re: So Trump signed the Internet Privacy bill into law today

quote:

---

It was big government at the state and local level that got us in this mess and unless and until we can fix that, net neutrality is the "smallest" way to protect consumers.

---

Aren't there enough ISP's available in various forms to prevent any monopolistic tactics that advocates of net neutrality are concerned about?

And if 3 or 4 ISPs started monolistic crap you'd think politicians would catch wind of it and the government would follow in with antitrust lawsuits?

quote:

---

Aren't there enough ISP's available in various forms to prevent any monopolistic tactics that advocates of net neutrality are concerned about?

---

The studies I have seen (I can try to hunt them down if you want) show most Americans (~70%) have one choice for high speed internet. Another ~25% have two. So it is a very small percentage of Americans that have three or more choices.

quote:

---

And if 3 or 4 ISPs started monolistic crap you'd think politicians would catch wind of it and the government would follow in with antitrust lawsuits?

---

Since I have some background on antitrust laws..... first the ISPs are too smart. None of them have set up a nationwide monopoly which would trigger huge investigations. Instead you see a decent number of ISPs creating a patchwork of smaller monopolies or pseudo-monopolies. Thus at a national scale there are a healthy number of ISPs, but the actual choice on an individual level is very limited. Next because most of what gives them a monopoly are various state and local policies that aren't explicit monopolies, they haven't really created a cartel. Lastly, go look at how far spread their money is in Congress. As long as they have proponents on the Hill it is hard to touch them.

quote:

---

All this does is return us to 2016. Were you complaining then?

---

Yes. That line of defense is complete nonsense. A regulation's value isn't determined by how long it has been in effect.

quote:

---

Yeah, this board is ignoring actual issues

---

You mean like the "privacy" of gmail, or facebook, or google?

Free market for webmail and search egines. No issues from me.

quote:

---

Google sells that and.... poof....

---

And poof what

Their advantage in advertising goes away.

From Google's Own Mouth

If you think that's false, go file a SEC complaint.

quote:

---

Their advantage in advertising goes away.

---

bruh thats straight ignorant

Relationship status: "It's Complicated." The "Unlawful content" clause has been a big issue of mine.

Linked below is a good three-part Wired series on NN, from nearly 3 years ago; a watchdog.org one from two years ago; another Wired one from a year ago. These are good places to start with a few others I linked. I'll update with up-to-the-minute pieces later today.
Wired NN Part I

Wired NN Part II

Wired NN Part III

2015 Watchdog piece on NN

Wired on NN 2016

ARSTechnica on Constitution issues (2015)


Below is what I've been hung up on big-time--has this been resolved?

quote:

---

“A person engaged in the provision of broadband Internet access service, insofar as such person is so engaged, shall not block lawful content, applications, services, or non- harmful devices, subject to reasonable network management,” reads page seven of the new Internet regulation adopted by the FCC.

Who then, now that these regulations are in effect, will determine which Internet content is lawful and unlawful?

---

That quote is from humanevents.com peice: FCC net neutrality regulations include one really scary sentence

I honestly haven't updated myself on this issue in awhile--is the "unlawful content" clause no longer an issue? (honest question--not being coy)

Do you like paying for slow, shitty internet because you stream Netflix? well, then you would love getting rid of Net Neutrality.