From what I can tell it doesn't sound good for Joe six pack. The internet providers get to charge for access speed to various websites. They can control your ability to "surf" the web. I could see maybe if consumers had an bunch of choices, but a lot of us (all?) Have very few alternatives. We have two providers where I live. So the market isn't forced to compete for customers, i.e. provide better, faster access. What do you techies out there think of this? Why do I feel like I am going to end up getting hosed?
Net Neutality?
poppadawg
41 - 60 of 80 Posts
Joined
·
1,955 Posts
Media over-hype-FTC now regulates
For those who don't know, all this change means is that the FCC no longer regulates the internet just like before Obama. However, the FTC (Fed Trade Commission) STILL WILL REGULATE to enforce anti-trust activities, monopoly formation, etc. So, folks, the media is telling half truths, i.e. "there will be no regulation"--BS!
And, Netflix, Google and other big i-net users were backers of "net neutrality" to keep their costs down and pass those costs to other users. (previously stated in this thread).
BEST explanation yet!
For those who don't know, all this change means is that the FCC no longer regulates the internet just like before Obama. However, the FTC (Fed Trade Commission) STILL WILL REGULATE to enforce anti-trust activities, monopoly formation, etc. So, folks, the media is telling half truths, i.e. "there will be no regulation"--BS!
And, Netflix, Google and other big i-net users were backers of "net neutrality" to keep their costs down and pass those costs to other users. (previously stated in this thread).
Check back in a few years and compare how much you pay for the same type of internet service you now receive. My bet is it will be more, significantly more. As long as you’re ok with that “freedom,” it’s all good. Every government decision has pros and cons, as well as politicians who benefit, often financially, from those decisions. I hope this ruling works out for everyone, but when ISPs pay lobbyists and/or contribute money to politicians to make this change happen I get a little suspicious.
Day 3 and the Internet still works just fine...and will continue to do so WITHOUT the US government screwing it up....as I said before...just a bunch of nonsense.
Joined
·
18,021 Posts
The Commerce Clause was specifically aimed at preventing the states from enacting impediments to the free flow of “commerce” such as tariffs, quotas and taxes. It also does not grant the federal government the authority to interfere with the free market.
Uh, you need to read the Constitution again...
Did you really think the effects of this decision would be felt on day 3?
Joined
·
6,051 Posts
Wow! People are so stupid.. If Facebook/Twitter says something ,these idiots believe it.
Joined
·
18,021 Posts
You need to read it as the framers wrote it & stop trying to pervert it as the progressives have done for the last 90 yrs. It is a very simple & concise document that defines (& limits) the authority of the federal government.
Joined
·
437 Posts
Y'all saying govt overreach, but what if the govt isn't our biggest enemies. These days, companies control the govt, it's just a matter of time for them to control us. Our biggest enemy are the big corporations taking advantage of the consum3rs by overpricing everything(airline industry collaborating).
Sent from my SM-J700T using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-J700T using Tapatalk
Joined
·
299 Posts
LOL....Net Neutrality......Affordable Care Act....get the picture??
Joined
·
199 Posts
net neutrality
My Techie son wrote a short paper on net neutrality and and why he believes it is a good thing. He was wondering about your thoughts on what he wrote.
I just finished reading about net neutrality from many different places both pros and cons. As I was reading on the subject I began to understand laws of net neutrality, which were put in place in 2015. What I have gathered is that net neutrality requires that all “BSP’s” to provide one speed for all. It basically states that all data should be delivered together and no one should have priority. You can relate it to “internet plumbing” net neutrality wants only one pipe that everyone and everything uses at once. It also states that no one on the internet can be blocked by a “BSP”
The problem I have with the idea of using one pipe line where no one gets priority is that its slower and can be a traffic jam when to many people are accessing a specific website at once. We saw this happen with the health.gov websites when Obamacare became available. The traffic was so high that many people couldn’t load anything at all. Now even though this was before net neutrality imaging how much worse it would be if we could only use one pipeline. With no net neutrality, we can leave the current pipeline and have other pipe lines for websites that experience more traffic to help our speed become faster and less lag time. I think this is something that is positive and not negative. Now the idea that all the other sources will be slower because the other pipes are faster is untrue. Think of it like a freeway, you can bypass all these stops and traffic lights that slow down your trip, but if you need to stop you just get on the access road and even though it’s a slower speed limit you still get to your destination. if we add these faster internet pipelines not only will it help heavy website traffic, but it will also speed up the slower one because there is less traffic.
