Dark

What People Miss About 1791L (ft. Bluce) 

Views 25K
93% 231 16

What People Miss About 1791L (ft. Bluce) - net neutrality update
Today we talk about net neutrality on the internet and Ajit Pai and the FCC, more specifically, the 1791l net neutrality video concerning this. In their video they mention what John Oliver, H3H3 and others miss about Net Neutrality, and we aim to analyse said video about the battle for the net, and its citations of Tim Wu, and critique it.
inspirations for this video:
us-first.info/player/video/mr6LmoB5fGZ3Z2Q.html (What John Oliver, H3H3, and others miss about Net Neutrality - by 1791L)
us-first.info/player/video/o8evi4h9Y4ZqamA.html (The FCC Just Crushed Net Neutrality... It's Not Over, But It Looks Really Bad. by Philip DeFranco)
- Bluce: us-first.info/more/VSLci8df67QdsgrDzZ21JQ
- Twitter: RightOpinionYT
- Patreon: www.patreon.com/therightopinion
- Discord: discord.gg/VKFReyr
- Edited by: us-first.info
- Special Thanks To: Nocty, Zany Jester, The Spansh Inn Physician, Yoo Toobah, Yerzi, Yeahsure, a7f, viirium, raener, The King Cow Show, Duster, LiquoricePepsi
- Thumbnail: us-first.info/more/yuNHQVfhMgszyJ2FRPfHUgi

Sources: us-first.info/player/video/mr6LmoB5fGZ3Z2Q.html
pioneersfornetneutrality.tumblr.com/
www.freepress.net/person/154/s-derek-turner
news.mit.edu/2009/fcc-neutrality
www.nytimes.com/2017/11/22/opinion/courts-net-neutrality-fcc.html
www.freepress.net/sites/default/files/resources/internet-access-and-online-video-markets-are-thriving-in-title-II-era.pdf
www.theregister.co.uk/2017/11/28/its_back_net_neutrality_nonsense_roundup/?page=2
www.ftc.gov/about-ftc/commissioners
www.opencongress.org/bill/110-h2905/show

Published on

 

Jan 20, 2018

Share:

Link:

Download:

Loading link...

Add to:

My playlist
Watch later
Comments 66   
The Right Opinion
The Right Opinion 2 years ago
Massive thanks to Bluce for stepping in and doing a part when another person couldn’t, I didn’t give him verbal thanks, but I URGE you to check out his channel. It is some of the most underrated content on US-first and I have no doubt about that. HIS CHANNEL LINK: us-first.info/more/VSLci8df67QdsgrDzZ21JQ More info below. - Edited by: us-first.info - Special Thanks To: Nocty, Zany Jester, The Spansh Inn Physician, Yoo Toobah, Yerzi, Yeahsure, a7f, viirium, raener, The King Cow Show, Duster, LiquoricePepsi - Thumbnail: us-first.info/more/yuNHQVfhMgszyJ2FRPfHUg Points: Throttling of websites happened before net neutrality. The internet is very different now than it was in 1996, trying to say it was fine back in 1996 as a justification to return to such regulation is fallacious. Idealistic free-market competition can’t occur in many places as many places only have one internet provider. The internet’s doing fine right now, if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. A majority of people are happy with it. The point of paid prioritisation was never sufficiently explained on how it would be defended Ajit Pai has conducted himself terribly, and not answered questions in an honest manner Companies like Comcast have behaved very suspiciously, such as removing their paid prioritisation pledge on the same day that the initial intent to repeal net neutrality was announced. This suspicious activity has led me to have very little trust in their case for repealing net neutrality. Concerned websites mean concerned people. Passing over decision making to the FTC at the same time has probably contributed to a lack of clarity, but it doesn’t justify it. I have not seen enough to suggest this is deregulation rather than just a shift in regulation, and one that has more public implications. There is a need for clearer outcomes and more debate. People overreacting detracts from the general case for net neutrality, but they don’t mean there are no legitimate arguments.
