Whats the deal with net neutrality?
- Thread starter FORANE
- Start date
We are waiting on word from the FCC chairman on how bad he's going to screw us. He ain't keeping the new rules quiet just for chuckles.
RotorAndWing
Final Approach
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2008
- Messages
- 8,496
- Location
- Other side of the world
- Display Name
Display name:
Rotor&Wing
Like the ACA, this thing is going to have multitudes of tentacles. Understand what the real intent of this monstrosity is, and it's not about "fairness".
It's about control of the masses. That comes from the top, and that's all I'll say. Don't want to see this thread go to the SZ.
Stewartb
Final Approach
I think it's flat-out scary. Nothing good can come from it.
We've blocked the major internet providers from screwing us all over worse than they already do but possibly have opened the door for the FCC to mess things up.
Florida Cracker
Ejection Handle Pulled
- Joined
- May 4, 2009
- Messages
- 12,360
- Display Name
Display name:
Florida Cracker
Given the choice between the FCC and the internet providers... there is NO CHOICE. The federal government will use net neutrality to limit freedom, restrict choices, and make internet service far less efficient for FAR more money.
nddons
Touchdown! Greaser!
Exactly right. The blue print is in the ACA.
nddons
Touchdown! Greaser!
Possibly? I think it's a certainty.
Heh, for over a year I hear nothing but demands for net neutrality, great lament that we don't have it, advocating for it, etc. With a few exceptions pretty much the whole tech/internet community was pulling for it.
Now, we finally get it and I see nothing but predictions of doom, outrage, and horror. Most of it from(sorry) right wing types who aren't the most computer/tech savvy folks.
I'm personally quite worried that this is the "camel's nose in the tent" but knowing the reasons why so many people were campaigning for and demanding this(no it didn't come from the top, not at all) I know it was probably needed. Heck these days, internet access is arguably a necessity... at least every much of one has having a phone. It kind of makes sense to call it a utility.
I get the worry though, I share it. Just maybe turn down the rhetoric a notch or two at least until we find an actual problem(then by all means let's rage). I don't like Obama either but he's not the devil incarnate he's just another mediocre democrat president.
Now, we finally get it and I see nothing but predictions of doom, outrage, and horror. Most of it from(sorry) right wing types who aren't the most computer/tech savvy folks.
I'm personally quite worried that this is the "camel's nose in the tent" but knowing the reasons why so many people were campaigning for and demanding this(no it didn't come from the top, not at all) I know it was probably needed. Heck these days, internet access is arguably a necessity... at least every much of one has having a phone. It kind of makes sense to call it a utility.
I get the worry though, I share it. Just maybe turn down the rhetoric a notch or two at least until we find an actual problem(then by all means let's rage). I don't like Obama either but he's not the devil incarnate he's just another mediocre democrat president.
I think that comment was totally unnecessary. I know a lot of liberals who are not too savvy (about anything).
RotorAndWing
Final Approach
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2008
- Messages
- 8,496
- Location
- Other side of the world
- Display Name
Display name:
Rotor&Wing
Yea, like the ACA, lets wait for it to be implemented to "find out what's in it".
I don't think he could ever rate as high as "mediocre", that would be a hell of a step up.
I do too. I wasn't trying to disparage those guys. A lot of my friends are those guys. I agree politically with those guys about 75-80% of the time... but let me put it like this.
You know how we all feel when we read articles about aircraft safety written by someone who isn't a pilot or really involved in aviation? They get so many things wrong and just lack understanding of the nuances or even some basic principals about how an airplane works? Well as someone with a degree in CS and experience in the field, that's what it feels like when I see a lot of these guys spouting off about net neutrality. That's all.
Shepherd
Final Approach
This is tyranny in it's most basic form. The Internet is the most powerful equalizer ever created, and the government is going to lock it down and turn it into another controlled media source.
RotorAndWing
Final Approach
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2008
- Messages
- 8,496
- Location
- Other side of the world
- Display Name
Display name:
Rotor&Wing
What and loose their best means of tracking and spying on the public? I doubt it.
Besides they've been trying to shut down all sorts of stuff on the internet for years without much success. The barriers are technical more than legal at this point.
- Joined
- May 11, 2010
- Messages
- 20,703
- Location
- Charlotte, NC
- Display Name
Display name:
Snorting his way across the USA
Like any other media, the government can do what it wants, something will replace it or I suspect there will be no shortage of work arounds. It may be the one thing we might appreciate Russian hackers for. And no I don't appreciate them.
Instead of big business making the money,the government is going to move in ,and tuck it to the populous.just another way to tax the people. In the End it's all politics.
Clip4
Touchdown! Greaser!
Without net neatrality, the high bidder will control the web content you have access to. The FCC was inundated letters supporting their action.
And if the high bidder delivers crap.. People won't buy their service and they go out of business.....
It is called free enterprise and capitalism...... Been workin for a thousand years..........
Don't *uck with success...
You mean... take their business to a competing internet? Most of us don't really have a lot of choice in that regard. In most of the US last I looked you really only have one choice in your area if you want decent broadband access. I've looked and my only alternative is Satellite which is terrible...
I'm all for free market capitalism and I agree that most of the time government intervention is a bad thing. However, in certain rare circumstances it is necessary and makes sense. I believe this was one of those circumstances.
James331
Ejection Handle Pulled
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2014
- Messages
- 20,309
- Display Name
Display name:
James331
Welcome to China!
Everskyward
Experimenter
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2005
- Messages
- 33,453
- Display Name
Display name:
Everskyward
Haha no kidding. I have no opinion one way or another, but that is what I noticed too. I know I'll end up paying whatever it is to one party or the other.