Now the idea that they can block websites(I’m actually not worried about this) seems many people are making it like “it the end of the internet”, “they are going to block all websites they don’t agree with”, and “they are taking away free speech from social movements”. This gibberish is a scare tactic to make people freak out. It’s just like everyone freaking out about the end of the world in 2012 or the end of America with the election of Trump. I believe that this is just a simple scare tactic because the laws that are being repealed have only been in place since 2015 which is only two years. Before 2015 there were no issues with blocked websites that took away free speech. Many left and right websites were up with many different views. I also believe that Obama put the “you can’t block any websites” as a political move to gain favor with people or make anyone who would repeal it seem to not care about free speech and hush people up because once again there was no issue before with blocking websites even though they had the power to do so. Another reason they won’t block anyone is because of the free market. This work by the means of competition. For example, if company “A” is blocking may websites that people want for $50 a month and company “B” offers all websites with no blocking for $50 a month, then company “A” will lose a lot of money because people will all buy company “B” internet service. So, company “A” would rather go out of business or have to offer all websites. Lastly, blocking already happens in a way. I host my website with “WIX” and in part of their agreement if they find you website offensive in any kind of way then they have the right not to host your website and will give you reimbursement depending on certain variables. an example of this is the KKK. I found out that many websites that are tied to groups like them have to host their websites on their own because most companies don’t want to host them and have every right to do so.
To wrap all this up many people are making a bigger deal than it really is. I think most people and the media are making it seem so bad because it is more about who is repealing this law, Trump administration, and it is less about the actual law itself. My personal opinion on the matter is leaning more to no net neutrality for all the reasons above however I really don’t think that either way is a big deal as a customer to a “BSP”. Sure, your speeds will vary but that can be relative. It really is more of a topic for companies with heavy website traffic. I have two questions I leave you with the first being “Did you have an issue with the internet before Obamas net neutrality laws were put into place before 2015?” And second “if Trump was not president and these laws were repealed by someone else do you think that the public would still make a huge mess out of this topic?”
My Techie son wrote a short paper on net neutrality and and why he believes it is a good thing. He was wondering about your thoughts on what he wrote.
I just finished reading about net neutrality from many different places both pros and cons. As I was reading on the subject I began to understand laws of net neutrality, which were put in place in 2015. What I have gathered is that net neutrality requires that all “BSP’s” to provide one speed for all. It basically states that all data should be delivered together and no one should have priority. You can relate it to “internet plumbing” net neutrality wants only one pipe that everyone and everything uses at once. It also states that no one on the internet can be blocked by a “BSP”
The problem I have with the idea of using one pipe line where no one gets priority is that its slower and can be a traffic jam when to many people are accessing a specific website at once. We saw this happen with the health.gov websites when Obamacare became available. The traffic was so high that many people couldn’t load anything at all. Now even though this was before net neutrality imaging how much worse it would be if we could only use one pipeline. With no net neutrality, we can leave the current pipeline and have other pipe lines for websites that experience more traffic to help our speed become faster and less lag time. I think this is something that is positive and not negative. Now the idea that all the other sources will be slower because the other pipes are faster is untrue. Think of it like a freeway, you can bypass all these stops and traffic lights that slow down your trip, but if you need to stop you just get on the access road and even though it’s a slower speed limit you still get to your destination. if we add these faster internet pipelines not only will it help heavy website traffic, but it will also speed up the slower one because there is less traffic.