ZORAfilms
ZORAfilms 2 months ago
Well, guess 1791 was right. Too many people overreacted about the repeal. Tbh the reason why no company decided to do a cable type of subscription is because all companies know that if they do anything that the majority of the customers may have a problem with then they will go and switch over to a competitor in masses, so it is in the best interest of the company to be in the same lane as others and offer it at a reasonable price rather than to force the customer to pay for something the competitor gives to you.
TheUndeadslayer221
PSA Sitch did a video on 1791L, however he didn't finish the little series of response videos due to 1791L being so incompetent on the matter. Net Neutrality is a good thing, all things considered and 1791L just proved to me that he is a fool with no knowledge of what the "Open Internet Order of 2015" actually says or does. "The Hated One" did a video on Net Neutrality that has way more facts than both Sitch AND 1791L have, and discusses the matter in a much more honest fashion.
Seth
Seth Year ago
Finally, someone that responded to 1791's video the same way I did!
totally not Jeff
totally not Jeff 2 years ago
The Right Opinion, I thought you met the year 1791, I mean, Washington was president thst year so it was pretty cool.
Philip J. Fry
Philip J. Fry 2 years ago
> The internet’s doing fine right now, if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. A majority of people are happy with it. Is it? We've seen many of the major sites who have a near monopoly in their specific realms (US-first, FaceBook, Reddit, Twitter, etc) censor speech they don't like or agree with. Maybe the power SHOULDN'T be in the hands of the free market.
smith palacios
smith palacios 5 months ago
what is 1791L Political stance is he a right winger or left winger or a libertarian. li
Gr O
Gr O 5 months ago
I’ve never seen someone blow someone so much while trying to disprove their argument 😂
Plugged In
Plugged In 10 months ago
Well, this didn’t age well. Speeds have gone up along with competition since net neutrality was lifted. I think the most important thing to keep in mind is this: ATT switched their position because they realized the competition they would stifle was worth the money they’d lose in the suit.
Dirk
Dirk 11 months ago
H3 sucks so does this channel.
Blackjack148
Blackjack148 Year ago
So essentially the same presentation and problems as Vox, but from a right wing perspective
ClingingMars
ClingingMars Year ago
well, we're over a year out and nothing has really changed except internet censorship which was not a part of net neutrality. I'd say 1791L was correct.
Petit
Petit Year ago
@Kyle Edward Hanophy I don't think you understand what I was trying to say. Op's said that "nothing has really changed" after the end of net neutrality. Research shows that Telecom companies are slowing down data, specially streaming services. Throttling is getting more common after the repeal. There are more factors to consider whether the repeal had positive or negative side effects. But it's obvious that the repeal had an effect on how internet service providers do business. I don't understand how that comment makes me "dependent on big tech", or even the relevancy of your response.
Kyle Edward Hanophy
"How dare Google and Netflix pay for bandwidth as if they were some individuals?" - @Petit
Petit
Petit Year ago
@Kyle Edward Hanophy What?
Kyle Edward Hanophy
lol @Petit You're dependent on big tech!
Petit
Petit Year ago
"Nothing has really changed?" www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-09-04/youtube-and-netflix-throttled-by-carriers-research-finds
Steel Man117
Steel Man117 Year ago
Do one of Sargons political rise
Square Yoyoer
Square Yoyoer Year ago
Why is his channel 1791 instead of 1791 L?
