- 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
Obama's plan to save the internet draws bold reactions
Posted on 11/10/14 at 12:35 pm
Posted on 11/10/14 at 12:35 pm
quote:
Today, President Obama took his strongest stance yet on the subject of net neutrality. Obama released a statement urging the FCC to reclassify broadband as a utility. In doing so, he answered the call of millions of people who've written the Commission and chairman Tom Wheeler in support of reclassification, which many view as the most sure fire way of keeping the internet open and shielded from the profit-driven interests of ISPs.
Obama's message was a huge boost for net neutrality advocates, but it's unclear how much impact it'll have in the long term; figuring out net neutrality is the FCC's job, and reclassification would require a GOP-controlled US Congress to play along. Even so, when the President of the United States speaks up, his words carry serious weight. We've collected some early reactions to Obama's plan, and more important voices are likely to chime in throughout the day. Much of the feedback is predictable and calculated, but we're already seeing some head-scratchers. And major ISPs are already threatening to sue if the FCC ultimately follows Obama's lead.
LINK
It seems most people are in support of Obama's net neutrality proposal, except the ISPs and certain Republican politicians. Do the Republicans oppose Obama on every thing, no matter what? When the only people on the side of the seemingly evil ISPs are Republicans, it raises some internal red flags for me.
This post was edited on 11/10/14 at 1:00 pm
13
Posted on 11/10/14 at 12:49 pm to hikingfan
quote:
It seems most people are in support of Obama's net neutrality proposal, except the ISPs and certain Republican politicians. Do the Republicans oppose Obama on every thing, no matter what?
Yes, I think so. I'm not a big Obama fan, but what he's proposing here, at least to some degree, will be a good thing for consumers (especially low-income consumers) and internet based startups.
Posted on 11/10/14 at 12:53 pm to Dirtman16
Some of it good but some is addressing a problem that doesn't exist. Content providers and ISPs should have the ability to negotiate fast lanes to ease access if they choose.
Posted on 11/10/14 at 1:40 pm to C
quote:
Some of it good but some is addressing a problem that doesn't exist. Content providers and ISPs should have the ability to negotiate fast lanes to ease access if they choose.
NO NO NO NO. Content providers pay for internet access. Consumers pay for internet access. ISPs want to negotiate "fast lanes" (which really means slowing everything else down except for people forking over cash) which would then charge content providers for access to their customers even though the customers are already paying for that access.
ETA: and you say they need it to ease access. The only bandwidth problem we have in this country is artificial. If ISPs had done what they promised when they agreed to take tax payer money back in the late 90s in the name of infrastructure upgrades, then every home in America would have fiber to the door and gigabit service in their homes for less than what we pay now.
This post was edited on 11/10/14 at 1:51 pm
Posted on 11/10/14 at 1:56 pm to hikingfan
One thing I heard from those that oppose it is that they don't want internet to be average and not innovate or improve. In general that does happen to everything the government regulates so I am a bit concerned about that. I don't know enough about it though.
Posted on 11/10/14 at 2:02 pm to Mr Gardoki
quote:
In general that does happen to everything the government regulates so I am a bit concerned about that.
This is a reasonable concern, and one that I often share. I'm typically a free market guy myself.
The problem in this case is that there is not really a free market. These telco companies have colluded to have singular control over large markets. It's so bad that Comcast even uses the fact that they don't directly compete with Time Warner as reason to allow them to merge (as if that will increase competition).
As I understand it, this proposal would require companies with the physical infrastructure to supply internet to allow third parties to lease their infrastructure at a fair price and then compete for customers. It will also prevent established content providers or the telco companies themselves from artificially pricing out competition.
Posted on 11/10/14 at 2:04 pm to Mr Gardoki
Innovations should be focused on making it faster (for everyone) and even more widely available (again, for everyone). Enforcing net neutrality doesn't hinder those innovations. The lack of competition does.
This post was edited on 11/10/14 at 2:05 pm
Posted on 11/10/14 at 2:05 pm to Mr Gardoki
quote:
One thing I heard from those that oppose it is that they don't want internet to be average and not innovate or improve. In general that does happen to everything the government regulates
Have our roads not improved? What about sanitation? Water quality? Food quality? Has environmental regulation been a net positive or net negative? Look at electric companies that are regulated like utilities. Have they not innovated or improved over the past 100 years?
Posted on 11/10/14 at 2:05 pm to Dirtman16
Sounds good, I just know it's a bit more complicated than people realize. Like I said, I don't know much about it. I'm kind of like you, normally I'm a free market guy but that hasn't happened here. 
Posted on 11/10/14 at 2:09 pm to hikingfan
In general I oppose government regulation and support free market capitalism, but monopolies must be regulated. The current system of 2-3 players with most consumers only having 1 option for broadband is the equivalent of a utility monopoly.
Posted on 11/10/14 at 2:09 pm to hikingfan
I'm a republican under the age of 30.
I support Obama in this one.
I support Obama in this one.
Posted on 11/10/14 at 2:12 pm to colorchangintiger
quote:
Have our roads not improved?
In Louisiana, no
Posted on 11/10/14 at 2:13 pm to The Eric
frick, I'm an anarcho-capitalist at heart and I agree with Obama on this, if we have to work within the current system.
This post was edited on 11/10/14 at 2:14 pm
Posted on 11/10/14 at 2:14 pm to Mr Gardoki
quote:
In Louisiana, no
You don't have to take Highway 90 to get from Houston to New Orleans anymore. We have these things called Interstates now.
Posted on 11/10/14 at 2:31 pm to colorchangintiger
Posted on 11/10/14 at 2:33 pm to hikingfan
the only people who are against this are people who don't know what the frick they are talking about OR those will financially benefit.
Net-neutrality is a must for an open internet. If you give the power for telcos to control what you access, they get to determine so much about your life. Its far too much control for one company to exert on your life.
Net-neutrality is a must for an open internet. If you give the power for telcos to control what you access, they get to determine so much about your life. Its far too much control for one company to exert on your life.
Posted on 11/10/14 at 2:38 pm to hikingfan
If anyone wants to listen to some good videos about net neutrality and why you should be for it, YouTube tek syndicate.
Posted on 11/10/14 at 2:38 pm to Hawkeye95
quote:
the only people who are against this are people who don't know what the frick they are talking about
Fully admit I don't know a lot about it. I just question the governments ability to not get in the way.
quote:
If anyone wants to listen to some good videos about net neutrality and why you should be for it, YouTube tek syndicate.
I know totalbiscuit has a video on it too.
This post was edited on 11/10/14 at 2:39 pm
Posted on 11/10/14 at 2:47 pm to Mr Gardoki
quote:
I just question the governments ability to not get in the way.
its a legitimate concern. our govt is clunky at best.
but we need the telcos to not control what you access on the internet.
It really comes down to - do you want telcos to control where you bank? Where you eat? What media you consume? What cloud services you use? B.c without net neutrality, they will do exactly that.
Posted on 11/10/14 at 2:48 pm to colorchangintiger
quote:Thank you. So many people do not understand how far behind we are compared to most other first world countries.
The only bandwidth problem we have in this country is artificial. If ISPs had done what they promised when they agreed to take tax payer money back in the late 90s in the name of infrastructure upgrades, then every home in America would have fiber to the door and gigabit service in their homes for less than what we pay now.
Page 1 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News