- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
FCC Votes in Favor of Net Neutrality Rules, Broadband Service is Now a Utility
Posted on 2/27/15 at 3:22 am
Posted on 2/27/15 at 3:22 am
LINK
quote:
The Federal Communications Commission today voted to enforce net neutrality rules that prevent Internet providers—including cellular carriers—from blocking or throttling traffic or giving priority to Web services in exchange for payment.
The most controversial part of the FCC's decision reclassifies fixed and mobile broadband as a telecommunications service, with providers to be regulated as common carriers under Title II of the Communications Act. This decision brings Internet service under the same type of regulatory regime faced by wireline telephone service and mobile voice, though the FCC is forbearing from stricter utility-style rules that it could also apply under Title II.
quote:
What is net neutrality you ask?
Consider this: Comcast owns NBC Universal and its programming. So when you're streaming Parks and Recreation reruns on Hulu, complete with advertising, they're making money from you. They're not going to do anything to hinder your Hulu streaming experience.
You watch one episode, get bored, and decide to start browsing TigerDroppings. Comcast has no stake in TD and makes no money off of it. Without Net Neutrality, they could slow down access to TD to the point where you're like "Damn, this site is completely unusable. I guess it's back to watching Parks and Rec" - unless you pay more for unrestricted access to sites. Or if TD owners paid a ransom to Comcast to unrestrict their site for all Comcast customers.
No Net Neutrality would almost allow them to set up speed tiers for different sites: You would get 50 MBPS for Hulu and anything else that makes Comcast money. 25 MBPS for Netflix because Netflix paid a ransom to Comcast. 10 MBPS for Twitter because Twitter also paid a ransom (but not as big as what Netflix paid). 5 MBPS for almost everything else. 3 MBPS for Amazon because Amazon told Comcast to take their ransom request and shove it up their arse, which angered Comcast, 1 MBPS for Skype because it competes with Comcast's landline services, and dial up speeds for AT&T and Verizon's site because they don't want you checking out the competition's pricing.
This post was edited on 2/27/15 at 3:30 am
6
Posted on 2/27/15 at 3:34 am to Street Hawk
Is this good or bad?
Posted on 2/27/15 at 3:55 am to poochie
Good
Posted on 2/27/15 at 4:44 am to poochie
It's good.
Posted on 2/27/15 at 4:59 am to poochie
It's very good. Those who see some dark conspiracy behind this are nuts.
In addition to preserving equal access, classifying broadband as a utility opens up access to the infrastructure, i.e. underground conduits and utility poles, to companies like google that want to enter a market but can't because the costs are prohibitive. It also allows municipalities to operate citizen-owned broadband.
In addition to preserving equal access, classifying broadband as a utility opens up access to the infrastructure, i.e. underground conduits and utility poles, to companies like google that want to enter a market but can't because the costs are prohibitive. It also allows municipalities to operate citizen-owned broadband.
This post was edited on 2/27/15 at 5:05 am
Posted on 2/27/15 at 6:08 am to poochie
Good, unfortunate the Govt had to step in but good, cause the alternative was worse.
Posted on 2/27/15 at 6:21 am to poochie
How in the hell can yall say its good when you have no idea what the gvt has planned for it? Nobody knows what the gvt plans to do with its new found power bc they kept the 300+ page bill hidden from the public so we couldn't see exactly what they were voting on. Why would you purposefully hide something unless you knew it contained information that could hurt your cause?
A 300+ page bill and they only release a 4 page fact sheet? The devil is in the details.
LINK
A 300+ page bill and they only release a 4 page fact sheet? The devil is in the details.
LINK
Posted on 2/27/15 at 7:14 am to wryder1
quote:
A 300+ page bill and they only release a 4 page fact sheet?
First of all it's not a bill, it's an administrative rule. The FCC now has 60 days to produce the final draft incorporating the dissenting opinions of the two members who voted no. The "300 page" meme has been floated on every conservative web site and all of you lemmings are going over the cliff with it.
Posted on 2/27/15 at 7:42 am to Street Hawk
quote:
hat is net neutrality you ask?
How do they know?
Nobody had seen the 300 pages of regulations...
