The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has voted to repeal net neutrality protections in a 3-2 vote. Good news?
The people who said they're fine without net neutrality probably don't even know what it is.
Net neutrality is more important than God!
I would hope it would be more important than an invisible man in the sky who doesn't exist.
Lol if you’re okay with no net neutrality you have no concept of what can/will happen without it. You won’t be laughing for long.
We were without it for 15 years, and that resulted in amazing gains. Net neutrality put the internet in the hands of lawyers, accountants and bureaucrats. Net neutrality did nothing good. It put the FCC and its dinosaur-hatched regulations (designed to control Ma Bell) over the internet. It stifled innovation and gave huge advantages to Google, Facebook and other large tech players. Entrepreneurs are back in the game, again!!
Like most in my area, I have one option for an ISP. I’m sure they would never sacrifice my service for their financial gain.
Blame government regulation of the market, not the tossing of net neutrality, for you having only a single provider in your area.
The threat is that service goes down and prices go up and everyone will cry.
I suppose nobody's ever invented something when people were unhappy with poorer quality service at higher prices???
Trigger the libs by destroying the internet!
I'm sorry, but to view this comment you must buy the angry libs package.
You don't have to be a liberal to not support this. According to this poll, the majority of Conservatives don't support it either.
👎 Bad decision
Thousands will die!
Let's threaten the commissioners family and call in a bomb threat.
Taxes, healthcare, immigration or the internet - the reaction is the same from the insane left.
They still navel gaze, read the unreadable whine from the wiper of the server about What Happened and repeat the same lefty hysteria that led to a Trump win.
I hope my ISP allows me access to SOH, because after this ruling we're all our ISP's slave.
We're you a slave before 2015?
Was SOH available in 2015?
How did the internet survive since Al Gore invented it until 2015 when the Messiah's administration found something else to regulate.
Nothing has changed except one less regulator regulating your life. Armageddon.
It would just be slower. But seeing that this app is affiliated with amazon it wont slow down. You would still be able to use a proxy if the government or corporation tried to block websites.
If you have your own website people will notice that it loads slower than bigger websites like google. You will probably get less views too. As these big corporations like Facebook google apple and amazon get bigger they are going to partner with internet providers like att and Comcast. Giving consumers less of an option in the “free market” and allowing corporations to govern the people. This is the result of what modern Americans call “libertarianism”. It will lead to monopoly and corporate autocracy
Degregulation never seems to be a good thing.
Calling this deregulation is misguiding because you’re deregulating something that kept a neutral playing field for websites that prevented corporations from regulating the internet
Net neutrality deregulated the internet and now these people who love deregulation want to get rid of it
Funny how a lot of people on this app claim to be libertarian but they get so up in arms when deregulation actually happens.
Because deregulation in this case allows monopolies to take advantage of citizens who have no other choice. Most libertarians agree that some regulation is necessary
But is that true or is it just fear mongering. I’m not really sure myself. I’m still researching the matter
What Americans call libertarianism leads to monopoly in every case. The corporations love it. No wonder it is the only acceptable political ideology in the mainstream that is not capitalism
Deregulation of any kind is never good. During the Reagan years deregulation began stripping away the protections that had been put in place after the crash of ‘29. That deregulation continued through all the administrations till George W. Bush and by that time the our economy and subsequently the world economy was on the verge of collapse. Obviously this is not on that scale, but deregulation is never good.
Will also say over regulation have the same results. It’s harder to start a businesses or keep a small business afloat with more and more regulations, thus eliminating new competition . Larger corporations have the assets to comply with new regulations. That’s why big banks have gotten bigger and NO new banks have opened (small banks are important for business start ups)
But isn’t tough to start a small business when larger business can run you out without they hard held back by regulation?
The world changes and always have to rethink strategy. Some get run out and some prosper. Wal-mart killed a lot of businesses sure but now people are starting to choose to go to smaller stores because it’s easier and quicker. People hate amazon but a lot of small stores are on there too they would’ve never reached the market #s like they do now.
It’s like hating IPhone because it got rid of the corded phone business. But in turn now have a market for cases, games....
Speaking of small business and getting loans from big banks, there’s an idea that a community could create a website where you build up points in a system where you do things for the community. Like helping a neighbor paint their house or baby sitting etc. Once you build enough trust in the system you can pull out a loan from the community and the community makes sure you don’t have to default on the loan. It’s called time banking and some places have done it. Here’s more about it-
Scrpn yeah a lot of businesses are on amazon and will be moving to amazon because their website will get less traffic without net neutrality.
What if you have a crappy idea? I wouldn’t back a crap business plan just because you painted my house.
