, and thatís why the 11 months that Iíve been in office as chairman of the FCC, weíve taken a number of initiatives to promote a lot more competition, getting a wireless spectrum put there for wireless carriers to use; making it easier for smaller wireless providers to enter the market place; getting the next generation of satellite companies into the marketplace to provide an alternative to the terrestrial folks. So weíre promoting more competition that way.

Number two: these heavy-handed regulations imposed by the FCC in 2015 take us in the opposite direction. They make it harder ó itís already hard as it is for a lot of these smaller internet service providers ó to build a service case for deploying internet infrastructure, especially in rural and low-income urban areas. These regulations make it even harder. In the last week alone, Iíve spoken to small internet service providers that nobody has even heard of, from Minnesota and Montana, who have said that these regulation make it harder to raise capital, to build a business case for deployment, and to actually spend the money and the time building out these networks.

And so, ironically, these rules take us closer to an oligopoly, or monopoly in some of these situations. And so the solution, to me, is get rid of the regulations that are standing in the way of competition, not preemptively regulating how the internet operates right here in Washington.

Shapiro asked why there was so much ire and hostility for those who contemplated reversing net neutrality, whether it was Pai getting death threats or blasts Shapiro himself received after putting out a video simply explaining the issue in basic terms. He asked, ďIs it just because of the propaganda thatís put out, people think that the next thing that is going to happen is somebodyís going to come along, take their internet away, force them to pay a fortune for Hulu or Netflix or for email that theyíre going to parcel out, all of this because now youíre giving Comcast an opportunity to screw everyone?Ē

Pai answered:
I think the charitable explanation is that the internet is increasingly important in our lives; we rely on it from the minute we wake up almost until the minute we go to sleep every night. The less charitable explanation is ideology; when you have some people, especially those who are committed to government regulation as a religion, essentially, who go around saying the internet is about to be broken, democracy is about to be destroyed, free expression and speech online is about to be threatened, and here is a picture of the guy whoís doing it, that is an ideological commitment that has nothing to do with the facts and has everything to do with the ideology, which is the government should rule everything, any dissenting views should be squelched, and anybody who advocates those views should be demonized personally.
Pai concluded, ďAs Iíve often said, hell hath no fury like a regulator bored; so weíre trying to infuse more of the free market approach here at the FCC to make sure that we let the private sector do the heavy lifting, not the bureaucrats here in Washington.Ē

See video here:
Chester Copperpot likes this.
Jean Ralphio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2017, 08:40 PM   #49
Aka "That Focus RS Guy"
 
Thirdgen89GTA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Buffalo Grove
Posts: 9,958
Casino cash: $96151300
3.12 per day
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nytebyte View Post
You have DVD's?!!

I gotta dust off these suckers. This was before boob implants were invented.

Only losers buy Porn on VHS and Betamax.

The Elite buy it on Laserdisc!
__________________
Toy: 1989 Pontiac TransAm GTA | LT1 M6 Swap | Cammed, AFR 195s, LTs, SLP 2otL Catback
Daily Driver: 2017 Focus RS | Frozen White | RS2 Package | 350hp AWD Goodness.


Thirdgen89GTA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2017, 10:03 PM   #50
Doing the jobs nobody wants to
 
Mr_Roboto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Joliet
Posts: 11,214
Casino cash: $19024000
4.17 per day
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Senor Deplorable View Post
Ben Shapiro's Interview With FCC Chairman Ajit Pai

Pai: "Hell hath no fury like a regulator bored."

On Wednesday, on the eve of the huge vote regarding net neutrality, Daily Wire Editor-in-Chief Ben Shapiro interviewed FCC chairman Ajit Pai, who is in favor of revoking the regulatory regime put in place by the Obama administration in 2015.

After noting Pai has received death threats catalyzed by his support of reversing net neutrality, Shapiro asked Pai about the basics of the issue: what is net neutrality and why should anyone care about it?

Pai responded:

The first part of that is a very difficult question. It’s one of the most successful marketing slogans of all time; after all, who could be against neutrality? The other problem is that it’s been around for a number of years and it’s morphed to mean essentially whatever people want it to mean. But at the end of the day, what it means to most advocates is putting the government, bureaucrats and lawyers here in Washington, in charge of how the internet is governed. And that’s the basic question. If you want the government to start running the internet, then you favor net neutrality; if you favor a free market, as I do, and as many of the other people do, then you want the light touch approach we had prior to 2015, when these regulations were imposed.


Shapiro said that what he understood was that net neutrality is designed so that all of the people putting content online pay the same amount for putting their content online, regardless of how much bandwidth they are using. Thus a company like Netflix pays the same amount as a single individual, and so ending net neutrality would allow internet providers to charge differently for various pieces of content uploaded to the internet, and would allow people to download content differently to get a different subscription plan from different providers.