Kyle Kemp
Kyle Kemp Year ago
Your “false equivalency” is incorrect. There are common factors involved in the analogy, Both have to do govenernment, and common knowledge. By reframing the point you took it out of the cemplex argumentative narrative and obfuscate the theme. In doing this you have aligned the point as a false equivalency, but in the arguments context its meaning is comepletly reconstructed it’s corporeality into a existent entirely different from its intended meaning. Within the context he is attacking the entirety of the idea, that public opinions should be used as a viable option of argumentative reliance. This entire video is an accusation of falicious behavior. Before you instigate an accusation of a malicious fallacy, re-examine the argument from the totality and not one latent facet. By emfisizing the articulation it appears you lose the meaning of the entirety. Further, just because something resembles a fallacy does not signify that it is. The difference between grad school thinking and under grad thinking is the emphasis on fallicous arguments. Deal with the entirety of the argument not the subtle minutiae. There is a saying in law, if the law is on your side argue law, law, law, law...; if the law is not on your side argue fact, facts, facts, facts. In the video you argue facts. Fallecies are not hard and fast laws of debate. The existential truth of a fallacy can be just as powerful as a well forged argument. The avail of a fallicy does not deteriorate the foundation of the plenitude. Especially, if this particular fallacy is not material to the argument. In this case it is not. I sincerely hope you take this criticism to heart and it helps you to acuminate your future arguments.
J Tinkerton
J Tinkerton Year ago
What's that music that starts at about 5:30?
red 2 the electric boogaloo
everyone is fallible. even 1791L.
Spruce bruce
Spruce bruce Year ago
I cant believe bluce just fucking disappeared like that
Rosie A.
Rosie A. Year ago
I really used to enjoy their videos, but I unsubscribed about a year-and-a-half-ish ago, I believe? They had seemed to me to be one of the few, artistic voices of “reason” during the height of the “me too”, anyone-who-disagrees-with-a-left-ideal-is-a-devil, hyper-feminism, etc. period. Unfortunately, their videos seemed to morph from defensive to offensive over time (from my individual perspective) as they seemed to put a halt to giving those who opposed their arguments ample consideration. This will be the first time I’ve revisited in awhile..I’m a bit wary of the play button. You know, if you’re not too sick of politics, a talk regarding the “ask me anything” approach by crowder and how effective it really is would be interesting. At any rate, love your vids and thanks for all of the time and effort that you put forth for your viewers; it’s always appreciated.
TheUndeadslayer221
I could probably do better at explaining "Net Neutrality" than 1791L did, as his points have been debunked by PSA Sitch and many others. It does not help 1791Ls's point that he didn't read the "Open Internet Order of 2015" (I.E the thing Pai repealed), as if he did, he would note the instances the FCC cited in which ISPs have violated "Net Neutrality" before. Furthermore, 1791L's video has been dishonest about some of the points he made, and that says more than I ever could.
Dathieflord
Dathieflord 2 years ago
His comment about ill-informed public, especially the three branches is relevant when you reference aspects of all three in this conversation. Just trying to learn anything about this topic would force you to figure out the basic parts of government, for that is at the heart of the debate. A lack of knowledge of one proves one did not really look into the subject matter with any real effort.
HerebyOrdinary
HerebyOrdinary 2 years ago
I used to watch 1791L quite a bit since many of his opinions challenge mine, but I discovered that he has a propensity for intellectual dishonesty, and that largely turned me off from his channel. I'll still watch a video of his once in a while, but that's about it... I think the first video of his that I really had a problem with was his video on Trump's withdrawal from the Paris Climate Accord. I do agree with him that the climate accord is largely ineffective on the whole, especially since the biggest perpetrators of greenhouses gases are developing countries are those who have signed onto the agreement but largely ignore it, but that's where our commonalities on that topic end. He essentially uses this point to discredit the climate accord, which is an argument from hypocrisy (or some other logical fallacy similar in basis to it). The climate accord was supposed to be a step towards more restrictive policies down the road that placed sanctions or other penalties on countries for emitting too many greenhouse gases, so it has utility in trying to combat the free rider problem surrounding countries and Earth's climate. Anyway, some of 1791L's other points for the withdrawal were, I found, logically sound though even though I still mostly