You have to be approved still
An this great idea churches have been doing it for years. not really groundbreaking.
It’d be great without the dogma
It’s interesting how passionate people are over a topic they don’t understand.
Hey, the FCC voted, and the sky didn’t fall. Facebook and Google (and other mega corps) who supported Net Neutrality did a good job of misdirecting the public. They stood to benefit hugely from Net Neutrality. Most of the commentary in the press, and especially the tech press was either ill informed or coopted.
Corporations now have the right to slow down internet connection to influence customers to use their sites, and they have the right to block some content. How is that freedom? Do you guys want everything to be controlled by corporations?
“Net Neutrality” is just as much of an oxymoron as the unaffordable “Affordable Care Act”.
Net Neutrality gave GOVERNMENT yet more control, and took it away from the free market that made it so great to begin with!
If you’re a thumb-sucking, ever-the-victim snowflake that needs someone to protect them from everything, then, well, keep voting democrat.
Good idea! Let's start calling for murder to be legal! I mean, making murder illegal is a threat to our freedom after all. And as you said, who cares about our safety and government protection.
Reductio ad absurdum...
Net neutrality is like global warming. Some people just just wake up every morning and go “what can I be hysteric about today?” Then they go read the puffho, fuzzbeed and alternet to get some ideas.
Then they become hysteric.
Excellent news. Governments should not be involved at all.
You want to turn our economy into a lawless wild west? Why?!?
Not sure if you meant to comment elsewhere, as that makes no sense here...
Government should not be involved at all = no laws = wild west.
Your food can have whatever unpronouncable chemical the food companies want and don't have to print honest anything on the label. The area around construction sites will be deathtraps. And your isp (glorified toll booth) will get to dictate what content you get to see rather than just charging for neutral access.
The message was meant for you. The government probably should not be a player in the game like communism, but it most certainly should be the game master setting rules that apply them to all equally. Without regulation, capitalism is a nightmare. Think early industrial revolution.
You have to read the poll to understand a good response to it. This poll is in regards to internet service.
And? What difference does it make? Regulation is needed. Why do you think companies will play nice? Their sole purpose is to make profit. Stiffiling competition is the #1 way to maximize profit. And now that many isp have been merging with actual content producers, why would they not slow down competitor products if it's not illegal?
I have no idea why libertarians think companies are some sort of benevolent angels.
It means your rambling about food and construction sites are irrelevant and in no way related to the topic.
I also rambled about isps. And even tho the same analogy works in all of the situations, you can keep pretending ignorance.
Feel free to move from projection to a discussion of the topic of ISP regulations any time.
Everything I said is in regards to general government business interactions that apply in varying degrees to all industries, including isps.
I stated my case about isps in my first post right next to the other subjects you keep bringing up. If your so unconcerned with the other subjects, why are you pretending to ignoring the statement about isps?
Please stop playing dumb or I'll have to assume your not playing.
So then, will you address how allowing toll booths to slow down competitor content is a good thing, or am I just going to have to ignore the troll?
There are no “toll booths” slowing down content. Again, say something relevant. Anything. Anything at all and we can discuss it.
Or maybe it would be better if I started and gave you something to go from.
Why should one person/company be forced to carry another person/company’s data across its network even if there is no agreement in place with anyone to do so?
The whole point of net neutrality is to outlaw selective slowing down of certain content. The whole point of revoking that law is to slow down content.
Isps went into business to provide the end user with access to the content on the internet, in other words to carry the content.
It seems you don't understand what net neutrality is or what isps do enough do know what the topic is about.
So again, Why should one person/company be forced to carry another person/company’s data across its network even if there is no agreement in place with anyone to do so?
The answer is that they shouldn’t. People should be free to deal with others in a voluntary manner.
Your projection about not knowing much about ISPs doesn’t make for an argument.
But if you want an education about the subject, it isn’t about someone blocking your Netflix. It’s about Tier 1 ISPs being forced to carry all data at the same transfer rates, which if you know anything about networking, you know is about as ignorant and unintelligent a thing as any.
The truth is that Net Neutrality is nothing more than corporate welfare made to support larger tech companies margin’s by limiting their competition.
Large companies can build multiple data centers or parallel networks to get around Tier 1 ISPs, while small companies cannot. Small companies must then rely upon Tier 1 ISPs carrying their data between regional ISPs, which is fine if they can prioritize important data for their customers. But if they’re prohibited from doing so, then they have no way of competing with larger companies.
I can't wait for the supporters of this to have their internet slow down and their prices go up! You people are so stupid to think this won't cost you in the end!
