- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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: FCC Chairman Ajit Pai: Why He's Rejecting Net Neutrality
Posted on 11/22/17 at 11:26 am to Adam Banks
Posted on 11/22/17 at 11:26 am to Adam Banks
(no message)
This post was edited on 3/3/18 at 11:19 pm
1
Posted on 11/22/17 at 11:26 am to stat19
You must be pretty naive to think that the data paradigm hasnt changed considerably since those early days.
Initially, the average user did little more than check their email, do some shopping and browse the web. Innovations in content distribution has turned even the most casual and unsophisticated users into data guzzlers.
There is far more motive and opportunity to throttle and/or influence data costs based on source and destination now as compared to "when the internet was founded".
You claim to be in the business and yet you dont understand how much things have changed?
Initially, the average user did little more than check their email, do some shopping and browse the web. Innovations in content distribution has turned even the most casual and unsophisticated users into data guzzlers.
There is far more motive and opportunity to throttle and/or influence data costs based on source and destination now as compared to "when the internet was founded".
You claim to be in the business and yet you dont understand how much things have changed?
Posted on 11/22/17 at 11:27 am to Adam Banks
quote:
I'll play. I don't believe sites known to engage in piracy should be run at the same speed.
Well most torrent sites have been shut down, the application on you machine to torrent files isn't illegal.
As for streaming sports, if the TV/ISP provider could offer consumers what they want and at a reasonable price, then people would not be forced to stream using other means. Via websites (which is dying due to pop ups and malware) and other applications.
This post was edited on 11/22/17 at 11:28 am
Posted on 11/22/17 at 11:28 am to culsutiger
quote:
The fact that such a bill was proposed shows that they currently do not have the authority without the title 2 classification. You keep making my point for me.
You are really having trouble with this. Legal authority form congress does not mean it has to be Title 2. If that were the case, the republican proposal would have made it so. It, in fact, went so far as to make sure that didn't happen.
quote:
You don't seem to understand. The FCC does not write law. Congress does. The FCC works within the framework set by Congress.
No, you don't seem to understand because at no point did I ever say the FCC has that power, or maybe you just don't understand what the courts actually did or did not strike down. The FCC tried to implement the Open Internet Principles in 2010 but the court struck them down. The FCC then tried to write them as rules, and were struck down again in 2014 by the same court, siting as I said above, they could not show a source of legal authority from congress the enforce such rules. That is when the republican committee proposed the law.
Posted on 11/22/17 at 11:28 am to LSURussian
quote:
That's the "Invisible Hand" that Adam Smith wrote about over 240 years ago in his book An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations.
Liberals hate Adam Smith because it doesn't result in instant gratification
Posted on 11/22/17 at 11:28 am to Tigerdev
quote:
hanged considerably since those early days
Ah yes the early days of February 2015.
Posted on 11/22/17 at 11:28 am to ShortyRob
I'm with the guy earlier who posted " I just want my ISP to be a dumb pass thru neither knowing nor caring what content is coming through their servers as long as it is legal"
Posted on 11/22/17 at 11:29 am to Tigerdev
quote:
Initially, the average user did little more than check their email, do some shopping and browse the web. Innovations in content distribution has turned even the most casual and unsophisticated users into data guzzlers.
Literally a verbatim argument for why NN is dumb.........and yet, used to support it.
Posted on 11/22/17 at 11:30 am to LSURussian
quote:
And that has been the issue all along, snowflake. When you think of "traffic" do you automatically assume it means what types of cars are on the road and not how many cars are on a road?
No one is hogging your data old man
quote:
If an ISP starts restricting content, the FCC will still be able to intervene. Nothing changes in that regard. But even then, the users will be able to decide to stick with that ISP or move their account to another one.
Most people don't have the choice to just move to a different provider when their options are limited.
Posted on 11/22/17 at 11:30 am to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
quote:
I'm with the guy earlier who posted " I just want my ISP to be a dumb pass thru neither knowing nor caring what content is coming through their servers as long as it is legal"
So you want BigGov to take care of it.
