- 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
re: For those that still think Obama's net neutrality is good
Posted on 6/27/17 at 10:56 am to GumboPot
Posted on 6/27/17 at 10:56 am to GumboPot
quote:
In the area I live (suburbs) I have the option of 5 cable or fiber ISPs, 4 cellular, 3 satellite and if I register as a business I would have 11 ISPs with all kinds of speed options. And with 5g coming on board cellular will become a real option.
Yea and I have one like I said
we have no competition so we get fricked with prices and data caps...
0
Posted on 6/27/17 at 10:57 am to GumboPot
quote:
5G will be a game changer. It will force fiber and cable to reduce prices or up service speeds. The industry will continue to head in the right direction with the seemingly infinite demand for more speed and access. In general we should always move toward more supply and less scarcity and whenever government gets involved scarcity ensues (which is bad especially for poor people).
Our internet is so substandard compared to other parts of the world its not even funny.
5G isn't changing anything. Esp when phone companies enforce data limits.
This post was edited on 6/27/17 at 11:03 am
Posted on 6/27/17 at 10:57 am to GumboPot
quote:
In the area I live (70433) I have the option of 5 cable or fiber ISPs
1.5 and 20mbps arent even worth mentioning, so you actually have a choice between charter or att. and since these are max speeds which anyone rarely actually gets, if you want to stream anything in any real quality, that rules out att.
Posted on 6/27/17 at 11:00 am to MastrShake
GumbPot should stop while he's ahead
he's literally has no idea what he is talking about
Every time we have these threads the people with clear lack of understanding get exposed while playing team politics
shite we have trumpkins and liberals agreeing on this.
he's literally has no idea what he is talking about
Every time we have these threads the people with clear lack of understanding get exposed while playing team politics
shite we have trumpkins and liberals agreeing on this.
This post was edited on 6/27/17 at 11:21 am
Posted on 6/27/17 at 11:01 am to notsince98
quote:you dont have to use google or facebook. i have no idea why youre even mentioning amazon.
And none of these neutrality agreements would apply to Google, Amazon, facebook, etc.
you do have to use your ISP.
see the difference?
Posted on 6/27/17 at 11:03 am to MastrShake
quote:
you dont have to use google or facebook. i have no idea why youre even mentioning amazon. you do have to use your ISP. see the difference?
They see the difference but ignore acknowledging it, bc its kills their argument.
Posted on 6/27/17 at 11:10 am to MastrShake
quote:
you dont have to use google or facebook. i have no idea why youre even mentioning amazon.
Amazon is one that is pushing the net neutrality regulations with Google & facebook.
quote:
you do have to use your ISP.
No, I don't. I have several ISP choices and wireless data choices. Heck, I don't even have to have internet. I don't use it much at home anymore.
quote:
see the difference?
They are all private companies. They all handle and provide content. See the similarities?
Posted on 6/27/17 at 11:15 am to notsince98
quote:
I have several ISP choices and wireless data choices
Most Americans don't.
Posted on 6/27/17 at 11:16 am to notsince98
quote:
Amazon is one that is pushing the net neutrality regulations with Google & facebook.
bc they don't want ISPs filtering their content or charging their consumers fast lane charges to access their sites.
quote:
No, I don't. I have several ISP choices and wireless data choices. Heck, I don't even have to have internet. I don't use it much at home anymore.
The internet is a utility and a part of every day human life. Not every has a ton of choices for ISPs with good speeds, even in some big cities there is only maybe four.
quote:
They are all private companies. They all handle and provide content. See the similarities?
The difference is the ISP is the gate keeper to those companies content and if they want to prioritize (ala fast lanes) which content can be accesses with an extra fee. Every packet of traffic on the internet needs to be treated equally, big business ISPs in bed with republicans want to dictate everyone's traffic.
How is this so hard so some of you people to grasp and understand?
This post was edited on 6/27/17 at 11:18 am
Posted on 6/27/17 at 11:29 am to BamaAtl
quote:
Most Americans don't.
Yep, I think it is only like 27% of households have 2 or more choices of definition broadband. Speeds 25mbps or higher.
This is not a competitive marketplace. The idea that you can hand gatekeepers a rent-seeking tool when they enjoy monopolistic or oligopoly power and not expect abuse(abuse we know had already happened) is absurd.
Posted on 6/27/17 at 11:39 am to bonhoeffer45
quote:
Yep, I think it is only like 27% of households have 2 or more choices of definition broadband. Speeds 25mbps or higher. This is not a competitive marketplace. The idea that you can hand gatekeepers a rent-seeking tool when they enjoy monopolistic or oligopoly power and not expect abuse(abuse we know had already happened) is absurd.
I have one
Which is Cable One, $100 a month for 200 down and a 700GB data cap what a joke. If you go over your cap three times, they bump you up to the next plan.
The only way to get more data is to pay for speeds you don't even need. Even then their Gig down service, still has a data cap just over a TB.
When I lived in England, I had like 8 all with low prices and no data caps.
This post was edited on 6/27/17 at 11:40 am
Posted on 6/27/17 at 11:50 am to MastrShake
Tell me how NN will give me/us more options?