Pai answered:

That’s basically correct; essentially, net neutrality involves regulating all of these companies like a utility, treating your internet service provider as you would your water company or electric company or subway system … the internet is not like any of those things; it’s certainly important, increasingly, in our daily lives; but the internet also scales dramatically over time. Twenty years ago, you were talking about 28k modems and AOL CD-Roms in the mail and e-mail being the killer app; now we’re talking about gigabit fiber and 4G LTE and high-definition wireless streaming. The way the internet has developed is scalable, so to speak; in the way that utilities, as we traditionally think about them, are not.

And the argument that I’ve made is that treating the internet like another slow-moving utility guarantees that what you’re going to have is a slow-moving utility providing the internet. That’s the last thing that I think consumers want. They seem to want better, faster, cheaper internet access, not another DMV in their lives.


Shapiro stated that the opposition to reversing net neutrality is based in part on dismissing the claim that reversing net neutrality would lead to more open competition, that local monopolies and local regulations make it impossible to have numerous internet providers in a given area.

Pai responded:

Two different points: I agree that we need to have more competition, and that’s why the 11 months that I’ve been in office as chairman of the FCC, we’ve taken a number of initiatives to promote a lot more competition, getting a wireless spectrum put there for wireless carriers to use; making it easier for smaller wireless providers to enter the market place; getting the next generation of satellite companies into the marketplace to provide an alternative to the terrestrial folks. So we’re promoting more competition that way.

Number two: these heavy-handed regulations imposed by the FCC in 2015 take us in the opposite direction. They make it harder — it’s already hard as it is for a lot of these smaller internet service providers — to build a service case for deploying internet infrastructure, especially in rural and low-income urban areas. These regulations make it even harder. In the last week alone, I’ve spoken to small internet service providers that nobody has even heard of, from Minnesota and Montana, who have said that these regulation make it harder to raise capital, to build a business case for deployment, and to actually spend the money and the time building out these networks.

And so, ironically, these rules take us closer to an oligopoly, or monopoly in some of these situations. And so the solution, to me, is get rid of the regulations that are standing in the way of competition, not preemptively regulating how the internet operates right here in Washington.

Shapiro asked why there was so much ire and hostility for those who contemplated reversing net neutrality, whether it was Pai getting death threats or blasts Shapiro himself received after putting out a video simply explaining the issue in basic terms. He asked, “Is it just because of the propaganda that’s put out, people think that the next thing that is going to happen is somebody’s going to come along, take their internet away, force them to pay a fortune for Hulu or Netflix or for email that they’re going to parcel out, all of this because now you’re giving Comcast an opportunity to screw everyone?”

Pai answered:
I think the charitable explanation is that the internet is increasingly important in our lives; we rely on it from the minute we wake up almost until the minute we go to sleep every night. The less charitable explanation is ideology; when you have some people, especially those who are committed to government regulation as a religion, essentially, who go around saying the internet is about to be broken, democracy is about to be destroyed, free expression and speech online is about to be threatened, and here is a picture of the guy who’s doing it, that is an ideological commitment that has nothing to do with the facts and has everything to do with the ideology, which is the government should rule everything, any dissenting views should be squelched, and anybody who advocates those views should be demonized personally.
Pai concluded, “As I’ve often said, hell hath no fury like a regulator bored; so we’re trying to infuse more of the free market approach here at the FCC to make sure that we let the private sector do the heavy lifting, not the bureaucrats here in Washington.”

See video here:
Interesting interview, that said we are at a point where public outcry was the only thing that blocked Comcast from controlling a huge proportion of the cable internet in this country. They have also engaged in behavior like trying to outlaw municipal ISPs in certain states, effectively using regulation as a cudgel against potential competition.

Back in the dial up days, you had a myriad of competition in this space, and it's evolved to where you can get something from the telco or something from the cable company. Even Google the giant seems to have given up on the idea of implementing fiber. While Joliet certainly is not the end all of the world, it's a decent sized metro area. As far as I can tell, my choices (except maybe 56K) would be AT&T and Comcast. When I lived in Carbondale it was the same way. A duopoly isn't competition. If you want to use the car analogy, we are at a point where last mile should be maintained by a company who does it exclusively for whatever form (fiber, phone, cable TV) line that company works with then the "service" aspect (upstream) should be whoever you want.

I also disagree with the idea that ISPs provide other services especially content. The reason for this is it creates incentive and a conflict of interest. If people are cutting the cord which deprives them of product revenue to increase bandwidth use for Netflix, there is an obvious incentive to play corporate warfare with them. That said, Netflix and Akamai having "cache boxes" at the major ISPs is unto its self almost anti competitive due to it being way harder for small players who don't have that option to get established. It's a great technology but I wish it was more of an "open" product that ISPs offered to content providers for a nominal price.

Some of the most vocal opponents of this are content hosts like Youtube or Twitter or FB who would fall in violation of the ideals of Net Neutrality if applied to their services. They certainly do not practice as they preach. Google can and will make you disappear if they so desire. Not all too "neutral" if you ask me. That's a huge down side to me, we may see the same SJW shit that they are doing now done by ISPs.
Chester Copperpot likes this.
Mr_Roboto is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:48 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.0.6 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
no new posts