Disqus - Latest Comments for Luv2Box

Re: Why Communications and Media Markets Will Probably Never Be Deregulated

Luv2Box — Wed, 17 May 2006 16:25:21 -0000

This puts another very good perspective on an issue that sometimes seems to go over my head. Regulation in moderation can be a good thing, but over-regulation and interference where it's not needed are two very different things. I love the fact that the Internet is so open. It takes on new technology and is constantly evolving and innovating and I really don't want to see that change!

Re: Some Thoughts on the New Senate Telecom Reform Draft

Luv2Box — Wed, 17 May 2006 16:32:30 -0000

I've been trying to get my head around this Net Neutrality issue and this is the second great posting from you all that puts it into terms even my grandmother can understand! I'm now set in my belief that government interference in the Internet will slowly destroy the wonderful technology we have at our finger tips! Thanks again!

Re: Neutrality Regulation In the Abstract

Luv2Box — Thu, 25 May 2006 20:59:41 -0000

Thanks for recommending the post - very good piece indeed! It is good that people are waking up and discussing net neutrality. My only concern is that it is being pushed by groups that really have no expertise in the Internet - MoveOn.org? Moby and REM? It would be nice to see some real solutions offered from the industry instead of just sides being taken.

Re: Brooklyn Bridge for Sale

Luv2Box — Thu, 25 May 2006 21:25:11 -0000

Excellent dissection of the Combs quote! As this debate continues, it is becoming more and more clear how ridiculous the notion of net neutrality really is.

Re: The poison pill bill

Luv2Box — Sat, 20 May 2006 09:11:45 -0000

Well when you have zero competition and lots of money to spend, what do you expect? It is great that Microsoft and Google have been so successful, but clearly they have forgotten where they came from.nothing. The beauty of the Internet is that it is an open source. Open to competition, which leads to innovation and better technology and who would be against that? Only those who have majority control over the Internet!

Re: Wall St. Journal gets it

Luv2Box — Sat, 20 May 2006 09:12:34 -0000

Of course the WSJ gets it - they are all about business and they really know their stuff because they actually research it (wow, big shocker in today's MSM!). Thank goodness we have a widely read publication taking a stand against Net Neutrality. Microsoft and Google are doing a good job of making consumers scared about AT&T and Verizon entering the Internet fray and this piece really puts it into perspective. Let's keep fighting!

Re: The poison pill bill

Luv2Box — Mon, 22 May 2006 20:38:34 -0000

I just don't like how this is being handled. Since when did MoveOn.org, REM and Moby become experts on the Internet? Net Neutrality may POSSIBLY be a good thing, but it needs to be discussed by those who know what they are talking about, not government!

Re: Christian Coalition wants some of that ole time Innernet

Luv2Box — Mon, 22 May 2006 20:42:29 -0000

This NN has really twisted my head and I think this may be the funniest posting I have read since the Democrats and MoveOn.org made it such an issue, so THANKS! With CCA joining, now everybody has got be shaking their head, saying, 'huh?' There is something just not right about MoveOn.org and CCA getting in bed on this issue. That alone tells me this issue is not even ready to be discussed!

Re: Daily Neutrino Spin

Luv2Box — Mon, 22 May 2006 20:54:47 -0000

YES! Finally someone getting it right! Great post debunking all the muck that is flying around regarding NN. Let's just hope people will see past Moby and REM and get this one right - the Internet as we know it depends on it!