I don’t know, man. I kind of just want things to be how they were for 23 years without a problem rather than for the last year and a half with lots of legal battles, actually higher costs, and controversy.
It seems that very few people who want net neutrality actually know what it does or what it is. It’s kind of like a blind rage that’s built on lies and assuming the worst. It actually makes me very sad to see how badly informed our public is.
The same can be said about those who against it. Assuming you are against net neutrality, do you know what it is and how could you possibly not want this regulation?
Yes, the internet shouldn't be restrained by the government. And no, the internet won't collapse. You weren't paying exuberant prices before 2015, were you?
Think of all the people in schools who have to pay to do their work! Fuck Ajit Pai, Comcast, and AT&T.
Pepsi ... I get that freedom and choose are hard for you, but the good news is that you’ll survive and eventually you may even get that this was a great day and a great step for freedom!
Did anyone notice, we never had government regulations until 2015.
The internet should be an open market place. We no longer subside Netflix and other programs.
Check out the WSJ..
Jazz ... more importantly, the onerous restrictions are placed on the internet by unelected partisan bureaucrats, not through our legal process of legislation.
Thankfully, we have more balanced folks in control now that are returning the power to the people.
How many actually know what NN means or are they going on Jimmy Kimmel’s barking face..
Jazzy ... yep, low info leftists don’t do their own research.
So can I get a specific way this helps consumers?
Here are specific ways consumers were hurt before net neutrality.
I’m sorry, this comment is not included in your Show of Hands Today internet package.
It’s funny how people think this is some brave argument that debunks the scary forces of evil that are against net neutrality
That 24% of us believe NN repeal is a good thing is worth rethinking my vote. I was behind the majority vote but now I just have one question, will the repeal affect the wallet of pleasure voters who rarely exceed 30GB of “unlimited” mostly thanks to heavy YouTube use? In other words will I have to pay more for bandwidth or is 30GB an insignificant quantity?
Think about it this way, if the net is not nuetral the corporate owned providers can slow down a site so that it is very hard to get on if they don't like the message the site is putting out to the public. This could easily happen on a right or left leaning site. Repeal of net neutrality is about control and profiteering.
Jw and if the government had control, we don’t! There is NOTHING that was good about the extra-constitutional Net Neutrality rules. They squelched competition and crushed innovation while forcing individuals to pay too much for the services they want and forcing them to buy services they don’t need.
Like the airlines, we need deregulation to spur competition and innovation to benefit the consumers, not the government monopolies. It’s time to remove all monopolies from this space!
With net neutrality in place, whether you are a newspaper, a blogger discussing sexual assault, a video provider, or someone filming a public official at a town hall, Verizon or AT&T can’t slow or block your ability to put your content online and speak. Without it, they effectively can.
Jw ... I get that your hair is on fire and your in full hysteria mode, but that’s utter nonsense that you’re spewing. How much of your sky is falling silliness happened before the unconstitutional NN rules were put in place by unelected bureaucrats?!
In the mid-2000s, Michael Powell, chosen by George W Bush as FCC chair, eliminated important safeguards against telecom monopoly power, and set the stage for the removal of net neutrality-like common carriage protections in broadband. Competition in broadband died and the US, once the leader in broadband, fell behind the rest of the world.
Jw ... the answer to bad government regulations is NEVER more regulation. Look at the airline industry. Deregulation was what saved it. It’s time to admit that MrO’s unconstitutional power grab was wrong.
The very same day Trump’s FCC chairman announced he was ending net neutrality protections, Comcast deleted from its website a public promise not to create internet fast lanes. In other words, now that the rules are poised to disappear, large telecommunications have decided to manipulate the flow of information in our society.
Jw ... there you go, proof positive of absolutely nothing! The problem is that the FCC didn’t go far enough. They should immediately dismantle all monopoly protections in this industry.
That way, the market will decide what is best.
Deregulation of the banks starting with Clinton and continuing with Bush caused the horrific financial crisis of 2008.
Putting all of the power in the hands of the executives of Comcast,Verizon, and AT&T will only lead to another disaster. These excutive's only concerns are limiting competition and increasing their profits.
If all states lift all regulations they have preventing more than one company laying cable in a region, then it will be a good thing. But obviously that's not going to happen, so I sincerely doubt the FCC's decision will introduce any significant competition to the market.
Cyan ... it is not obvious! We own the government. It’s time to push them to remove the destructive monopolies and allow the market to manage.
It is obvious considering the FCC (whose composite members are not voted in by the public, mind you) is bought and paid for by these ISP monopolies who have zero inventive to introduce competition by removing other regulations. Nothing about the NN repeal was intended to benefit the free market or the consumers. The priority is making these companies and the government more money, any other perceived benefits are an unintended side effect.
