- 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: Goodbye Net Neutrality; Hello Competition
Posted on 1/7/18 at 8:45 am to Korkstand
Posted on 1/7/18 at 8:45 am to Korkstand
quote:
What on Earth could possibly make someone believe that regulation that essentially says "don't frick your customers" is the reason there is little competition in the ISP market?
Because I lived through the massive regulation of telecommunications of the sixties and seventies!!
Thank goodness we deregulated long distance and airlines for example.
quote:
ISPs have been consolidating for a very long time, and the reason for that is pure free market forces. We would have seen more consolidation and even fewer choices if not for those big meanies in government regulating mergers. It simply makes economic sense to not compete in building infrastructure. Consolidation WILL happen. Wishing upon a free market will not magically make competition emerge.
There will be consolidation and NN protected those consolidating companies. Removing NN laws and standards will allow more people to enter the market.
There is no question competition will increase and service options will increase. Some of the choices available to customers in the future may be throttled but you will know it as the FCC says the service levels must be revealed. You will have choices. The 4th fiber provider available to our business in a very small town began laying fiber this past week on our street.
The new providers may or may not be huge companies and the investment is obviously nothing like some of you believe. We ALL will see more choices for ISPs.
You NN folks are FOOLS to advocate for FCC regulation of the internet as a utility.
Instead of directing your energy toward the Feds direct it toward your local and state governments and demand they end franchise deals.
This post was edited on 1/7/18 at 8:47 am
2
Posted on 1/7/18 at 8:50 am to cave canem
quote:
Good lord man you are clueless as to what is even being discussed, this has jack shite to do with competition in the ISP market, it takes a special kind of stupid to even make that claim, congrats.
This is exactly about competition within the ISP market.
You are unbelievably foolish if you do not think the NN laws would eventually limit competition AND service levels.
Posted on 1/7/18 at 11:12 am to I B Freeman
quote:
There will be consolidation and NN protected those consolidating companies. Removing NN laws and standards will allow more people to enter the market.
There is no question competition will increase and service options will increase. Some of the choices available to customers in the future may be throttled but you will know it as the FCC says the service levels must be revealed. You will have choices. The 4th fiber provider available to our business in a very small town began laying fiber this past week on our street.
Then why didn't this happen prior to 2015? The large ISPs had temporary agreements in place requiring them to abide by net neutrality principles and no restrictions existed for new ISPs -- barriers to entry were lower than ever. The only reason net neutrality was passed in 2015 is because a court ruled that the FCC did not have the jurisdiction to enforce net neutrality principles that the ISPs agreed to in lieu of regulation. The ISPs repeatedly failed to hold up their end of the bargain and as a result were reclassified under Title II.
Verizon was open about their position that net neutrality is unconstitutional because it removes their editorial right to censor us
Almost no one cares about the Title II aspect of NN. We care about NN principles.. and that's it.
This post was edited on 1/7/18 at 11:18 am
Posted on 1/7/18 at 11:15 am to I B Freeman
Can you name one single way in which net neutrality in any way at all inhibited ISP competition?
I'll wait.
Posted on 1/7/18 at 11:16 am to I B Freeman
quote:
You are unbelievably foolish if you do not think the NN laws would eventually limit competition AND service levels.
How?
Posted on 1/7/18 at 11:16 am to I B Freeman
quote:
Thank goodness we deregulated long distance and airlines for example.
And would you say your experience as a customer of airlines has improved since the 60s and 70s?
This post was edited on 1/7/18 at 11:17 am
Posted on 1/7/18 at 11:39 am to Korkstand
quote:
Is that why those big companies cried about the NN rules until they got the repeal they wanted?
Totally bro. The mammoth IP's are working against their bottom line out of principled conviction for market freedom!!! Those CEOs would never put their stock price ahead of principles.
Posted on 1/7/18 at 12:13 pm to cameronml
quote:
And would you say your experience as a customer of airlines has improved since the 60s and 70s?
Absolutely.
No question about it.
