- 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
re: NN why not FTC regs?
Posted on 12/15/17 at 10:39 am to Greace
Posted on 12/15/17 at 10:39 am to Greace
quote:If they do it to the point of abuse (I don't consider $5/month as "abuse") they will lose customers, either soon or shortly in the future.
You dont think Cable Companies will use the ability they have gained to squeeze more money out of you?
It will open up entirely new competition, especially with 5G wireless service being implemented.
I trust the market over government regulations.
1
Posted on 12/15/17 at 10:39 am to LSURussian
quote:
Link? What ISP has announced this policy?
So they lobbied this hard for...?
Posted on 12/15/17 at 10:39 am to 25 Point Lead
quote:
The ruling said that the FTC exemption for common carrier companies extended to the non-common carrier services offered by the companies with common carrier exemptions
Well that sounds like a bad ruling and I agree with Russian that it would be better solved by legislation rather than arbitrarily giving the FCC power which theoretically can be revoked, put back, revoked, put back each Presidential election.
But what was the FTC trying to regulate? What did AT&T do?
Posted on 12/15/17 at 10:40 am to DavidTheGnome
quote:So your answer is "nobody"?
Link? What ISP has announced this policy?
So they lobbied this hard for...?
Posted on 12/15/17 at 10:41 am to LSURussian
quote:
If they do it to the point of abuse (I don't consider $5/month as "abuse") they will lose customers, either soon or shortly in the future.
They wont lose customers because they are the only option. I have two options where I live. Cable internet or Satellite. One of those isnt even really a viable option.
Posted on 12/15/17 at 10:42 am to H-Town Tiger
quote:
Ok, i appreciate your answer and that makes some sense. But, why would the ISP automatically start doing that? Just slow down certain sites to charge more? And if they did why wouldn’t another ISP offer you cheaper service of faster speeds at the price? Faster lanes don’t necessarily mean other lanes are unbearably slow. This may not be a perfect analogy but I opt for the cheaper version of Hulu with commercials so the “slow” or regular lane may be fast enough for me
They aren't going to automatically start, it's going to be a drawn out process. Way easier to hide and digest.
Why would they do it though? More money, it really is as simple as that.
Posted on 12/15/17 at 10:42 am to LSURussian
Considering it doesnt go into effect for 60 more days and it still has to go through Congress. It doesnt make much sense for them as a company to announce they plan on putting the screws to you if they are allowed to.
Posted on 12/15/17 at 10:44 am to Greace
quote:
They wont lose customers because they are the only option.
quote:
or shortly in the future.
Your falling for a common fallacy, "The ways things are today is the way they will always be."
Posted on 12/15/17 at 10:44 am to LSURussian
quote:
So your answer is "nobody"?
Comcast has removed from their site a pledge they won't throttle traffic for example. They aren't going to come out and advertise how they are going to frick over the consumer though, so i'm not sure exactly what you're looking for.
Posted on 12/15/17 at 10:45 am to Greace
quote:Wait, what?!
and it still has to go through Congress.
Posted on 12/15/17 at 10:47 am to DavidTheGnome
quote:You said companies are already throttling certain sites. I'm simply asking what ISPs are already doing that? Pretty easy to understand.
so i'm not sure exactly what you're looking for.
Posted on 12/15/17 at 10:48 am to LSURussian
quote:
You said companies are already throttling certain sites.
No I didnt
Posted on 12/15/17 at 10:48 am to LSURussian
quote:
You said companies are already throttling certain sites.
I dont think he said that. But there is proof that Verizon and others were caught throttling before the 2015 ruling
Posted on 12/15/17 at 10:50 am to DavidTheGnome
quote:Okay but you did write, "but now you'll have to pay the ISP for the privilege of accessing them." Who is doing that "now"?
You said companies are already throttling certain sites.
No I didnt
Posted on 12/15/17 at 10:50 am to DavidTheGnome
quote:
Why would they do it though? More money, it really is as simple as that
Everyone would like to make more money so that’s not really an answer but a cop out. Again if 1 company does another could not do it to attract new customers. And i still don’t see why having the option to pay more for better service is bad. We already have did service plans more or less data etc.
Also what would stop them from just increasing the price on everyone as it is now? Or just slow everything down?
Posted on 12/15/17 at 10:53 am to Greace
quote:I'm confused.
But there is proof that Verizon and others were caught throttling before the 2015 ruling
I thought you said ISPs can already (under NN) throttle speeds if the user goes over a certain amount of data, or, at least charge extra for additional data? And that charge is $5/month for additional increments of 100 gigs.
Posted on 12/15/17 at 10:54 am to LSURussian
Now they have the ability to cause you to have to pay the isp for the privilege of accessing them. Before they didnt have that ability.
Posted on 12/15/17 at 10:55 am to DavidTheGnome
quote:
Comcast has removed from their site a pledge they won't throttle traffic for example. They aren't going to come out and advertise how they are going to frick over the consumer though, so i'm not sure exactly what you're looking for.
I literally just saw a tweet from Comcast that said that exact thing.
Here we get to the heart of it though people don’t like cable companies or ISPs so they view everything they do is “screwing” the consumer. Meanwhile Apple Jacks up the price on the new iPhone and no one bats an eye
If Netflix started charging extra for certain shows would they be “screwing” consumers?
Posted on 12/15/17 at 10:56 am to H-Town Tiger
The problem is that the giant ISPs basically stay off each others lawns.
Its not more for better service. Its more for the same service you already have
quote:
And i still don’t see why having the option to pay more for better service is bad
Its not more for better service. Its more for the same service you already have
Posted on 12/15/17 at 10:59 am to H-Town Tiger
quote:
Meanwhile Apple Jacks up the price on the new iPhone and no one bats an eye
Plenty of people batted an eye thats why its not selling as well as they hoped.
And im sure if Netflix started charging extra for certain shows people would be up in arms about it
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News