Cyan .. I understand that you’re confused. The unelected bureaucrats that put NN in place were the ones who could care less about consumers as they were paid by their buds to screw the consumers and stifle innovation.
Now the FCC has taken one small step towards eliminating the government overreach in the industry. Now let’s eliminate the monopolies completely!
I don't disagree that NN was established with little regard to the consumer, but it was also repealed for the same reasons. No decision the FCC makes is intended to increase freedom and innovation. I think our main disagreement here is the order in which deregulation occurs, which DOES matter. Repealing NN protections while retaining all other telcom regulations is going to hurt the consumer and result in maximum benefit to the monopolies.
Cyan ... repealing these onerous regulations will only hasten the next steps. Deregulation is the answer.
Do you honestly believe that? Do you really think the FCC and telecom monopolies have any interest whatsoever in further deregulation and a more open market? And are just going to start repealing stuff because it's the right thing to do? Until we eliminate the pathways for these monopolies to influence policy to such a large extent, we can't just assume any step is a step in the right direction. Freeing up the market is going to require tact. Total deregulation is obviously the ideal, but the process will be much like the game Jenga. Every block we pull out affects the integrity of the structure. To follow the analogy, every deregulation within the context of all other regulations still in place will affect the most vulnerable people in our society first and most.
24% of users on this are bots I guess.
Fishy ... nope, the 24% aren’t government dupes. We get that government control of the internet crushes innovation and raises the prices.
24% of people are informed and knew what net neutrality was
By February, no one will remember or care
The internet was a wasteland before 2015 obviously
That’s a bit overdramatic but ISPs like Comcast were definitely handling internet traffic unfairly.
No, but the outrage is mass hysteria.
Trump keeps winning! Right?!? Morons.
We're you crying this much prior to 2015, before net neutrality was a thing?
Net neutrality has existed in some form or regulation for over a decade now. This ruling just shows a complete disregard for consumers and overwhelming disapproval of policy. We are getting screwed Merica.
Net neutrality has existed in America since 2015.
Polarized, net neutrality was not around prior to 2015 and the regulations removed were the ones put into place by Obama (in 2015). We are getting screwed? The stock market and our economic growth tell me a different story. Open your eyes.
Stock markets been rising since Obama but I bet he gets no credit in your mind. And go read about net neutrality origins and the cases in court supporting it and it's principle of dumb pipes. I honestly don't have time to inform you myself when you don't want to take the time to read.
And don't even get me started on how you can't judge an economy based on stock market index....
At a snails pace during the Obama administration. Same with the economy. Are you suggesting he should get a participation trophy for that?
I said stock market AND economy. Two things.
Obama inherited a recession. I fucking hope the stock market rose. If it didint that would have been a disaster
Sounds like an excuse to me.
This is getting old republicans. Don’t you realize your party never listens to you?
WHO thinks this is a good thing?
People who are actually educated on the topic?
Are you asking me a question?
Why is it a bad thing?
Why is more regulation and treating it with utility company regulations a good thing?
The Obama administration went looking for a solution to a problem that did not exist in order to do what the do best - regulate, tax and regulate some more.
And it was not a good solution, because it stifled investment and choked the market so that only current big players (Facebook, Netflix, etc.) have a shot at survival while the people that provide the infrastructure for them get completely shut out. It's too much regulation. I trust the market to correct itself, as it had done for the couple decades before Net Neutrality was passed.
All Net Neutrality does is discourage investment and incentivize monopolies. People don't realize that the reason Netflix loves it so much isn't because they support the people, it's because their service uses an incredible amount of bandwidth and they're scared they'll have to pay a reasonable amount for it if Net Neutrality is repealed. People are SO misinformed, it's honestly scary.
This is the first intelligent comment I’ve seen from a doctor who fan. You’re busting stereotypes!
Thanks 😂 I haven't updated this account in years. I don't usually talk about Doctor Who because I know the kind of people it attracts, haha
Even Netflix came out with a statement against it.
Netflix came out with a statement against REPEALING it. They love Net Neutrality, because it means they get to take advantage of ISPs while smaller websites are forced to pay higher costs to compensate.
Pro-NN people love to call Republicans corporate shills but this is really a battle between ISPs and content providers. If you support NN you're just protecting Big Facebook. 😂
Nope. Look up their Twitter account. They definitely didn't want this. Companies were making it more expensive for their clients to stream Netflix and it cost them business.
What are you talking about? They tweeted yesterday that they're disappointed in the FCC's decision to REPEAL Net Neutrality.