Posted on 11/22/17 at 11:32 am to culsutiger
quote:
Who would you propose to create the standards for sites being known to engage in piracy? Who maintains this list?
Your isp. In fact you could make an argument that they are currently a co conspirator given the fact they are providing the boat to engage in illegal activities.
If you don't agree with their list then change providers or get the content provider to publicize why they are in the right and consumer demand/bad pr will force their hand. I promise there is a captive media to air their grivences
Posted on 11/22/17 at 11:33 am to StraightCashHomey21
quote:
As for streaming sports, if the TV/ISP provider could offer consumers what they want and at a reasonable price, then people would not be forced to stream using other means. V
Oh the excuse of the big bad corporate giant made me break the law. Spare me. There's plenty of places to watch a game.
Posted on 11/22/17 at 11:34 am to Adam Banks
quote:
Oh the excuse of the big bad corporate giant made me break the law. Spare me. There's plenty of places to watch a game.
Why should someone be forced to leave their home to watch a game when they can via the internet.....
Posted on 11/22/17 at 11:37 am to GoCrazyAuburn
(no message)
This post was edited on 3/3/18 at 11:19 pm
Posted on 11/22/17 at 11:37 am to StraightCashHomey21
If they are not legally doing so then they should. Just because a crime is easy doesn't mean you should do it. If they are engaged in illegal activities they should be shut down. The dumbasses who don't understand basic economics will be forced to when the sports they are illegally streaming are no longer broadcast at all due to espn and the like having massive budget cuts.
Posted on 11/22/17 at 11:37 am to StraightCashHomey21
quote:
Why should someone be forced to leave their home to watch a game when they can via the internet.....
You speak in terms entirely unrelated to markets, economics or business.
Customers want everything for nothing.
Companies want to provide nothing for everything.
From there, economics applies. ALWAYS
There are no "shoulds". There are merely market desires, pressures and the push pull of it all.
The moment you insert "shoulds" into the equation, you frick up the equation.
Posted on 11/22/17 at 11:38 am to ShortyRob
Don't waste your time. These people believe they are entitled to any media for free.
Posted on 11/22/17 at 11:39 am to Tigerdev
quote:
You claim to be in the business and yet you dont understand how much things have changed
To add to this point one only needs to look at the consolidation that has gone on in pretty short order. Verizon just bought Yahoo, Time Warner cable getting gobbled up by Charter. Along with the proliferation of online alternatives to cable has further incentivized this push to hand ISP’s that are often cable monopolies or duopolies in most regions the tools to push people back into their expensive bread and butter arrangements. More incentive to divert traffic from competitors. While extracting more from internet reliant businesses and consumers in the process to meet their profit targets.
You don’t spend millions annually to lobby, force model legislation to stifle competitors, and get your puppets into regulatory positions because they are going to screw you. You do it so you can do the screwing. And this push is transparently a push to give back ISP’s one of those tools to aide in their rent-seeking. It’s the definition of crony capitalism but some will defend it all with every fiber.
Posted on 11/22/17 at 11:40 am to Adam Banks
quote:
If they are not legally doing so then they should. Just because a crime is easy doesn't mean you should do it. If they are engaged in illegal activities they should be shut down. The dumbasses who don't understand basic economics will be forced to when the sports they are illegally streaming are no longer broadcast at all due to espn and the like having massive budget cuts.
Maybe providers should expand their packages at a reasonable price point. The days of sports not being on tv or broadcast are long gone. Things won't be like the 80s. With teams starting their own web or youtube channels or services like periscope. The user will be able to find everything they need.
Seems like PS Vue is working just fine but that might change once ISPs start restricting their traffic unless you pay for it.
Posted on 11/22/17 at 11:41 am to StraightCashHomey21
quote:
Why should someone be forced to leave their home to watch a game when they can via the internet.....
If you don't subscribe to a service that has certain channels you're not watching anyway. No one is forcing anything, it's 100% voluntary.
The most entitled attitudes come out in these discussions
Page 5 of 26
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News