Would you support Trump ending Net-Neutrality?

Hell Yeah!

Net Neutrality is the biggest anti-internet freedom bill ever passed

Well we already have ISP/TV companies starting this bullshite use our content won't go against your data cap. So much for a free internet, if this keeps going the market will be closed.

Data caps are bullshite.

Bandwidth throttling already is a problem. Couple that in with the behind the scenes monopoly AT&T is busy creating with the Direct TV situation. It's a lose-lose for everyone but them.

I say appears because it only seems that way. He has appointed Jeff Eisenach and Mark Jamison as advisors. They are his FCC transition team so to speak. Both of which are opposed to net-neutrality. And one was a former lobbyist for Sprint. Trump tweeted about it a year or so ago, but the tweet really didn't make sense. I don't think Trump even understood what it meant.

I'd hate to think that this is becoming a partisan issue.

I've actually worked on developing a real net neutrality system involving cryptocurrencies. Decentralized P2P ISPs

quote:

---

Data caps are bullshite.

---

If you really want to get pissed about it then look into the amount of "data" the cable company uses themselves.

I haven't looked at it in a while but last I checked the cable companies use the mpeg2 format for the info they send to your box. MPEG2 is yesteryear's tech; it is the stuff that DVDs use and its compression ration is atrocious when compared to the two/three generations that have been developed since it first came about.

Cox, for example, is pushing up to 6 HD video streams to one box - record 6 programs at once - and I could in theory be doing that 24/7. That amount of video is potentially 60 GB per hour = well over a 1.2 TB each day = 36 TB each month. Yet Cox limits me to only 1 TB data usage per month.



Furthermore;

1 TB per month / 30 days = 34.133 GB per day
34.133 GB per day / 24 hours = 1.422 GB per hour
1.422 GB per hour / 60 minutes = 0.024 GB per minute = 24.27 MB per minute
24.27 MB per minute / 60 seconds = 0.4 MB per second = 3.24 Mb per second

So, you could hit your data cap by downloading at only 3.24 Mb per second throughout the month, yet I pay for 150 Mb per second. That is what pisses me off.

quote:

---

we are going to get data caps

---

For cellular data we've had these for a while unless you are willing to accept a shite network.

Lost in all this negativity is what I always hoped this type of thing would do to the wired ISPs. In November Cox upped it's data caps to 1TB/month across the board for all speed levels. Before their lowest speed level was capped at like 150GB/month I think. I think the advent of more of these OTT services drove that change.

quote:

---

Net Neutrality is the biggest anti-internet freedom bill ever passed

---

^

That.

quote:

---

If you really want to get pissed about it then look into the amount of "data" the cable company uses themselves.

I haven't looked at it in a while but last I checked the cable companies use the mpeg2 format for the info they send to your box. MPEG2 is yesteryear's tech; it is the stuff that DVDs use and its compression ration is atrocious when compared to the two/three generations that have been developed since it first came about.

Cox, for example, is pushing up to 6 HD video streams to one box - record 6 programs at once - and I could in theory be doing that 24/7. That amount of video is potentially 60 GB per hour = well over a 1.2 TB each day = 36 TB each month. Yet Cox limits me to only 1 TB data usage per month.

---

While I think net neutrality is supremely important, you're taking the wrong angle here because your understanding is off. The first error is they aren't just pushing 6 HD streams at once, they are pushing ALL the channels down the line at ALL TIMES (cable works this way, but at&t uverse doesn't). So multiply your figures by about 50 to see a more accurate representation of cable TV "bandwidth". But this should not be compared to your internet speed, and it's not something to be angry about, because these channels are broadcast. Think about it... what is the total transmission capacity of a broadcast over-the-air TV tower? Well, if you're multiplying by the number of receivers, then it's practically unlimited. Cable TV is the same way, every channel is broadcast to everyone, so the total bandwidth requirement is whatever the max channels is (let's call it 500 in HD). And this total does not increase with more subscribers. Internet bandwidth requirements, however, do increase with subscriber count. The required bandwidth scales linearly with the number of subscribers, since everyone is streaming something different.

So, while it might seem like the cable company wastes a ton of bandwith by putting 500 channels on the line at once, keep in mind that their infrastructure just needs to handle those 500 channels at once even with a million subscribers. For streaming TV, to handle a million subscribers their infrastructure would need to handle a million channels at once. Quite a difference.


All that said, it is still insanely cheap for the cable company to provide internet service, and their markups are ludicrous especially given the limitations that are becoming more common.

That's really lazy. Do you understand the typical libertarian position on net neutrality or is this just a pot shot? As I've said I've actually worked on decentralizing internet service