Posted on 6/27/17 at 12:08 pm to Taxing Authority
quote:
then you know NOTHING about he FCC. You do realize that the FCC auctions off radio bandwidth to the highest bidder all the time, right?
Not to mention the rampant graft of the commissioners...
Are you referring to auctions?
Posted on 6/27/17 at 12:18 pm to BamaAtl
quote:
Most Americans don't.
And that is a local government over-regulation issue. Once again big govt is your problem, not free market.
Posted on 6/27/17 at 12:21 pm to StraightCashHomey21
quote:
The difference is the ISP is the gate keeper to those companies content and if they want to prioritize (ala fast lanes) which content can be accesses with an extra fee. Every packet of traffic on the internet needs to be treated equally, big business ISPs in bed with republicans want to dictate everyone's traffic.
How is this so hard so some of you people to grasp and understand?
it is very simple. I still don't understand how you don't get it.
private companies should do as they please and the customers/builders of the world will solve the problems.
You don't have enough ISP choices? Guess why. Your local govt established monopolies. Issuing government regulations to address problems caused by regulations is NOT the answer.
How do people not see what is going on here?
Posted on 6/27/17 at 12:24 pm to notsince98
quote:
For those that still think Obama's net neutrality is good
You are a dumbass if you think you are now informed.
Your quoted text doesn't even cover what "net neutrality" targets and is referring to, pointing at end destinations rather than targets.
Net neutrality refers to the ISPs (Cox, Comcast, AT&T, etc) treating every bit that passes through them the same. It has literally nothing to do with Facebook having the right to censor "fake news" although I can see how you can make that up based on "net neutrality" if you are a paranoid hack.
It simply prevents Comcast from trying to piggyback on the success of Netflix and arbitrarily saying "I know you bought the 100 megabit package, but if you want to actually hit those speeds at YouTube, Netflix, and Hulu, you have to spend an extra 15 dollars a month."
That is all. It's not about the generation of content.
Most of the opposition seems to be from the assumption that if Obama did it, it's bad.
IMHO, the net neutrality rules, designating Internet as a utility was the best thing by FAR Obama did in his 8 years. And it was passed because ISPs were starting to breaking the conventions and stifling things that hurt their business interests.
This post was edited on 6/27/17 at 12:30 pm
Posted on 6/27/17 at 12:31 pm to notsince98
quote:
I'd rather see all internet companies unregulated.
Okay.
They need to lose their sanctioned monopoly status immediately.
Posted on 6/27/17 at 12:47 pm to Volvagia
quote:
Your quoted text doesn't even cover what "net neutrality" targets and is referring to, pointing at end destinations rather than targets.
Because that is the distraction that hides what is really going on. This is exactly the crony capitalism and corruption people should be paying attention to.
Don't let the details hide.
Posted on 6/27/17 at 12:48 pm to Volvagia
quote:
Okay.
They need to lose their sanctioned monopoly status immediately.
Someone gets it. They have no monopoly where I live and it is wonderful.
Stop enabling governments to create these monopolies is the answer.
This post was edited on 6/27/17 at 12:50 pm
Posted on 6/27/17 at 12:49 pm to GumboPot
quote:
I don't believe that getting rid of Obama's net neutrality will lead to more internet throttling and forced bundling. We currently have pathetic internet speeds in the U.S. arguably due to net neutrality. Net neutrality seems like a good method to protect current ISPs from new competition.
There is nothing like good competition to keep other ISPs honest. For example, a new ISP could partner with Netflix or Hulu and lay their own fiber and offer quadrupedal the speeds of current ISPs at a slightly lower prices. Start in highly dense areas and move out. That's how you keep other ISPs honest.
Oh my sweet summer child.
I'm very conservative fiscally, and big on free market. But you can't just throw the buzzwords like "MUH competition" and assume that it's better that way.
There is no free market here, and realistically you can't do an about face now, AT&T and Comcast have too much of a trenched in advantage.
You know why net neutrality was a convention between ISPs up to a few years before the FCC made it policy, all the way back to the start of the Internet? Because no one could make the whole network themselves. But in a sense of community, they didn't use the Internet as leverage.
Let's use your example, of a start up using a lack of net neutrality to build competition.
Big ISPs get threatened, they now charge new ISP specifically higher rates to use their backbones.
New ISP now has to charge in line with old ISP.
Threat eliminated.
Status quo maintained
And no, a new start up isn't building their own backbones
Wastefulness aside (lots of dark fiber out there), it is incredibly expensive. Government routinely gives the biggest companies hundreds upon hundreds of millions of dollars to build and expand that infrastructure But yes. "MUH FREE MARKET"
And no, net neutrality has NOTHING to do with the slower speeds. I can cite a number of factors. But it certainly isn't net neutrality that is stifling competition. That is something else entirely, primarily the fact that hard wired internet connections are governed by monopolistic companies. Net neutrality tries to stifle one negative outcome of this monopoly
This post was edited on 6/27/17 at 3:18 pm
Page 6 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News