disagreed with them. (I thought stronger alternative arguments existed.) The second video that bugged me was this video in particular. I just disagreed with the whole thing, and reading some of the comments, some people pointed out how 1791L misquoted and cherrypicked quotes from some of the experts. Watching this video just bugs the shit out of me even more, especially with the appeals to authority who support his argument and the lack thereof for those who don't. Just more fuel for the intellectually dishonest flame, I guess. The third video which really was the nail in the coffin for me and this channel was his video regarding the disparity of IQ among different races. I assumed then and still assume now that, in this video, he pulled off data from American studies regarding the racial disparity. Anyway, while his video on the whole was well-intentioned, stating that people shouldn't wilfully ignore this statistic and that regardless of IQ or race, we should live as an egalitarian society. However, pretty much one of the foundational points of his video was the assumption that this intellectual disparity was mostly caused by genetics. While, if my memory serves me correct, he didn't outright say this, he strongly implied it. But yeah, this statement was pretty fucking baseless because I could not find a source of his which corroborated this claim. Also, just never mind the socioeconomic disparity between races in America. And never mind the multitudes of twin studies looking at intelligence which conclude that both nature and nurture play role in IQ or *_g_* as it is now commonly referred to. While at it, you might as well ignore how _all_ of the observational studies I looked at which studied intelligence in children and checked for the Scarr-Rowe hypothesis had their data support it. (In short, the Scarr-Rowe hypothesis states that there is a negative correlation between the variance of the impact of the environment on a child's intelligence and the socioeconomic status of that child. In other words, in a poorer child, environmental factors will tend to have a greater impact on a child's intelligence, and in a richer child, genetic factors will tend to have a greater impact on their intelligence.) All in all, this video irked me the most, especially since I've had prior Internet arguments regarding the nature vs. nurture argument of intelligence.
Frickez Thias
Frickez Thias Year ago
Noone is arguing IQ is ONLY genetic and everyone agrees your health, upbringing and societal factors contribute to IQ. But when Blacks in the top earning income bracket ($100,000+) have the same murder rate as Whites in the bottom earning income bracket ($15,000 or less), there is a genetic component. People are not equal. We aren't just blank slates.
Sisto Activitatem
Sisto Activitatem 2 years ago
I'm a big fan of 1791L, I think they are an amazing channel. This is my first time watching your videos (because I was looking up 1791L) and I'm extremely pleased that I stumbled upon your channel. I'm subscribing and looking forward to your other videos!
Dudofall
Dudofall 2 years ago
Hold on, did I miss something or is Bluce not in this video?
Steven Vasquez
@The Battle Against Moribund Muniments! sorry mate
jiffyb333
jiffyb333 2 years ago
Thank you for addressing this video. I also appreciate the video but I was taken aback by some of the framing.
The Right Opinion
The Right Opinion 2 years ago
Definitely
Brain In A Cat
Brain In A Cat 2 years ago
ilybb
The Right Opinion
The Right Opinion 2 years ago
Ily 2
Zach
Zach 2 years ago
How you growing so fast!?!??!!!
The Right Opinion
The Right Opinion 2 years ago
IHE shoutout
goodj111
goodj111 2 years ago
I suggest you watch PSA Sitch’s video that in my opinion refuted a lot of the points made in 1791L, e.g. some of the quotes made by experts have nothing to do with the law that is being repealed, the premise that before the law of net neutrality there was nothing similar in place (there was a similar law, just perhaps not as tough), etc.
The Right Opinion
The Right Opinion 2 years ago
I shall, I've watched a bit of it just hard to make time for it all given my current schedule, once I'm out of exams I'm planning on checking it out.
ThatzCringe TV
ThatzCringe TV 2 years ago
is net nutrality gone?
ThatzCringe TV
ThatzCringe TV 2 years ago
yeah I thats what I thought but I see articals saying its already repealed
The Right Opinion
The Right Opinion 2 years ago
It's been repealed by the FCC but may still go through one of the other institutions
M a
M a 2 years ago
Why aren't you discussing nut neutrality?
M a
M a 2 years ago
The Right Opinion a man's gonna bust his nut from time to time
The Right Opinion
The Right Opinion 2 years ago
They were all busted
Hoodied
Hoodied 2 years ago
Fucking great job at reaching 10k dude. The IHE shoutout was well deserved
The Right Opinion
The Right Opinion 2 years ago
Thank you
Funny Bunny
Funny Bunny 2 years ago
I’m kinda curious, but what are the arguments against net neutrality? Like, actually logical ones that don’t fall apart on closer inspection?