Ok, sorry. I read your response wrong. I thought you were agreeing that the repeal is a bad thing. Which it is, because when Netflix has to pay more, guess who gets to make up that difference? WE do. Netflix, cable, cell phone usage...etc.
I agree that there are pros and cons. Ultimately, though, I think that the fact that investment in startups decreased tremendously under NN and new companies had trouble competing with existing ones shows that the bill makes the government's hand in the market a little too strong. If the bill is repealed, the market should go back to autocorrecting itself without the need for government meddling. I don't understand how liberals act so anti-big corporation one moment and then the next want to protect their right to choke smaller competitors. It doesn't make sense to me.
Because we see the opposite happening. Bigger companies can now cause the chokehold by making the cost so high that startups can't afford it. That's just the tip of the iceberg. Let's just wait and see, shall we?
Reese: Don’t know where you get your information, but are wrong on this issue. Without NN consumers will pay more & the small business/startups don’t stand a chance on an unlevel playing field. The notion that the market will manage justly is BS.
Not to mention the fact that internet providers can now limit and even block information. If there's something they don't want you to see, you won't see it. They can deliberately slow your connection then make you upgrade for better service while charging you more for it. And they will. It's not a maybe thing.
So happy to see someone here that gets it, Reeze. There's a reason all the jumbo sized companies supported NN so much and it wasn't so that small fries could come in with new ideas and disrupt the market and, potentially, their profits. Anytime the big boys support new regs, you know it's to stifle competition.
But you think the ISPs would allow small businesses across to the fast lane? You're fucking crazy. ISPs would have charges small business the same amount for access as they would Netflix. Netflix and Amazon can afford to pay that fee to reach customers at higher speeds. Jenna's Book Store & Video wouldn't be able to. Thus the ISPs are playing ON TEAM FACEBOOK AND NETFLIX by stuffing out the competition. The ISPs saw it as a win win. Netflix pays us a fuck ton of money and if they don't then Hulu (owned by Verizon I believe) will have faster download speeds and then will do better than Netflix. And on top of that we'll charge our customers more!
Krystina! Where ya been? How are things?
Hey Coffee! Great to see you. Just been busy with life, and had to take a little break from politics for a bit too. The negative energy gets to me after a while and I need a reprieve from all the hate, you know. Hope all has been well with you.
Yeah things have been good. Glad to see you back around!
1.) It's the exact same thing we had two years ago.
2.) Many of the things you idiots are afraid of are protected against by anti-trust laws.
3.) the only thing this will hurt is Google.
Since I'm not 12 years old I can remember that the internet was completely fine in 2015 and before.
The fear mongering idiots in favor of NN are either Netflix shills, middle schoolers, or just listened to what their fake news told them to think.
I heard EA is taking over the internet and everything will be a micro transaction and will cost $19,000. Only the rich will be able to afford to shitpost. Write your congressPERSON, phone bank for Bernie, buy your guy fawkes mask before they are illegal!
Or are industry insiders and do not want to see America's ISPs act in the way they do in other countries. Leave the internet alone and protect all data.
“Leave the internet alone”
We agree! That’s what just happened.
Wrong you are now putting it in the hands of the ISPs and their monopolist practices.
The internet is supposed to be free and open, all data treated equally. And net neutrality ensures that
All they did was decrease the control the government has over the net.
You realize the government created the internet correct? With out the government their would be no internet and if there was it would not be the same as it is today.
ARPANET was a creation of the US DOD
Also please provide me with an example of the government using its "control" over the internet since 2015? I'll wait
The government laid infrastructure for the military to communicate. This morphed into the internet.
Capitalism made the internet what it is today, and the farther the government stays away from a free internet, the better for citizens
I have no love for ISPs, but you’re letting a hawk convince you it’s saving you from a snake. It’s not. The government has its own agenda for wanting more control over the net
When has the government exerted it's control over the internet?
Again I'll wait.
The unregulated free market fails because it puts profit before consumer. Take a look at countries with no government regulation on the internet and tell me that they're flourishing and are the pinochle of online and telecommunications innovation.
Net neutrality ensure that all data is treated equally. There is nothing wrong with NN regulation Coffee
While you’re waiting try asking a question without being a bitch
Also the time to fight against censorship is BEFORE it happens, not after
I provided a source, but I didn’t even have to. You don’t need to show precious examples to know it’s a shit idea that should be fought against
All of those acts happened BEFORE net neutrality regulation. Way before actually.
"We're sorry, but to view this news website you have to pay an additional $40/month for the 'Non-government-sanctioned-news' package.
Lol, you realize this ruling means the government has LESS control over the net right?