I remember having to fly Delta on one leg and Eastern on another leg of trip through Atlanta in the old Atlanta airport. It was not a long flight just one airline had one leg and the other had not be "approved" for that let. The gates were like 100 gates apart. The ticket was like $600 and that was 1978 money.
Oh they had wider seats but the cost, availability and reliability are much better today.
Posted on 1/7/18 at 12:16 pm to AUbused
quote:
Net Neutrality had the backing of all the top names in content delivery, from Google to Yahoo to Netflix to Amazon. It’s had the quiet support of the leading Internet service providers Comcast and Verizon. Both companies are on record in support of the principle, repeatedly and consistently, while opposing only Title II which makes them a public utility – a classic "have your cake and eat it" position.
The opposition, in contrast, had been represented by small players in the industry, hardware providers like Cisco, free-market think tanks and disinterested professors, and a small group of writers and pundits who know something about freedom and free-market economics.
The public at large should have been rising up in opposition, but people were largely ignorant of what was going on with net neutrality. Consumers imagined that they would get censorship-free access and low prices. That’s not what happened.
What was sold as economic fairness and a wonderful favor to consumers was actually a sop to industrial giants.
Here’s what’s was really going on with net neutrality. The incumbent rulers of the world’s most exciting technology decided to lock down the prevailing market conditions to protect themselves against rising upstarts in a fast-changing market. The imposition of a rule against throttling content or using the market price system to allocate bandwidth resources protects against innovations that would disrupt the status quo.
Posted on 1/7/18 at 1:22 pm to I B Freeman
Given the political and philosophical leanings of Apple, Microsoft, Google. Facebook, Twitter, Uber, Lyft, Netflix, Hulu, and a hissy of other tech and content companies, I wonder if this back fires...
With the fall of net neutrality a cable company can basically ban a small free speech alternative to Twitter like Gab.ai from the net.
With the fall of net neutrality a cable company can basically ban a small free speech alternative to Twitter like Gab.ai from the net.
This post was edited on 1/7/18 at 1:24 pm
Posted on 1/7/18 at 1:45 pm to I B Freeman
quote:
Here’s what’s was really going on with net neutrality. The incumbent rulers of the world’s most exciting technology decided to lock down the prevailing market conditions to protect themselves against rising upstarts in a fast-changing market. The imposition of a rule against throttling content or using the market price system to allocate bandwidth resources protects against innovations that would disrupt the status quo.
So.. let me get this straight.. who are the 'incumbent rulers of the world's most exciting technology'?
It would obviously have to be the ISPs who wield active control over the internet. I hadn't realized that they lobbied for net neutrality principles only to reverse course after the 2015 net neutrality ruling and work towards repealing it and finally succeeding in 2017.
This post was edited on 1/7/18 at 1:45 pm
Posted on 1/7/18 at 1:55 pm to Boatshoes
quote:Companies like ATT already did this.
With the fall of net neutrality a cable company can basically ban a small free speech alternative to Twitter like Gab.ai from the net.
Posted on 1/7/18 at 3:11 pm to ninthward
Of course their customers can move to their competitors and they will not have their lobbyist protecting them with no NN rules.
You do not want these big companies you NN proponents fear with the ability to limit competition using the FCC. That is exactly where we were headed before the NN rules were rolled back.
You do not want these big companies you NN proponents fear with the ability to limit competition using the FCC. That is exactly where we were headed before the NN rules were rolled back.
Posted on 1/7/18 at 3:13 pm to Breesus
How? you got to be kidding? The FCC with the power to treat the internet as a utility could set pricing, speed standards, service levels by area ect.
Posted on 1/7/18 at 3:16 pm to I B Freeman
quote:
Here’s what’s was really going on with net neutrality. The incumbent rulers of the world’s most exciting technology decided to lock down the prevailing market conditions to protect themselves against rising upstarts in a fast-changing market. The imposition of a rule against throttling content or using the market price system to allocate bandwidth resources protects against innovations that would disrupt the status quo.