Funny Bunny
Funny Bunny 2 years ago
The Right Opinion Hmm. Well, while I guess it’s true that the internet is a market in some cases, I feel it’s more of a way to distribute something. Lots of sites, like fan sites, government agency sites, etc., actually lose money by existing. I feel it’s more comparable to a road network than than a market, really. If they want some oversight for the markets that are only on the internet and thus unique and currently not really overseen (like search engines and video streaming), I’m all for that, but as it stands the rules for equal flow of service belong under title II. Interesting bit of information (which I guess you might know?) is that title II isn’t dedicated to internet as one might be lead to believe, but is rather a generic set of regulations that apply to common carriers, like tap water and electricity, but also post. Postal services can’t make exceptions for magazines, or charge more for them, other than indirectly charging more for it than, say, post cards due to their greater size and greater strain on their system. These same principles, recently, were made to be extrapolated towards internet providers because, so the government apparently reasoned, internet providers provide the means for information to get around, rather than a platform for business. Back to the post example, it was previously also used for business, but that still doesn’t make it a platform for business because it’s also used for other things (and, generally, was simply used to send information, regardless of what kind). It seems to me like a lot of people forget that things like email use internet as well, and that the current situation was created to take that into account properly. I hope this makes helps a bit. P.S.: if you ever happen to come across a link to an in-depth investigation into the effects the reclassification of the broad brand providers to a common carrier had on the business side of the internet, please let me know. Though, it’s worth keeping in mind that these changes were only made in april of 2015, which I only just realised should actually make me sceptical to statistical arguments around this issue since 2 years is barely enough time to allow the changes to properly flow through the relevant markets, let alone conduct research that would take up the same time span or longer. pps: I realised, now, that I made a bit of an oversight in my previous examples; the internet has been reclassified as a common carrier, yes, but specifically under the communications and telecommunications act set up in 1934 for, you guessed it I guess, post and later fax, phone calls, etc. Ppps: To me the reclassification as communications provider is especially interesting, considering that is what the internet was designed to do originally, and how it is more technically correct. Though not in the sense of a technicality, but in the sense that the internet literally is nothing but the communication of data - with glass fibres, satellites, etc.
The Right Opinion
The Right Opinion 2 years ago
I think some people just consider it a case of how something should be individually dealt with on a case by case basis, and that the FTC should be making trade rules to deal with throttling rather than the FCC applying Universal principles, as the internet is a market in a way, people say that a trading body should oversee them. These individuals also assume that due to the fact the FCC's rules have had a negative impact on investment within the network industry, that this could be better handled. The evidence is mixed in this behalf, but there is reasonable support that some parts of Title II don't work well for smaller business, but, it doesn't mean that we completely reverse the whole thing and toss it off to a FTC, who haven't really put forward a clear manifesto to deal with it anyway.
Ben
Ben 2 years ago
Congratulations on 10,000. Congratulations on the recent support it's very well deserved. And as always a fantastic video. The editing is especially good!
Xemgoa
Xemgoa 2 years ago
So, what I can take away from this is discerning between actual facts present and subtle manipulation followed by not detailing other facts... And all through it, no matter how right someone appears, it's best to form my own opinion and do my own research? Excellent work, TRO!