TMetzinger
Final Approach
Strongly disagree with this. You heard what the proponents wanted you to hear. Lots and lots of NetGeeks are horrified by this.
JoseCuervo
En-Route
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2012
- Messages
- 2,868
- Display Name
Display name:
JoseCuervo
JoseCuervo
En-Route
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2012
- Messages
- 2,868
- Display Name
Display name:
JoseCuervo
Here is the argument for Net Neutrality:
"Net neutrality proponents range from consumer advocate and human rights organizations to major online and technology companies. They base their arguments on the idea of an “open Internet,” in which people face no restrictions on what they can access over the Internet — except for what local governments may prohibit, such as illegal file sharing. Advocates say that users should encounter no upload and download speed limits based on what they are accessing, within the confines of the connection rates that consumers pay for. Supporters believe that this promotes the Internet as a “free market,” which provides a level playing field for companies to compete for customers and allows start-up companies to pursue new customers without restriction or unfair disadvantage."
It is kind of similar to the argument for Freeways vs. Toll Roads.
TMetzinger
Final Approach
The premise of net neutrality is that the internet will not be able to prioritize any traffic over any other traffic. It's primarily aimed at keeping your ISP from accepting money from Netflix to stream their content faster than Amazon, for instance.
And like many things, that sounds good on the surface. But there are legitimate needs to prioritize traffic on the internet - Vonage and other Voice-over-IP work better if their traffic (which is real-time unbuffered streams) gets a boost.
The BAD part that has many of us scared is that this is the government seizing the power to regulate what was essentially a free-market service. And when the government does that, things generally get worse and more expensive. And government tends to write rules with no idea of how the things they are working actually work.
And like many things, that sounds good on the surface. But there are legitimate needs to prioritize traffic on the internet - Vonage and other Voice-over-IP work better if their traffic (which is real-time unbuffered streams) gets a boost.
The BAD part that has many of us scared is that this is the government seizing the power to regulate what was essentially a free-market service. And when the government does that, things generally get worse and more expensive. And government tends to write rules with no idea of how the things they are working actually work.
Everskyward
Experimenter
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2005
- Messages
- 33,453
- Display Name
Display name:
Everskyward
I think it's a ****ing match between companies which provide content on the internet and companies which provide bandwidth + content. The companies which provide bandwidth + content might have an interest in slowing their competition down which will be prevented by net neutrality. I'm sure there is more to it and people will correct me but that is my layman's view.
Everskyward
Experimenter
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2005
- Messages
- 33,453
- Display Name
Display name:
Everskyward
Actually I'm paying about double what I did before because I got ****ed at my original ISP. There are not many choices out here.
Everskyward
Experimenter
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2005
- Messages
- 33,453
- Display Name
Display name:
Everskyward
In one post you say the price is going down, in the next you say it's going to get ugly. I say it is what it is and what it will be and I'm not going to worry about it.Same here since the "hole" currently has limited wired access.....
The game changer will be the expansion of wireless services... And the FCC is the main gate keeper in that arena...
It will get REAL ugly soon...
JoseCuervo
En-Route
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2012
- Messages
- 2,868
- Display Name
Display name:
JoseCuervo
How many people have options for more than 2 wired suppliers??
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
JoseCuervo
En-Route
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2012
- Messages
- 2,868
- Display Name
Display name:
JoseCuervo
Close enough.
You don't want Cable Companies killing Netflix.
Which, they would if they could.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Everskyward
Experimenter
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2005
- Messages
- 33,453
- Display Name
Display name:
Everskyward
Dunno, phone service it much cheaper now than when I was a kid, especially in inflation-adjusted dollars.I am saying the less government control ... The better..... IMHO... And... I am with you.. I ain't gonna worry either.. I am old and any changes will effect the young kids... I will be long gone by then...
JoseCuervo
En-Route
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2012
- Messages
- 2,868
- Display Name
Display name:
JoseCuervo
I am saying the less government control ... The better..... IMHO... And... I am with you.. I ain't gonna worry either.. I am old and any changes will effect the young kids... I will be long gone by then...
We regulate all sorts of utilities.
And it works.
Ask a Texan how much they pay for electricity after deregulation.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Everskyward
Experimenter
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2005
- Messages
- 33,453
- Display Name
Display name:
Everskyward
Only one wired service here, Century Link. And I pay something like $25/month but no long distance.Phone service here has two wired providers,,,,
US West / now Century Link charges 85.00 a month for ONE private line...
Charter cable offers ALOT better service for 29.95 a month.......
Competition is GOOD......
Everskyward
Experimenter
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2005
- Messages
- 33,453
- Display Name
Display name:
Everskyward
So I will post the other side of the argument too. The bandwidth companies invested in the infrastructure so they want to be able to control what goes through it.
James331
Ejection Handle Pulled
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2014
- Messages
- 20,309
- Display Name
Display name:
James331
No, your government overlords will be handling that.
Same government people who got into office from campaign funding from corp America.
...no cookie for you
EppyGA
Touchdown! Greaser!
I'll bet your paperwork doesn't say x amount of bandwidth is guaranteed.
Everskyward
Experimenter
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2005
- Messages
- 33,453
- Display Name
Display name:
Everskyward
I may be getting a deal on my phone (landline) service but not on my wireless service. That is about $75/month.Which is exactly why they have the position they have.... Wireless companies can come it,, not have to lay millions in wires underground and beat the rates wired providers have.....
Evolution and progress is a wonderful thing.....