[ SECRET POST #3997 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3997 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.



__________________________________________________



02.
[Guardians of the Galaxy, Vol. 2]


__________________________________________________



03.
[Neil Gaiman, Good Omens]


__________________________________________________



04.
[Tonya Harding, Nancy Kerrigan / I, Tonya]


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.



__________________________________________________



09.











Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 21 secrets from Secret Submission Post #572.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Re: net neutrality

[diet_poison]

They're going to keep trying, though, like why wouldn't they? And this year they have more of a shot with Congress and the White House all being really red.

Re: net neutrality

[tabaqui]

So fucking ridiculous. It's *more* interference. You'd think the fucking GOP would be against that.

But then - they have plenty of money to buy their porn feeds, so.....

Re: net neutrality

[diet_poison]

It's not though. Is it? My understanding was that net neutrality was a condition directly created by the regulations the GOP wants to roll back.

The ISPs want to charge more money for the internet and rolling back these protections is a way to do it - basically, make people pay for faster internet and bundle internet into packages like cable, so people who have more will pay more to get what they were already using. It's more free-market and pro-corporation and it's less regulation and those are all things the GOP wants. It's basically unfettered capitalism applied to the internet. And to top that off with more capitalism, the ISPs can afford to buy lawmakers via lobbying and donations.

Re: net neutrality

[tabaqui]

It is all those things, yes. But the GOP base can't actually afford this, and they have to know it. It's so fucking baffling.

*sigh*

I'm so sick of our government right now.

Re: net neutrality

[(Anonymous)]

The GOP base—at least the super hardcore subset— probably doesn’t understand what net neutrality is, or what they stand to lose without it, and since tech companies are seen as belonging to the liberal left, any decrease in access will be blamed on those damn liberals. Basically a legislative solution is our best long-term bet and lawsuits our best stopgap measure to keep the internet under Title II.

Re: net neutrality

[tabaqui]

No lies detected.
Grrrrr.

Re: net neutrality

[diet_poison]

The GOP has been repeatedly shooting itself in the foot for a couple of years now. I really think at this point they're just clinging to their ideals because they don't know what else to do. And their ideals are "less government oversight, more free market". They have no concept, either, of what it's like to live with less than a sizable disposable income.

Re: net neutrality

[(Anonymous)]

That's pretty much it right there. I don't think they have a single fucking clue what to actually *do* anymore, and clinging to this skeleton of the past is all they can figure.

(Me, Tabaqui, not logged in.)

Re: net neutrality

[diet_poison]

It'll be really interesting to see what happens from here. But a loooot of damage is actively being done. :(