Hillary Clinton Unveils Tech Platform

[SansVarnic]

Hillary Clinton Unveils Tech Platform

Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee also details student-loan relief plan aimed at supporting young entrepreneurs and innovators

By: COLLEEN MCCAIN NELSON

Source: http://www.wsj.com/articles/hillary-clinton-to-unveil-platform-on-technology-1467108000?mod=WSJ_TechWSJD_NeedToKnow

 

 

ROFLMAO!!!!

 

OK I apologize to all that is reading this but two words that should never be used in the same sentence Hillary Clinton and Technology.

(If you like Hillary Clinton well then I feel sorry you and you can ignore my blatant remarks.)

 

Quote

Democrat Hillary Clinton laid out plans aimed at democratizing technology Tuesday, releasing a wide-ranging agenda that calls for connecting every household to high-speed internet, promoting innovation and developing the next generation of entrepreneurs.

Quote

“I intend to make sure we do what we did with electricity in my grandparents’ generation—we connect every home and business in America to high-speed internet, and we do it on as fast a time scale as possible,” Mrs. Clinton said during a campaign stop in Denver. “Every year we waste means we leave people behind and left out in a way that is heartbreaking and wrong.”

Quote

The presumptive Democratic presidential nominee set an ambitious goal of bringing broadband to every U.S. home by 2020.

 

I am sorry but Governments do not ensure progress, people and innovation do that on its own.

If anything this will not help matters that the US currently faces.

Mrs Clinton does go on to outline other social minded thoughts further down the article but the gist of the thing is in the quotes. Though I agree that the US needs to continue expanding and upgrading its infrastructure in this area, having more Government involvement and regulation will not help but hinder the process as it already has... with one exception of course the FCC ruling on ISP conduct one good will not absolve a thousand wrongs. Tsk tsk.

 

Apologies if the topic is a bit too political but it is tech related.

 

 

[vanished]

As someone who would really love to see a lot more people get much faster and cheaper internet access than they current have, this does sound good though:

Quote

“I intend to make sure we do what we did with electricity in my grandparents’ generation—we connect every home and business in America to high-speed internet, and we do it on as fast a time scale as possible,” Mrs. Clinton said during a campaign stop in Denver. “Every year we waste means we leave people behind and left out in a way that is heartbreaking and wrong.”

Yes, yes it is.

[AresKrieger]

2 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

As someone who would really love to see a lot more people get much faster and cheaper internet access than they current have, this does sound good though:

Yes, yes it is.

Unfortunately she is about as likely to do something good she says as me winning the lottery.

[SansVarnic]

2 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

As someone who would really love to see a lot more people get much faster and cheaper internet access than they current have, this does sound good though:

Yes, yes it is.

I agree but the matter in which this specific politician would take to achieve this goal would be devastating to our current economic status though  

 

2 minutes ago, AresKrieger said:

Unfortunately she is about as likely to do something good she says as me winning the lottery.

Absolutely.

[vanished]

1 minute ago, SansVarnic said:

I agree but the matter in which this specific politician would take to achieve this goal would be devastating to our current economic status though  

Well that could be good for us getting cheaper tech  

[SSL]

6 minutes ago, SansVarnic said:

Though I agree that the Us needs to continue expanding and upgrading its infrastructure in this area, having more Government involvement and regulation will not help but hinder the process as it already has... with one exception of course the FCC ruling on ISP conduct one good will not absolve a thousand wrongs. Tsk tsk.

 

Yeah, because the current lack of oversight is really helping the internet situation right now. De facto monopolies are definitely not a thing at this point.

[AresKrieger]

5 minutes ago, SSL said:

 

Yeah, because the current lack of oversight is really helping the internet situation right now. De facto monopolies are definitely not a thing at this point.

They have those monopolies due to regulations which make the barrier of entry extremely high. A monopoly requires 1 of two things, regulation to prevent competition or the ability to buy all competitors. Comcast doesn't buy companies very often, but is in a regulated industry, where as microsoft in its hayday was buying every competitor under the sun to keep it's hold.

[SansVarnic]

12 minutes ago, SSL said:

 

Yeah, because the current lack of oversight is really helping the internet situation right now. De facto monopolies are definitely not a thing at this point.

This is why i mentioned the FCC involvement and I guess I forgot to mention as well that congress has started their own investigation into ISP monopolies due to the FCC ruling. But the thing you may or may not realize here is that US Constitutional Laws do not allow the Federal Government the powers to meddle on this scale, this is a State level thing.

 

*edit

Hopefully this post doesn't become a political onslaught of arguing about ISP monopolies and US laws dictating it.

I was pointing more or less to Mrs Clinton attempting to make Technological overtures during her being under FBI investigation over her use of technology.

Beside anything the US does concerning tech usually has a domino effect world wide... though I would rather not get into that either...

[stconquest]

Next up:  Clinton reveals her plan to begin legislature that will protect consumer's dick picks from the prying eyes of ISPs.

