Keep in mind that greed is at work here. Comcast, Verizon want a piece of the cake(s). Voice over IP (Skype), streaming video (YouTube, Google, etc), streaming data (Google Earth, Google Maps, etc) is exploding and they have to treat the (competitors') data frames on an equal basis with their own solutions: digital TV, VOIP, internet data service, etc. (Verizon is expected to dedicate 80% of their bandwith to their digital TV product once they go live)Ubermensch said:Myself and many others defending net neutrality are mainly concerned with the descrimination of internet in the United States. ISP's will be able to descriminate and give priority in bandwidth to websites that they see fit.
Ubermensch said:I post on various forums, such as Digg, Shoutwire, Reddit, theliberty, and mostly a lot of 9/11 websites.
We do appear to have a bit of a question here, then. Perhaps it is time for Ubermensch to clarify things?Salleles said:But, looking into it, Ubermensch seems to have placed zero comments on Digg. ۢermensch wrote 121.
Not the first step. The US control of ICANN is something that is real: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/12/29/us_undermines_internet/Ubermensch said:Once Congress implements the law to squash net neutrality, the ISPs will begin their filtering process. This is the first step to control the internet.
And then how are you going to participate in this forum?I know that I am going to cancel my internet service once this happens, but the sheeple won't.
Hopefully, alternative internet sources will pop up... Hopefully. Maybe international satellite? Maybe other ISPs that use their lines, but require a much higher premium? I will definitely pay more every month to keep using the internet the way it is today; it's worth every cent to me. I will eat ramen noodles everyday so that I can continue to learn the truth. Damn you world government!!domivr said:And then how are you going to participate in this forum?
It already is.Ubermensch said:... surfing in the vast oceans of the internet will be narrowed down to boogie boarding on the limited shores of the seas...
I looked at Reddit and Shoutwire but found no reference to SOTT either as Ubermench claimed he posted elsewhere. Maybe My search was not thorough enough, but again it would be something for Ubermench to help with by backing up his assertions byanart said:Ubermensch said:I post on various forums, such as Digg, Shoutwire, Reddit, theliberty, and mostly a lot of 9/11 websites.We do appear to have a bit of a question here, then. Perhaps it is time for Ubermensch to clarify things?Salleles said:But, looking into it, Ubermensch seems to have placed zero comments on Digg. Übermensch wrote 121.
I don't think "Ubermensch" is necessarily indicative of racism. It might just indicate admiration for Nietzsche. Also, if we notice, the person with the same call name but using a small u with the two dots, is more of a stickler for details regarding the term (it takes a slight extra effort to get those two dots over the u), and the writing style is very very different.Anders said:It could well be that 'ubermench' is genuine, but it would be helpful to have this clarified. As Ark mentioned it is indeed a curious handle.
Collect data FIRST. Analyze data. Ask questions. Avoid assumptions unless you have a really good reason to assume. And even if you do, collect data and ask questions first.A: It is just as dangerous and just as useless to "see" conspiracy in everything s it is to "see" conspiracy in nothing. We tire of conspiracy "buffs." They are nutty, and serve as perfect false sponsors to those who really DO seek to conduct widespread mental/psychic manipulations and control.
Indeed I might have emotionally jumped into premature conclusions... Therefore, I hope Ubermensch can comment on the two points Anders brought up. An explanation why he or she uses this specific nickname would also be highly appreciated.EsoQuest said:...there is a danger that emotions generated by prior attacks can transfer to those who have not (as yet) exhibited behaviour to warrant them.