Xemgoa
Xemgoa 2 years ago
Agreed. Albeit though, I feel that happens because, in my opinion, people tend to forget those basics such as questioning themselves or what they're hearing or seeing, despite how legit the evidence, behavior and attitude might be and how it aligns with their views. Basically, despite all the shenanigans going on today (would have used the word "chaos" but the world is not exactly Hell at this point), despite how 'right' some people seem, people are relying too much on how right they seem or feel and not doing individual research and investigation. ... and this might be me, but I kinda sense a "WELL! There has to be that one person who is always right!" mentality. It might be a unspoken rule or a subconcious thing that happens on its own when listening to other people or it's been impressed on us in some way, shape or form. People go with it without a second thought or just make a leap to sides as frantic as a grasshopper goes from blade of grass to another. It helps to critique, evaluate, investigate, and examine each other, even the most virtuous down the most scummy. I know I say it too often, but I wish that a lot of peoples perspectives did not view critique as solely a bad thing. We can critique (hopefully in a constructive manner) even for the people we lose and/or care about, as much as businesses, publishers, craftmen of many fields seem to get a lot of flak for a lot of the actions they do, I wish they differentiate between actual volatile comments and genuine constructive criticism instead of addressing their consumer base as though we are just one entity with some severe bipolar disorder. (Though I think I'm hyperboling it and the last part of this paragraph is likely irrelevant.)
The Right Opinion
The Right Opinion 2 years ago
Definitely, it seems elementary when you say it out loud but many people don't think about it when it's happening.
Mr. Grizzly
Mr. Grizzly 2 years ago
Wtf you had 6000 subs yesterday
The Right Opinion
The Right Opinion 2 years ago
Good day
Coll Waterman
Coll Waterman 2 years ago
hey hey ihe shout-out, congrats man, see you at 100 k, i am sure you will make it. also i think 1791L is really intellectual and looks amazing similar to my editing style. but i think most of his arguments are emotional, just incredibly well put. i am subscribed to him, although i disagree on most he says. his video's has moved my political views more to the center, wich is a good thing, but his anti-sjw videos are straight up bad. his last video on the film moonlight did not held any substance in my opinion.
The Right Opinion
The Right Opinion 2 years ago
Thank you! And yeah it's a mixed bag when it comes down to substance.
Ned is Fat
Ned is Fat 2 years ago
Psa sitch made a great video in response to 1791L’s video
Plugged In
Plugged In 10 months ago
Pseudo Anonymous - He did a good job but was indeed proven wrong as well. I like Sitch but 1791 and the counter narrative was correct. Speeds have improved greatly as did competition. One thing really stands out to me and that’s how ATT switched their position. They more than likely realized the money they’d lose in the suit was worth the competition they’d stifle by keeping NN alive. Ajit surely does have a punchable face though.
Pseudo Anonymous
Pseudo Anonymous 2 years ago
The Right Opinion IIRC, one of the great things about Sitch's video is that he points out that many of those authorities that 1791L appeals to are quoted out of context to make it sound like they are against net neutrality, when most of them are actually for it. At least a couple of them actually signed that pro-NN letter. Sitch' previous NN video is great too. He does an amazing job of cataloging the many abuses that happened before (and even after) the NN rules that were put in place to prevent them.
The Right Opinion
The Right Opinion 2 years ago
Yeah I heard will have to check that one out when I have the time
Ned is Fat
Ned is Fat 2 years ago
Congrats on 10K man well deserved
The Right Opinion
The Right Opinion 2 years ago
Thanks man :)
-KXVIN-
-KXVIN- 2 years ago
1791L called Ajit Pai an *_AMERICAN HERO_* on twitter before.... so ya I knew he would be wanking his side a little too much when the video dropped. This was a very good response 👍
The Right Opinion
The Right Opinion 2 years ago
Indeed, not how I would quite describe him.
Jude Lind
Jude Lind 2 years ago
Really good video
The Right Opinion
The Right Opinion 2 years ago
Thank you!
Rosss
Rosss 2 years ago
10,000 Subs 🎉🎉🎉*hoot hoot hoot*
The Right Opinion
The Right Opinion 2 years ago
Hell yeah!
TheLucky1s Show
TheLucky1s Show 2 years ago
You hit 10k bro
The Right Opinion
The Right Opinion 2 years ago
Awesome :)
Floop Floop
Floop Floop 2 years ago
Lovely video, strong arguments.
The_Borg
The_Borg 2 years ago
0:20 to 10:00 is TRO complaining about ajit pai instead of talking about 1791L You're welcome.
