re: Net Neutrality -- What You Need To Know

quote:

---

So why change it?

---

it may be better, especially for those on the lower end of the internet-usage spectrum. it may get much cheaper for them

quote:

---

If their only motive is to find a way to make more money, how would that work out well for consumers?

---

typically this works out well for consumers, because providing a better product at a better price is how you increase market share/profits.

quote:

---

but when an overwhelming portion of the public is against this and the ISPs are still pursuing it, it seems that the ISPs are not acting with the best interest of the consumer in mind.

---

first of all, i don't think the "overwhelming portion of the public" even has an opinion of net neutrality, and the vocal minority of internet power users has dominated the discussion

secondly, we don't know how the public, acting as market participants, will react. we can guess, but we don't know. people vocally oppose all sorts of shite until implementation, and then grow to enjoy it.

quote:

---

typically this works out well for consumers, because providing a better product at a better price is how you increase market share/profits.

---

I fail to see how my ISP choosing what websites I can and can't view efficiently is a better product.

quote:

---

first of all, i don't think the "overwhelming portion of the public" even has an opinion of net neutrality

---

You're right, I should have worded that better. Most of the public is oblivious to this just like they are with most social and political issues.

quote:

---

and the vocal minority of internet power users has dominated the discussion

---

Well I am far from a "power user" and I'm strongly against this.

quote:

---

secondly, we don't know how the public, acting as market participants, will react. we can guess, but we don't know. people vocally oppose all sorts of shite until implementation, and then grow to enjoy it.

---

I fail to see how we should just accept this because "we might like it eventually"

quote:

---

You are giving them a gov't controlled market.

---

wait what?

government is currently controlling the ISPs via N/N rules. how is removing these rules creating a government-controlled market? government has moved itself out of the way and has less of an imprint on the market.

Note: i am not discussing crony capitalism moves like south carolina banning municipal internet

quote:

---

I personally think the telcos are setting themselves up for a blockbuster moment. As soon as consumers can bolt, they will.

---

i agree. and it will be glorious. i've said for years that companies like time warner and comcast are going to crumble due to their recent behaviors. this allows that to happen more quickly

quote:

---

My guess is the blockbuster style moment is in 3-4 years, the technology is just not there for mass WIFI, but its close.

I know where I live they are putting strong wifi towers on apartment buildings, so if you are within a few blocks you can get internet. It ends about 3 blocks from me now, but they are expanding. As soon as I can switch, I will.

---

see? this is exactly the type of innovation that i am talking about. sticking with the staus quo will just ensure we stick with the status quo. i want to see municipal fiber. i want to see companies like google lay down fiber. i want to see new creative ways to exchange data from computer to computer, which may lead to a non-cable world. most of all, i want to see any company that ignores what its customers do want out of some temporary domination of a particular market to pay down the road

quote:

---

, but you seem ok with giving ISPs total control over that market AND their own.

---

i'm OK with removing government restrictions on ISPs in how they use their own property and how they contract, in an effort to see what happens and how this affects consumers

let's state my stance clearly and without bias

quote:

---

government is currently controlling the ISPs via N/N rules. how is removing these rules creating a government-controlled market? government has moved itself out of the way and has less of an imprint on the market.

---

Yes of course, the gov't has given them practically a monopoly, and eliminating these rules will further extend their power.

quote:

---

see? this is exactly the type of innovation that i am talking about. sticking with the staus quo will just ensure we stick with the status quo. i want to see municipal fiber. i want to see companies like google lay down fiber. i want to see new creative ways to exchange data from computer to computer, which may lead to a non-cable world. most of all, i want to see any company that ignores what its customers do want out of some temporary domination of a particular market to pay down the road

---

So it has to get worse before it gets better? I don't think that is going to fly with me.

Net neutrality screws the consumer. If they can differentiate traffic, they can stop you (or make it inconvenient) from receiving stories, ads or other things from their competition. Its fricking brilliant scheme on their part, and the fact they have convinced others of this is either pure brilliance or mass stupidity. Probably a bit of both.

quote:

---

quote:

---

Its almost a monopoly in some markets

---

let's just be clear. that is due to government and i want to combat this very problem

---

The reason the government interfered and created these monopolies is the same reason we don't have duplicate power lines (except for redundancy) and water lines. It was understood somewhat early on that having multiple phone and cable lines running everywhere was unnecessary and wasteful, especially considering the likelihood that these competing companies would merge sooner or later anyway. I typically don't like government involvement, either, but in cases of massive infrastructure it can be necessary.

quote:

---

Yes of course, the gov't has given them practically a monopoly

---

see i don't agree with this. more government to fix government just makes things worse for everyone, though

quote:

---

So it has to get worse before it gets better?

---

it's possible it has to get worse before it gets better. and it may get worse for some, but may be better for others from the get go. we do not know. we have nothing of which to judge the future, because the future has not occurred yet.

quote:

---

If they can differentiate traffic, they can stop you (or make it inconvenient) from receiving stories, ads or other things from their competition. Its fricking brilliant scheme on their part, and the fact they have convinced others of this is either pure brilliance or mass stupidity. Probably a bit of both.

---

i don't think the vast majority of consumers care

there is a great deal of elitism in these arguments. i didn't want to really get into it, but it's true

y'all are ignoring the average person and how they use the internet. these people dominate the market. how the market works for these people is what is going to shape the market. for far too long, we (i include myself) "internet elitists" have lived a subsidized live on the internet. we're probably going to have to start paying our fair share, while the typical internet consumer lives a subsidized internet life.

if you want to divide the discussion up like this, you can: what percentage of the population must benefit, compared to what percentage of the population will face detriment? i'd wager right now the current policies benefit a small % of total users (your "internet elites" or "power users"), to the detriment of a much larger % (your typical/average user)

you can ask why they must subsidize our behavior patterns, especially when they're in the majority

i think a large part of the hysteria and fear mongering is from people scared of being treated like your average/typical consumer

quote:

---

consumers know their choices are limited, and that's why we're debating government policy.

---

that's non-responsive

a vocal minority is "protesting" online, trying to steer government policy

that is completely irrelevant to how the total market will react to changes in the "new world" of the policy being debated

quote:

---

This is fine from an academic perspective but its not fine from a practical perspective.

---

we don't know that, yet

my argument is to see how this affects the market and then make the policy decision. we have the N/N market example. we don't have a non-N/N market example to compare to. we can't really evaluate the 2 policies without data from both policies

quote:

---

, but I call it seeing the writing on the wall.

---

your assumption is that all ISPs will act the same

since all ISPs will act the same, why haven't all ISPs restricted the use of google wallet?