This would be more appropriate fear mongering if the government won. I swear I don’t know if you people are trolling or not
Coffee: You really don’t get the NN thing, do you? The NN ruling was a “meta-rule” which said “the internet in the US can’t be controlled”, hence, a rule that banned regulation by anyone.... a rule that required there to be to no regulation.
Nah I do. NN meant the government could regulate how the ISPs handle the data THEY pay for.
The OP is ironic, and so is your post if you don’t understand that
Bad news for you and me. Write/call your congressman.
i guarantee the % of people that want net neutrality gone are the same people that support roy moore
so stupid. wake up republicans
Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't we just going back to the same rules we had two years ago as published by the Clinton era?
I don't think my internet service two years ago was the end of the world.
Those rules do not prevent companies from throttling speeds and restricting access to websites
Did it perfect us to use again?
Did it affect us two years ago?
These are the rules that Clinton is that what you keep the Internet free and open.
And net neutrality did not keep the internet open and free? Treating all data equally is the greatest protection.
We have seen many time ISPs throttle data inbound from competition. The Clinton rules did not do anything to stop this. Part of the reason net neutrality was voted on was due to Comcast throttling competition such as Netflix, Skype, Google Wallet, etc...
Prior to 2010, there were only ever 4 instances of ISPs throttling, and they were relatively minor occurrences
So the whole throttling thing came about when this computer guru was trying to rip off his internet company on his $19 a month unlimited plan. He was using it commercially and was uploading and downloading terabytes of information. The internet company took exception and throttled him. He got mad because he didn't want to pay extra for a commercial account and started a whole campaign with congress. They felt sorry for him and started this idea to regulate them. So, just like your phone, you get so many gigs at high speed for a price. If you go over, they throttle your speed. Now some companies knew customers didn't like this and advertised unlimited at high speed. And that is how competition works. If you don't like your service move. Companies will compete for your business. Seriously, watched Netflix and was never throttled. Do you really want everyone to pay more so a few guys can run terabytes through their machines? That's not very fair.
Yes, it affected us before the rules. A smaller ISP blocked VoIP, Comcast throttled P2P apps, AT&T blocked FaceTime and throttled Netflix. The FCC always had the position of NN but didn't have the teeth to enforce them. The rules in 2015 didn't add net neutrality, it just gave them the ability to enforce it.
Each violation grew in impact over the last which is why the change was needed. The ISPs have nothing standing in their way to make it as terrible as possible.
75% of the country only has access to one or two providers, so your "just move" comment is hilariously accurate because that's what it would take to switch providers...moving. These companies have monopolies and must be regulated as such. Your power company can't wake up one day and just jack up the price or charge you more for using one kind of TV over another.
I say that if you want more data then you better be prepared to pay for it. Because I don't want to pay your for your party on the internet just because you don't think it's fair.
And your power company does charge you more for more power. And if you go over a threshold, you're a commercial operator and the rates go way up.
And like cable, if you want HBO then you gotta pay for it.
Data isn't a limited resource...it's not like the ISPs will run out. The limit is with throughput, not capacity, which is already tiered appropriately. You pay for faster speeds.
Exactly. And the socialists in the Ôbama administration didn't want you to have to pay more for a higher speed. They said it wasn't fair. But you do know that terabytes at high speed takes a whole lot more equipment to keep up with than the same high speed that one person is using for Netflix. So if you're a commercial account then you should have to pay more than a little guy just watching a Netflix movie.
Lol, what? That is categorically untrue. I guess this conversation is done lol.
What category? What do you specifically want regulated? And what don't you want regulated? Because net neutrality was so intrusive that it was going to be impossible to live with without raising everyone's prices.
So with net neutrality gone, what would you like to see written as a new regulation?
Net neutrality is gone. And was way to much regulation. If you want something simple, address just the issue that needs it. Not the entire industry. Like Ôbamacare. They had one issue and destroyed the entire industry. You don't need to go that far. The government isn't our savior.
Dik, do you have an idea for us?
Net neutrality kept the intergity of the internet. Without it it allows ISPs to extort small companies and ultimately hurt consumers. I don't know why you see it as burden some.
Provide examples of NN harming anyone
It would raise prices for all of us. But it's gone.
So you would expect to see internet rates fall again? I can assure you that is not going to happen. Internet pieces go up because we have consumer grade equipment that is faster, transfer speeds for consumers increased and the amount of matainence required on infrastructure. It would have brought prices up regardless.
So please I ask you to present examples of NN harming people
The net neutrality rules hadn't gone into full effect yet. But they were about to regulate the competition out of the industry. Very similar to cable. You can't get another cable company to your house can you?
the net neutrality rules adopted during the Obama administration discourage the ISPs from making investments in their network that would provide even better and faster online access.