A
A Year ago
Lol
The Right Opinion
The Right Opinion 2 years ago
Lol
OmniousTV
OmniousTV 2 years ago
Early congrats on 10k. Glad you're getting some exposure now.
The Right Opinion
The Right Opinion 2 years ago
Thank you
Bryson Handy
Bryson Handy 2 years ago
For 10k do your position on every major topic together in one vid. This is just an Idea though.
The Right Opinion
The Right Opinion 2 years ago
Interesting
Salokin
Salokin 2 years ago
Interesting, though where's your pro trump/alt right video? Come on!
The Right Opinion
The Right Opinion 2 years ago
Ahah, I'm not the most pro-Trump person and the alt-right wouldn't like me very much (to understate a little).
TheMasterKrook
TheMasterKrook 2 years ago
2:00 Oh let's break it DOWN!
TheMasterKrook
TheMasterKrook 2 years ago
heck yes
The Right Opinion
The Right Opinion 2 years ago
You know it
Doco
Doco 2 years ago
Very in depth video.
The Right Opinion
The Right Opinion 2 years ago
Thank you!
Mr Radiance
Mr Radiance 2 years ago
What I dislike about 179l is his frame working his usage are buzzwords such as regime he knows it perks The Hears of the listener while persistent that he is an objective source of information that he has no aligning in terms of who fighting for or making an argument for though a lot of people he sites and sources or statements that are poorly sited and at times completely out of context and sometime to extent ad Libs At nauseam at times 179 l video is the epitome of intellectual dishonesty
Delune
Delune 2 years ago
I'm not saying that they (2 people run 1791l) don't have a bias but the important part is on multiple occasions they do state that they're biased and when watching their videos to keep that in mind; The problem is a lot of viewers may not understand that and therefore many of the viewers who don't avidly watch them or take the time and personally research counter arguments on their own may take it as fact rather than their opinions and conclusions based on their interpretation of the facts gathered. Edit: Same and any political pundit.
Mr Radiance
Mr Radiance 2 years ago
The Right Opinion sorry for some of the words I typed auto-correct can sometimes be a bitch
The Right Opinion
The Right Opinion 2 years ago
Looking into the sources they can be quite twisted
Blakm3
Blakm3 2 years ago
bro you gained like 3 thousand subs in like a week
Blakm3
Blakm3 2 years ago
yeah you have
The Right Opinion
The Right Opinion 2 years ago
Good week
sparkie1j
sparkie1j 2 years ago
hi
The Right Opinion
The Right Opinion 2 years ago
I like your comments
sparkie1j
sparkie1j 2 years ago
i like the video
The Right Opinion
The Right Opinion 2 years ago
Hey!
blepeded
blepeded 2 years ago
The "The End" from the thumbnail is from the revelations ee ending
The Right Opinion
The Right Opinion 2 years ago
The more I know tbf
dibs dibs
dibs dibs 2 years ago
yes finally your gaining subs. it takes way to long to gain popularity on this fucking website .
dibs dibs
dibs dibs 2 years ago
170 well made and edited videos, a shout out from a 1 million sub channel and your only now picking up steam. finally quality content is being supported.
The Right Opinion
The Right Opinion 2 years ago
It's about time!
absolute bs
absolute bs 2 years ago
His vid was crafty.. so is Ajit's proposals...ditto industry response. That and now the political entanglements..makes ya want to search for a good deal on lube. Well done vid man!
The Right Opinion
The Right Opinion 2 years ago
Cheers :)
Panthermic
Panthermic 2 years ago
Spot on man, just what I was thinking.
The Right Opinion
The Right Opinion 2 years ago
Thank you!
Conor Holohan
Conor Holohan 2 years ago
I can find it hard to follow whats being said or what point you are making in the video because you talk very fast. perhaps slowing down the pace of your video or title cards for when your moving on to a new point could remedy this.
