it's possible it has to get worse before it gets better. and it may get worse for some, but may be better for others from the get go. we do not know. we have nothing of which to judge the future, because the future has not occurred yet.

quote:
If they can differentiate traffic, they can stop you (or make it inconvenient) from receiving stories, ads or other things from their competition. Its fricking brilliant scheme on their part, and the fact they have convinced others of this is either pure brilliance or mass stupidity. Probably a bit of both.

i don't think the vast majority of consumers care

there is a great deal of elitism in these arguments. i didn't want to really get into it, but it's true

y'all are ignoring the average person and how they use the internet. these people dominate the market. how the market works for these people is what is going to shape the market. for far too long, we (i include myself) "internet elitists" have lived a subsidized live on the internet. we're probably going to have to start paying our fair share, while the typical internet consumer lives a subsidized internet life.

if you want to divide the discussion up like this, you can: what percentage of the population must benefit, compared to what percentage of the population will face detriment? i'd wager right now the current policies benefit a small % of total users (your "internet elites" or "power users"), to the detriment of a much larger % (your typical/average user)

you can ask why they must subsidize our behavior patterns, especially when they're in the majority

i think a large part of the hysteria and fear mongering is from people scared of being treated like your average/typical consumer

This post was edited on 5/19/14 at 5:24 pm

2 ...

Report Post

Posted by Hawkeye95

Member since Dec 2013

20293 posts

Posted on 5/19/14 at 5:30 pm to SlowFlowPro

quote:
see i don't agree with this. more government to fix government just makes things worse for everyone, though

its not more gov't. It something we already have.

quote:
it's possible it has to get worse before it gets better. and it may get worse for some, but may be better for others from the get go. we do not know. we have nothing of which to judge the future, because the future has not occurred yet.

The internet is such a core part of our life, I don't think we should be making decisions through unelected committee.

quote:
i don't think the vast majority of consumers care

Probably not. Technology scares a lot of people. And those who talk technology scare others with terminology.

I do really believe that almost everyone will be worse off with net neutrality. Giving corporations more control of your life is a non-starter in my opinion.

quote:
i think a large part of the hysteria and fear mongering is from people scared of being treated like your average/typical consumer

the chance of this actually impacting me or other power users is relatively low. I cannot foresee how they can actually impact my internet activities. It may cost me a bit more money but I don't pay for that anyway.

Its others I worry about.

quote:
you can ask why they must subsidize our behavior patterns, especially when they're in the majority

I doubt I am in the top 5% in terms of internet traffic. I don't watch streaming, and rarely go near my soft cap. And I could easily trim 100gb off my internet usage. I am not stealing other people's bandwidth. Its pretty rare I use the internet during peak times in fact.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by Korkstand

Member since Nov 2003

28745 posts

Posted on 5/19/14 at 5:42 pm to SlowFlowPro

quote:
i don't think the vast majority of consumers care

there is a great deal of elitism in these arguments. i didn't want to really get into it, but it's true

y'all are ignoring the average person and how they use the internet. these people dominate the market. how the market works for these people is what is going to shape the market. for far too long, we (i include myself) "internet elitists" have lived a subsidized live on the internet. we're probably going to have to start paying our fair share, while the typical internet consumer lives a subsidized internet life.

if you want to divide the discussion up like this, you can: what percentage of the population must benefit, compared to what percentage of the population will face detriment? i'd wager right now the current policies benefit a small % of total users (your "internet elites" or "power users"), to the detriment of a much larger % (your typical/average user)

you can ask why they must subsidize our behavior patterns, especially when they're in the majority

And you continue to ignore the real implications of no net neutrality. It's not about what the consumer pays for internet access. It's about how much internet companies will have to pay (and to whom) to gain access to these consumers, and how these contracts will impact the economy.

Let's say we eliminate all regulation on ISPs, and they decide what websites can be visited, what TV channels we can watch, and what advertisements we can see on each. Are you saying they should be allowed to deny a startup ISP any ad space/time? Will this startup have to rely on billboards and newspaper ads to convey the advantages to switching to their services, considering all TV and internet in the region is controlled by the incumbent? How deep does the corporate "oppression" have to go before you feel government intervention is warranted?

1 ...

Report Post

O-T Lounge - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board