Posted on 2/27/15 at 7:55 am to Layabout
So Mark Cuban is a nut? Lo ok.
The idea of nn is unquestionably good, 300 pages of new regulation and big government regulation... Probably bad.
The idea of nn is unquestionably good, 300 pages of new regulation and big government regulation... Probably bad.
Posted on 2/27/15 at 7:58 am to Street Hawk
So then you will switch providers, and if they all do it, someone will step in to fill the demand and/or developments in technology will come about to give people what they want
Big brother policing them is the wrong way to go.
Big brother policing them is the wrong way to go.
Posted on 2/27/15 at 8:14 am to DelU249
quote:
Big brother policing them is the wrong way to go.
Seems to have worked OK for telephone and cellular service.
Posted on 2/27/15 at 8:48 am to Layabout
quote:
It also allows municipalities to operate citizen-owned broadband.
How many municipalities operate citizen owned water and power? You're living in a dream world. The government can't even get it's head out of it's own arse, much less improve upon anything that private companies have established.
Posted on 2/27/15 at 8:59 am to Street Hawk
Net Neutrality itself is a good thing. The way it was achieved adds a layer of bureaucracy that goes beyond Net Neutrality.
This will likely be tied up in court for a while. The last two attempts to reclassify the internet were blocked in court. The head of the FCC also admitted that these regulations which at their core are 80 years old and were last updated in the mid 90's don't apply well to broadband. He said they are the best tool available but they will have to selectively enforce regulations that actually make sense for broadband. No one knows what that means yet, and since it is an interpretation it is up for debate with each new head of the FCC.
This will likely be tied up in court for a while. The last two attempts to reclassify the internet were blocked in court. The head of the FCC also admitted that these regulations which at their core are 80 years old and were last updated in the mid 90's don't apply well to broadband. He said they are the best tool available but they will have to selectively enforce regulations that actually make sense for broadband. No one knows what that means yet, and since it is an interpretation it is up for debate with each new head of the FCC.
Posted on 2/27/15 at 9:16 am to seawolf06
quote:
quote: It also allows municipalities to operate citizen-owned broadband. How many municipalities operate citizen owned water and power? You're living in a dream world. The government can't even get it's head out of it's own arse, much less improve upon anything that private companies have established.
Lafayette has one. Seems to work well enough. If it's crap people won't buy it. Scared of competition?
Posted on 2/27/15 at 9:26 am to seawolf06
quote:
How many municipalities operate citizen owned water and power?
Actually quite a few including the city of Lafayette here in Louisiana which offers a gigabit ethernet connection for $109.95 a month (or as little as $69.95 a month bundled with additional services like phone or TV). Their electric rates are also among the lowest in a state known for its low electric rates.
This post was edited on 2/27/15 at 9:27 am
Posted on 2/27/15 at 9:28 am to TigerGman
Lafayette and other cities were already building these. In many areas where they were blocked, states had begun to change laws to allow cities to do this.
This status change probably won't affect that much. The FCC will still have to determine that an area is a monopoly and needs competition. That will go to court. If they determine that it is a monopoly then someone else can come into that area. This is why most of us only have one or two providers for our various utilities.
This status change probably won't affect that much. The FCC will still have to determine that an area is a monopoly and needs competition. That will go to court. If they determine that it is a monopoly then someone else can come into that area. This is why most of us only have one or two providers for our various utilities.
Posted on 2/27/15 at 9:30 am to jcole4lsu
quote:
So Mark Cuban is a nut?
Mark Cuban is chairman of a cable company. Do you think he's got the interest of the public at heart or his own profits?
Posted on 2/27/15 at 9:31 am to Street Hawk
It's not a done deal yet. One of the reasons the FCC has shied away from using Title II in the past is they didn't want to deal with the political battle.
quote:
Today's order could face both legal challenges and action from Congress. Republicans have proposed legislation that would eliminate Title II restrictions for broadband providers and vowed that the FCC vote is just the beginning of the debate.
Posted on 2/27/15 at 9:32 am to Layabout
quote:
quote: So Mark Cuban is a nut? Mark Cuban is chairman of a cable company. Do you think he's got the interest of the public at heart or his own profits?
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News