The Right Opinion
The Right Opinion 2 years ago
Feedback noted dude
Rosss
Rosss 2 years ago
From James' Stream and now subbed. :)
The Right Opinion
The Right Opinion 2 years ago
Incredible what a legend
Atomic Number 9
Atomic Number 9 2 years ago
You want to know what's funny people were complaining about the repeal of net neutrality even though they didn't know what it was, and I'm sorry to say this but I was one of these people
TheUndeadslayer221
TheUndeadslayer221 11 months ago
@Garbo Legolas You expect an ISP to try any shit while this issue is hot? I'm also guessing you NEVER read the litigation that Comcast pulled against California and you also never heard Verizon in court on the matter in 2011 (they said "Buffer these rules, we'd be exploring those commercial arrangements", which is a fancy way of saying "We'd love to make fast lanes and charge people extra"). Are you going to ignore how Verizon intentionally slowed down the California Fire Department's connection as well? The only one fear-mongering here is Pai and people like you. I've had enough of these lies from people like you.
Garbo Legolas
Garbo Legolas 11 months ago
@TheUndeadslayer221 How bout now? A year later and none of the stuff we were warned about came to pass. Starting to think it was all just fear-mongering
TheUndeadslayer221
@plumlogan Second thoughts? Net Neutrality is needed given the history of ISPs.
plumlogan
plumlogan Year ago
@TheUndeadslayer221 any second thoughts?
TheUndeadslayer221
After reading the whole thing about Net Neutrality, 1791L looked like a massive fool.
Tears of Fire
Tears of Fire 2 years ago
Almost at 10k mate
The Right Opinion
The Right Opinion 2 years ago
Exciting!
NessieNep
NessieNep 2 years ago
PSA Sitch absolutely decimated 1791L in his response imho. You should check it out as well. us-first.info/player/video/fax_gK6oioCnmYk.html
NessieNep
NessieNep 2 years ago
No problem. :)
The Right Opinion
The Right Opinion 2 years ago
Ah yes I did see this but have been caught up in exams so didn't watch, thanks for reminding :).
howdy
howdy 2 years ago
Nice video
The Right Opinion
The Right Opinion 2 years ago
Ay thanks g
Lad, The One And Only
I quite like these videos. Definitely good for my critical thinking skills.
The Right Opinion
The Right Opinion 2 years ago
Glad you enjoy!
Generic Animater
Generic Animater 2 years ago
Soo early
Generic Animater
Generic Animater 2 years ago
Early
Generic Animater
Generic Animater 2 years ago
'Anyways i enjoyed the video.'
Generic Animater
Generic Animater 2 years ago
Anyways enjoyed the video
The Right Opinion
The Right Opinion 2 years ago
You are indeed
LukaCola
LukaCola 2 years ago
Also good video
The Right Opinion
The Right Opinion 2 years ago
Thank you!
LukaCola
LukaCola 2 years ago
Wait are you pro or anti.
The Right Opinion
The Right Opinion 2 years ago
I'm against the repeal of net neutrality. So I'm pro-net neutrality, though I do believe it should be reformed in some areas.
Glady
Glady 2 years ago
I liked his videos but he really does seem to jump the shark all the time now. He seems to follow the view that: people think a thing -> that thing must be wrong -> there's a conspiracy. I think there's a lot of disingenuous alliances in the mainstream media but I don't go out of my way to make them the villain at any cost.
Glady
Glady 2 years ago
The Right Opinion there he goes again. This time Del Toro's shape of water is promoting degeneracy and communism against the white man.
The Right Opinion
The Right Opinion 2 years ago
Definitely, he has good logical reasoning, but sometimes he moves from a point to the inference rather hastily.
Lad, The One And Only
Hey, I'm on time.
The Right Opinion
The Right Opinion 2 years ago
Good job!
MirthMire
MirthMire 2 years ago
Early for the vid
Lad, The One And Only
No, you're on time.
The Right Opinion
The Right Opinion 2 years ago
Welcome
Next
A Chat With Bolerhatman
1:41:15