“There’s plenty of scaremongering around steps broadband providers could take in the absence of neutrality regulation — blocking off certain sites, or charging extra fees to access certain services — but not a ton of reason to think they would do these things, which would antagonize customers, be technically tricky to enforce against sophisticated users, and invite the re-imposition of regulations,”
“What’s more realistic is the introduction of plans that provide higher speeds for specific bandwidth-intensive services,” he said, pointing to streaming high-definition Netflix videos as an example of such a service. “Or, similarly, content providers might end up subsidizing higher-speed access to their services for subscribers who’ve only paid for slower all-purpose Internet access.”
Or I can pay for access for the internet and not have to worry about bullshit plans and can go wherever I want on the internet with the bandwidth and speeds I already pay for. Maybe it's because you don't live in a city but my internet is extremely fast already and the free market that NN regulation encourages requires ISPs to constantly adapt to and accept ever expanding technologies.
I shouldn't have to pay extra to watch Netflix, I should pay one internet bill just like I do with my water, gas and electricity.
But you don't pay a flat rate for your electricity. That's the point, you only pay for what you use. Net neutrality blocked anyone from paying to get a faster service. It treated everyone the same, and you and I know that someone that only checks email doesn't need to pay for blazing speed required by gamers. And with everyone being treated the same, you cannot buy a blazing fast speed for important life saving internet requirements.
While no ISP has announced specific plans to offer paid-priority services, several executives say they might in the future. They argue there are certain applications -- in medicine or in the development of autonomous vehicles -- that require fast, low-latency internet connections that a paid-priority service would deliver.
"You don't want your self-driving car operating on best-effort-delivery bandwidth," Randall Stephenson, CEO of AT&T, said last month in an interview at the Economic Club of New York. "If you have any expectation of medical professionals using wireless networks for surgery or EMS or other types of medical applications, you don't want to outlaw paid prioritization."
outlaw paid prioritization."
Broadband providers argue that these fears are overblown. They say market forces will keep them honest and that the internet will continue grow as it did in the days before net neutrality regulations.
Breck1011: You rant on & on but the more you do the more you amplify the fact that you don’t know what in the world you are talking about. Please say something intelligent or shut up. Thanking you in advance.
Breck you realize that the medical field uses a heavily secured and restricted LAN/WAN network. So while they may have internet access from an ISP the majority of the medical record information and EMS systems are running on a network whose sole purpose is to connect to a database and retrieve information. Hospitals already have high speed low latency internet connections. The argument made by AT&T is utter bullshit.
Also there are two types of delivery systems and neither has to do with bandwidth speeds.
Best effort delivery ensures no gaurentee that all packets will arrive. Example being mp3. Have you streamed an MP3 file and noticed that the audio may differ in quality? That's because the protocol used is BED.
Reliable delivery ensures to entirely of packets arrive. It may be slightly slower but it ensures all packets arrive. An example would be SOAP messages
Also net neutrality did not block you from buying internet plans that offer higher speeds. I have 1Gbps internet but my ISP also offers 300Mbps and lower. I chose to pay for faster internet
Your right whether you're downloading and uploading for a game or just downloading an email your data should transfer at a consistent rate. You pay for how fast you want your connection to be. If I pay for 1Gbps I expect all my data to download at 1Gbps. I don't expect Netflix to download at 500Mbps unless I pay more to also have Netflix download at 1Gbps
Jenna, I totally agree with you that next we need legislation to stop the sale of our information and to stop the blocking of content. That may be next. I'm hoping that they won't do it for fear that people will quit them and move on to a company that wont do that. Even though they say that there's only one ISP in certain areas, there's always satellite and hotspot through your phone with unlimited high speed access.
Obviously stupid, those aren't my quotes, those are from a popular computer magazine editor.
More importantly Jenna, I want to know about your baby.
I read an analysis yesterday that said the most likely outcome is that the Internet will gradually become like cable until eventually you will pay a monthly fee and get a package of Websites, services and apps and the small, independent sites and apps will disappear.
The two examples it gave of services that wouldn’t exist without net neutrality are Etsy and Vimeo.
I’m sure Craigslist wouldn’t have either because it competes with corporate resellers like Amazon and EBay.
Heck, Amazon probably wouldn’t exist because the bookstore chains would have partnered with ISPs to squash it.
Dude if you think NN is going to kill Amazon you have overdosed on the koolaid
If there is a demand, there will be a supply
Coffee, you totally misread my words. I mean if net neutrality had been repealed in 1995 Amazon might never have existed.
You forget, but Amazon was once a vulnerable little upstart that found a niche with very low startup costs and few barriers to entry.