 

What ever her marketing campaign tells her is a good direction to take, is the one she will take.  This poor girl's ethics and convictions have been so twisted, bent and broken over the years that I don't think she even knows what she wants to accomplish anymore... other than get paid.

 

That is what her political career is all about people, making as much money as possible.

[kokobash]

Due to skimming the headers, What I read was this "Hillary Clinton enters Jupiter's orbit". :))

[Speedyv]

Yes lets just leave everything to the private companies that reap profits from the people and couldn't give two shits about advancement. I'm in no way a supporter of Clinton but people saying stupid things like less/no regulation don't understand where that has gotten us. Yes there are some companies that are innovating but that isn't the norm.

[vanished]

1 minute ago, kokobash said:

Due to skimming the headers, What I read was this "Hillary Clinton enters Jupiter's orbit". :))

heh, that works more than you might think, in a very distant sort of way  

Everyone's realized the hilarious naming of the jupiter mission, right?  Jupiter's moons are named after his love affairs and Juno is Jupiter's wife

[SSL]

5 minutes ago, Speedyv said:

Yes lets just leave everything to the private companies that reap profits from the people and couldn't give two shits about advancement. I'm in no way a supporter of Clinton but people saying stupid things like less/no regulation don't understand where that has gotten us. Yes there are some companies that are innovating but that isn't the norm.

 

Bingo. The knee-jerk reaction that bad regulation means the solution is therefore no regulation stinks of ignorance and/or ideology.

 

People like this are happy to reject government intervention until it no longer suits them to do so.

[Belgarathian]

32 minutes ago, AresKrieger said:

Unfortunately she is about as likely to do something good she says as me winning the lottery.

True, but you could have Trump?

[Ronda]

Didn't she unveil her tech platform back when she said that the government should break all encryption?

[PlayStation 2]

Who's ready for this to go nowhere like everything else Hillary says?

[MageTank]

50 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

Well that could be good for us getting cheaper tech  

Sadly, there is always a catch whenever "good" and "politics" mix. Without trying to put on a tin foil hat, I can't help but feel there would be a catch with trying to get everyone broadband internet. Let's face it. Not everyone is going to get it if they have to pay for it. We all know they won't make it free, because the internet falls under the "want" category and not a "need". If it is free, I would be very afraid to use it, as it is likely going to be some government run ISP that is tracking every move you make (more than what is currently done at the moment).

 

If something is good AND free from a politician, avoid it like the plague.

[Lethal Seraph]

I bet she'll blame the tech industry for her platform plans getting deleted on private email servers.

[SurvivorNVL]

It's clear she's pandering for the youth vote, to techies and companies.  I mean, Sundar Pichai posted a picture of him and her taking a selfie together and saying, "I can't wait until she is president and all the good it will do for our country."  

Sigh.

If we really want more internet, and faster internet, we'd(as much as I disagree with using the Federal govt for this), we'd Federally de-regulate all ISP's, and telecom companies, as well as drop State municipal barriers.  The States would be upset, but drop the barriers, create subsidization for building networks, and watch as companies, municipalities, and you name it, pop up left and right, competing en masse.  The old companies, to retain their customers would then have to either spend a fortune blocking the move, or upgrading.  

Hell, technically while we're doing all that, we should remove all citizen based taxes, lower business taxes to 15%, legalize marijuana, then just tax cigarettes, alcohol, marijuana, and then add a nationwide consumption tax.  And then done.  We've fixed the country.

[Entropy]

Gonna need at least 90% more bias from you, OP. 

[vanished]

2 hours ago, MageTank said:

Sadly, there is always a catch whenever "good" and "politics" mix. Without trying to put on a tin foil hat, I can't help but feel there would be a catch with trying to get everyone broadband internet. Let's face it. Not everyone is going to get it if they have to pay for it. We all know they won't make it free, because the internet falls under the "want" category and not a "need". If it is free, I would be very afraid to use it, as it is likely going to be some government run ISP that is tracking every move you make (more than what is currently done at the moment).

 

If something is good AND free from a politician, avoid it like the plague.

I just mean if the american currency tanks, things should stop being so expensive here

[nosirrah123]

I'm really happy right now because all I need to do is let my profile pic perfectly explain my reaction to this.

 

[Master Disaster]

She's just saying what her campaign advisors are telling her people want to hear. The second she gets elected it'll be "Technology? What technology?" 

[nosirrah123]

4 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

She's just saying what her campaign advisors are telling her people want to hear. The second she gets elected it'll be "Technology? What technology?" 

I'd say she's already on her way to that. She seems to have forgotten about emails.

 

*badum-tiss*

[Nowak]

2 hours ago, AlexTheRose said:

I already stopped caring or listening to anything about Donald Trump because that’s how he succeeded thus far – people give him negative attention and it’s working for him.

 

Should I do the same with Clitton?

Yes, that would be advisable. Neither candidate is good.