- 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
Would you support Trump ending Net-Neutrality?
Posted on 12/1/16 at 10:18 am
Posted on 12/1/16 at 10:18 am
It appears he will make efforts to do so. From both a political and a practical standpoint do you agree or disagree and why?
Personally I would think it would be absolutely devastating for the consumer.
Personally I would think it would be absolutely devastating for the consumer.
Posted on 12/1/16 at 10:20 am to fouldeliverer
Hell Yeah!
Net Neutrality is the biggest anti-internet freedom bill ever passed
Net Neutrality is the biggest anti-internet freedom bill ever passed
This post was edited on 12/1/16 at 10:21 am
Posted on 12/1/16 at 10:20 am to fouldeliverer
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.
Data caps are bullshite.
This post was edited on 12/1/16 at 10:22 am
Posted on 12/1/16 at 10:21 am to fouldeliverer
quote:
t appears he will make efforts to do so
Where are you getting this from?
Net neutrality is paramount to free speech in the 21st century.
Posted on 12/1/16 at 10:25 am to fouldeliverer
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.
Posted on 12/1/16 at 10:25 am to BamaCoaster
quote:
Net neutrality is paramount to free speech in the 21st century.
Funny you should consider this a positive.
Lysander Spooner can still deliver mail for $0.04 on the dollar!
Posted on 12/1/16 at 10:26 am to BamaCoaster
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'd hate to think that this is becoming a partisan issue.
Posted on 12/1/16 at 10:27 am to idlewatcher
quote:
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.
If the att/time warner deal goes through...
This post was edited on 12/1/16 at 11:01 am
Posted on 12/1/16 at 10:28 am to joshnorris14
I've actually worked on developing a real net neutrality system involving cryptocurrencies. Decentralized P2P ISPs
Posted on 12/1/16 at 10:47 am to StraightCashHomey21
quote:If you really want to get pissed about it then look into the amount of "data" the cable company uses themselves.
Data caps are bullshite.
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.
Posted on 12/1/16 at 10:56 am to fouldeliverer
quote:it probably will be devestating but they voted for trump, this is what they are goign to get.
Personally I would think it would be absolutely devastating for the consumer.
they can only fault themselves.
the funny part is that we are going to get data caps and no net neutrality.
It won't affect me since I watch maybe 2 hours of streaming content a week.
Posted on 12/1/16 at 11:35 am to Hawkeye95
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.
Posted on 12/1/16 at 11:41 am to fouldeliverer
The flock would support Donald shutting down the Internet all together as long as he trolled the libruls.
Posted on 12/1/16 at 12:13 pm to joshnorris14
quote:
Net Neutrality is the biggest anti-internet freedom bill ever passed
^
That.
Posted on 12/1/16 at 12:39 pm to SlapahoeTribe
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.
Posted on 12/1/16 at 12:46 pm to joshnorris14
quote:
Hell Yeah!
Net Neutrality is the biggest anti-internet freedom bill ever passed
Sometimes I forget that libertarians, ancaps and most conservatives take the free market purity a bridge too far and that's what net neutrality is.
Posted on 12/1/16 at 12:48 pm to Sentrius
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
Posted on 12/1/16 at 12:52 pm to fouldeliverer
I would support. Net neutrality sends to end monopolies by having everything run by a monopoly. Let freedom ring, baby.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News