- 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
FCC Votes in Favor of Net Neutrality Rules, Broadband Service is Now a Utility
Posted on 2/27/15 at 3:22 am
Posted on 2/27/15 at 3:22 am
LINK
quote:
The Federal Communications Commission today voted to enforce net neutrality rules that prevent Internet providers—including cellular carriers—from blocking or throttling traffic or giving priority to Web services in exchange for payment.
The most controversial part of the FCC's decision reclassifies fixed and mobile broadband as a telecommunications service, with providers to be regulated as common carriers under Title II of the Communications Act. This decision brings Internet service under the same type of regulatory regime faced by wireline telephone service and mobile voice, though the FCC is forbearing from stricter utility-style rules that it could also apply under Title II.
quote:
What is net neutrality you ask?
Consider this: Comcast owns NBC Universal and its programming. So when you're streaming Parks and Recreation reruns on Hulu, complete with advertising, they're making money from you. They're not going to do anything to hinder your Hulu streaming experience.
You watch one episode, get bored, and decide to start browsing TigerDroppings. Comcast has no stake in TD and makes no money off of it. Without Net Neutrality, they could slow down access to TD to the point where you're like "Damn, this site is completely unusable. I guess it's back to watching Parks and Rec" - unless you pay more for unrestricted access to sites. Or if TD owners paid a ransom to Comcast to unrestrict their site for all Comcast customers.
No Net Neutrality would almost allow them to set up speed tiers for different sites: You would get 50 MBPS for Hulu and anything else that makes Comcast money. 25 MBPS for Netflix because Netflix paid a ransom to Comcast. 10 MBPS for Twitter because Twitter also paid a ransom (but not as big as what Netflix paid). 5 MBPS for almost everything else. 3 MBPS for Amazon because Amazon told Comcast to take their ransom request and shove it up their arse, which angered Comcast, 1 MBPS for Skype because it competes with Comcast's landline services, and dial up speeds for AT&T and Verizon's site because they don't want you checking out the competition's pricing.
This post was edited on 2/27/15 at 3:30 am
Posted on 2/27/15 at 3:34 am to Street Hawk
Is this good or bad?
Posted on 2/27/15 at 7:42 am to Street Hawk
quote:
hat is net neutrality you ask?
How do they know?
Nobody had seen the 300 pages of regulations...
Posted on 2/27/15 at 7:58 am to Street Hawk
So then you will switch providers, and if they all do it, someone will step in to fill the demand and/or developments in technology will come about to give people what they want
Big brother policing them is the wrong way to go.
Big brother policing them is the wrong way to go.
Posted on 2/27/15 at 8:59 am to Street Hawk
Net Neutrality itself is a good thing. The way it was achieved adds a layer of bureaucracy that goes beyond Net Neutrality.
This will likely be tied up in court for a while. The last two attempts to reclassify the internet were blocked in court. The head of the FCC also admitted that these regulations which at their core are 80 years old and were last updated in the mid 90's don't apply well to broadband. He said they are the best tool available but they will have to selectively enforce regulations that actually make sense for broadband. No one knows what that means yet, and since it is an interpretation it is up for debate with each new head of the FCC.
This will likely be tied up in court for a while. The last two attempts to reclassify the internet were blocked in court. The head of the FCC also admitted that these regulations which at their core are 80 years old and were last updated in the mid 90's don't apply well to broadband. He said they are the best tool available but they will have to selectively enforce regulations that actually make sense for broadband. No one knows what that means yet, and since it is an interpretation it is up for debate with each new head of the FCC.
Posted on 2/27/15 at 9:31 am to Street Hawk
It's not a done deal yet. One of the reasons the FCC has shied away from using Title II in the past is they didn't want to deal with the political battle.
quote:
Today's order could face both legal challenges and action from Congress. Republicans have proposed legislation that would eliminate Title II restrictions for broadband providers and vowed that the FCC vote is just the beginning of the debate.
Posted on 2/27/15 at 9:53 am to Street Hawk
If you support more government control, then I guess you think this is a good think. But just as with Obamacare, businesses will respond in a way that mitigates the impact which will likely be a net negative for consumers.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News