Is this referring to the ISPs or Google or what?
Posted on 1/7/18 at 3:29 pm to bmy
quote:
Net Neutrality had the backing of all the top names in content delivery, from Google to Yahoo to Netflix to Amazon. It’s had the quiet support of the leading Internet service providers Comcast and Verizon. Both companies are on record in support of the principle, repeatedly and consistently, while opposing only Title II which makes them a public utility – a classic "have your cake and eat it" position.
The opposition, in contrast, had been represented by small players in the industry, hardware providers like Cisco, free-market think tanks and disinterested professors, and a small group of writers and pundits who know something about freedom and free-market economics.
The public at large should have been rising up in opposition, but people were largely ignorant of what was going on with net neutrality. Consumers imagined that they would get censorship-free access and low prices. That’s not what happened.
What was sold as economic fairness and a wonderful favor to consumers was actually a sop to industrial giants.
Here’s what’s was really going on with net neutrality. The incumbent rulers of the world’s most exciting technology decided to lock down the prevailing market conditions to protect themselves against rising upstarts in a fast-changing market. The imposition of a rule against throttling content or using the market price system to allocate bandwidth resources protects against innovations that would disrupt the status quo.
I guarantee you one day under NN laws this would happen---Say Giant ISP is your only provider because he has lobbied the FCC to restrict access through licensing or other means available under title II. He agrees not to throttle but no one makes him invest in upgrades. A new technology that requires a lot of bandwidth to delivery becomes the norm for video or some other media. Giant ISP is now protected from delivering this new media simply because he is not throttling and he is not investing.
The logical and proper thing to advocate for is no Federal involvement and MUCH less local and state involvement. I know that does not fit the narrative the content providers want you to have but please think logically and look at history for the crap federal regulation creates.
This post was edited on 1/7/18 at 3:30 pm
Posted on 1/7/18 at 3:57 pm to I B Freeman
quote:
I guarantee you one day under NN laws this would happen---Say Giant ISP is your only provider because he has lobbied the FCC to restrict access through licensing or other means available under title II. He agrees not to throttle but no one makes him invest in upgrades. A new technology that requires a lot of bandwidth to delivery becomes the norm for video or some other media. Giant ISP is now protected from delivering this new media simply because he is not throttling and he is not investing.
The logical and proper thing to advocate for is no Federal involvement and MUCH less local and state involvement. I know that does not fit the narrative the content providers want you to have but please think logically and look at history for the crap federal regulation creates.
If this was the case.. why did Verizon, Comcast, etc. spend millions of dollars lobbying against net neutrality principles? It's a documented fact.. not only do they oppose Title II classification they also oppose net neutrality principles.
Verizon argued in court that net neutrality principles violate their 1st amendment rights.. arguing that "In performing these functions [providing the transmission of speech], broadband providers possess "editorial discretion. Just as a newspaper is entitled to decide which content to publish and where, broadband providers may feature some content over others."
Comcast wants to preempt states from requiring net neutrality principles (from a Comcast filing)
"We also emphasized that the Commission's order in this proceeding should include a clear, affirmative ruling that expressly confirms the primacy of federal law with respect to BIAS [Broadband Internet Access Service] as an interstate information service, and that preempts state and local efforts to regulate BIAS either directly or indirectly."
You're either shilling or have been grossly misinformed.
This post was edited on 1/7/18 at 4:01 pm
Posted on 1/7/18 at 4:03 pm to bmy
Well luckily now that The Internet is suing the FCC along with multiple attorney generals, we won’t see NN ended for a while as this plays out in courts.
Not only that but a few states are attempting to pass their own NN legislature.
Not only that but a few states are attempting to pass their own NN legislature.
Posted on 1/7/18 at 4:03 pm to I B Freeman
quote:I don't know why you keep trying.
I B Freeman
I finally just decided to let time win the argument for me
In about 18 months give or take. I'll bring this subject back up on the board and laugh at all of these assholes
Page 3 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News