Net neutrality didn't exist until 2015...
You’re right I misread. My bad.
Net Neutrality simply codified the free, unregulated nature of the Internet that existed in the 1990’s and before.
So, in a figurative sense, it dates to the origin of the Web.
How do you think those sites were created and thrived before they made these rules.
Because ISPs were not monopolies and did not had not had a stake against these companies
I don't know if this is the most likely outcome for the US, but it's absolutely *possible* for this occur. New Zealand has this problem.
I don’t particularly care. The internet was fine pre2015. There’s no need to fear monger.
Now 18 States and the District of Columbia, are all suing because they hate freedom.
The internet was great before 2015. Liberalism is a dangerous mental disorder. Especially dangerous for women and children.
Correct! I listened to an interview with the FCC Chairman that explained it well. Net Neutrality is just a clever name, like Affordable Care Act. I want the free market and entrepreneurs governing the internet like it did from 1996-2015. I don’t want government and bureaucrats.
I don't want businesses deciding what businesses thrive and die.
Keep in mind Ajit Pai is a lawyer not a communications specialist
I know. You support the Government deciding what you should buy which is insane.
The government hasn't stopped me from anything on the internet pre or post 2015
Exactly. The Government didn’t have to do anything.
I don’t want the government but 30Billion XL rubber ducks. Just cause it CAN happen doesn’t mean it will.
I don’t what that means.
Less stifling regulation is the way to go. The past Marxist president wanted total government control of our lives and his attempt to further that goal was "net neutrality". Don't let the biased liberal media fool you. Think for yourselves, you little snowflakes, it may surprise you that your liberal leftist heroes only want to control you.
Bad news. A free internet is important. It isn’t Marxism, it’s a matter of corporate greed. I am a capitalist, but this is too far. The internet needs to be free to everyone and cater to the people, not the corporations.
My poll was better. It included the bomb threat by the peaceful loving Democrats before the vote took place.
Awesome news if you love freedom. 🇺🇸
Terrible news if you love Marxism. 🤬
Terrible new if you love freedom*
The Government doesn’t care about your freedom, Jenna.
Marxism is the opposite of freedom.
Cowboy this literally is just creating an even playing field so that capitalism can occur. Without net neutrality start ups can be squashed if they don’t have the seed cash to pay for good speeds. Net Neutrality is making sure that no one not the government, not the cable companies, not private citizens gets to decide which businesses get better exposure through anything but their own skill.
It wouldn't surprise me if cowboy was still running on a 56k, be it if he could fine a dial up provider
“even playing field so that capitalism can occur.”
Wow. I’ve seen a lot of dumbass statements on SOH but that has to the one that puts the icing on the gay wedding cake. Damn dude. I’m making a poll about that.
Please explain your problem with my statement? You pay an amount of money for internet. It is not more or less than anyone else is paying. You now have internet can create websites and access information. That is a perfectly level playing field. Anyone can enter anyone can give their business a go.
Your ridiculous idea of capitalism being equal to everyone is up. Enjoy!
Nonono you seem to misunderstand capitalism means that the entry point is the same for everyone
You couldn’t be more wrong.
The only arguments I ever hear against net neutrality, are conservative talking points and that removing it won't be that bad.
It won’t be that bad. I’ve had the internet since 1995 and got to choose which services was best for me.
Barry Soetoro “fixed” a “problem” that was working fine.
Always choose freedom over Marxism. 🇺🇸
You didn't have choice over your services...you bought access to the internet and you were free to do what you wanted. All data was treated equally
I’ve had the internet since 1995, sweetheart. It was working fine before Barry Soetoro “fixed” it, like he did with Government healthcare.
How did net neutrality hurt the internet? Provide me a list of reasons and examples
It’s purpose was to hurt people and limit freedom. Like all forms of Marxism.
So what you're saying is that you cannot provide any examples.
Net neutrality was out in place to protect the flow of data and endure all data is treated equally.
Did you do a wake and bake this morning?
I actually said;
“It’s purpose was to hurt people and limit freedom. Like all forms of Marxism.”
I don’t support evil Communists, like you do.
That's not an example of net neutrality hurting the market. That's a bs statement
It’s a true statement. You support Marxism, in any form. I do not.
That proves nothing about net neutrality you dumb fuck
So quick to anger. You’re going to make a great “mother”. Poor kid. 😔
Exactly what I was talking about. You can't get an actual reason, just talking points.
Freedom isn’t a talking point, kid. It’s a way of life. A life you apparently have no interest in.
Good news. My teenager asked me what net neutrality was a couple days ago.
I explained it to him and he was like “oh wow”.