Now the idea that they can block websites(I’m actually not worried about this) seems many people are making it like “it the end of the internet”, “they are going to block all websites they don’t agree with”, and “they are taking away free speech from social movements”. This gibberish is a scare tactic to make people freak out. It’s just like everyone freaking out about the end of the world in 2012 or the end of America with the election of Trump. I believe that this is just a simple scare tactic because the laws that are being repealed have only been in place since 2015 which is only two years. Before 2015 there were no issues with blocked websites that took away free speech. Many left and right websites were up with many different views. I also believe that Obama put the “you can’t block any websites” as a political move to gain favor with people or make anyone who would repeal it seem to not care about free speech and hush people up because once again there was no issue before with blocking websites even though they had the power to do so. Another reason they won’t block anyone is because of the free market. This work by the means of competition. For example, if company “A” is blocking may websites that people want for $50 a month and company “B” offers all websites with no blocking for $50 a month, then company “A” will lose a lot of money because people will all buy company “B” internet service. So, company “A” would rather go out of business or have to offer all websites. Lastly, blocking already happens in a way. I host my website with “WIX” and in part of their agreement if they find you website offensive in any kind of way then they have the right not to host your website and will give you reimbursement depending on certain variables. an example of this is the KKK. I found out that many websites that are tied to groups like them have to host their websites on their own because most companies don’t want to host them and have every right to do so.
To wrap all this up many people are making a bigger deal than it really is. I think most people and the media are making it seem so bad because it is more about who is repealing this law, Trump administration, and it is less about the actual law itself. My personal opinion on the matter is leaning more to no net neutrality for all the reasons above however I really don’t think that either way is a big deal as a customer to a “BSP”. Sure, your speeds will vary but that can be relative. It really is more of a topic for companies with heavy website traffic. I have two questions I leave you with the first being “Did you have an issue with the internet before Obamas net neutrality laws were put into place before 2015?” And second “if Trump was not president and these laws were repealed by someone else do you think that the public would still make a huge mess out of this topic?”
Joined
·
199 Posts
net neutrality
"BSP" Is broadband/internet providers
"BSP" Is broadband/internet providers
CR, I agree with you. The one thing that bothers me is the lack of competition among providers. Most of us have no choice or very few. So if we don't like the lack of access to certain websites that company A provides, we don't have a choice to go with company B. An open market place that would give people the choice among various providers that you describe would be the ultimate answer. But currently that doesn't exist.
I think ISPs were given exclusive territories to ensure return on their original investment. That's a guess.
The completely wireless ISP that a couple of folks have mentioned, sounds real interesting. Didn't know that was even doable.
I think ISPs were given exclusive territories to ensure return on their original investment. That's a guess.
The completely wireless ISP that a couple of folks have mentioned, sounds real interesting. Didn't know that was even doable.
Joined
·
20,272 Posts
I know a hard working young man that recently quit AT&T and went to work for Centerpoint. His reasoning was that communication (low energy) would eventually get to be entirely wireless and that his future was questionable there. However, wires would still be needed for high energy electric power so his future with Centerpoint would be stable. If communication changes as much in his career as it did in mine, who knows?
Joined
·
18,021 Posts
The bottom line is not the restriction of sites/content (they could & have done so before). The purpose was to allow companies that stream data (Apple, Google, YouTube, NetFlix, etc) to pay the same as small sites like 2Cool. In essence, all the little ISPs would be subsidizing the large data streaming sites. They have billions of $$$, let them invest in their own infrastructure instead of the individual ISPs.
The 'pie' is only so big under this so-called Net-Neutrality... if they get a bigger piece, what do you think is going to happen with the size of everyone else's piece???
If those with smart TVs that stream movies (myself included) & other content, by all means pay for it yourselves... just don't expect the rest of the country to subsidize your bills for doing so.
The 'pie' is only so big under this so-called Net-Neutrality... if they get a bigger piece, what do you think is going to happen with the size of everyone else's piece???
If those with smart TVs that stream movies (myself included) & other content, by all means pay for it yourselves... just don't expect the rest of the country to subsidize your bills for doing so.
Since I've been involved in technology for 30 years and watched the Internet grow from usenet groups to the birth of the first websites to what it is today without government overregulation...I know what I'm talking about. Day 5 and the Internet still works fine. (just a note...it'll still work fine on Day 5005 if we keep the government out of overregulating it.)
Joined
·
8,011 Posts
.
Attachments
Joined
·
20,272 Posts
This can't be expressed enough, and those are just a few examples.
Never assume that the name given by the government, or a corporation or practically any group for any program actually depicts the truth.
41 - 60 of 80 Posts
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
