- 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 to free Internet From Obama's “Net Neutrality” Rules
Posted on 11/21/17 at 2:39 pm to GoCrazyAuburn
Posted on 11/21/17 at 2:39 pm to GoCrazyAuburn
quote:
Then why were they on board with other legislation to prevent such actions, as long as the internet didn't get re-classified as a public utility? AT&T and Comcast agreed to largely similar constraints on their business as part of their merger. Their issue isn't with keeping the internet open, its with being classified a utility.
BC they don't want outside competition
and those mergers that have happened. The constraints are not for ever. Spectrum for example can't have data caps for 7 years after that its fair game.
1
Posted on 11/21/17 at 2:41 pm to Korkstand
quote:
I could set up my own pathetic little power plant on my block and not count as an electric utility.
Are you going to sell the power? If so, then you are.
quote:
The only thing preventing multiple electricity providers from servicing my neighborhood is regulation.
You have multiple power lines and transformers in your neighborhood?
quote:
No, the classification as a utility is the reason for not having multiple providers. You've got it backwards.
No, I don't. Go back and read the history of why utility regulation was created. And read up on natural monopoly.
Posted on 11/21/17 at 2:44 pm to StraightCashHomey21
quote:
BC they don't want outside competition
Well, then they would be all on board for the Net Neutrality law re-classifying them as a utility then. Public utility eliminates competition. So, that can't be it.
quote:
those mergers that have happened. The constraints are not for ever. Spectrum for example can't have data caps for 7 years after that its fair game.
Okay? They clearly have no problem with operating under those types of regulations though. They also were fully on board with enacting federal regulations in 2010 and 2014 to keep ISPs from doing what you are claiming they are trying to do. Their change of heart came when they were going to be labeled as a utility.
Posted on 11/21/17 at 2:45 pm to Centinel
quote:And how were they addressed? What legal structures/procedures were involved in resolving these cases?
I'm well aware of those cases. And I'm also well aware that they were addressed without net neutrality.
quote:Well, here we are. Very nearly all ISPs have implemented hard data caps. The specific intent of which is to prevent widespread video streaming. What are we going to do about it? Is it even a problem in your view? Do we have any legal means by which to prevent an ISP from intentionally harming the business of another company by limiting their access to customers in this way?
When ALL the ISPs are doing this, then it becomes time for regulation. And can be addressed through existing anti-trust collusion laws.
Posted on 11/21/17 at 2:47 pm to Ag Zwin
quote:
How about we wait until it DOES happen, craft the policy based on the facts, and then hold violators accountable?
Jesus Christ where to begin?
That already happened. The current regulatory framework is in place in response to anti-consumer and anti-free market actions by the telecoms.
Question for all the anti-NN people: The federal government and the largest corporations on earth are telling you that they want to reduce their power and marketshare over the internet. Why do you trust them?
Posted on 11/21/17 at 2:49 pm to Korkstand
quote:
And how were they addressed? What legal structures/procedures were involved in resolving these cases?
You can Google the info.
quote:
Well, here we are. Very nearly all ISPs have implemented hard data caps. The specific intent of which is to prevent widespread video streaming. What are we going to do about it? Is it even a problem in your view? Do we have any legal means by which to prevent an ISP from intentionally harming the business of another company by limiting their access to customers in this way?
None of this has anything to do with NN.
Posted on 11/21/17 at 2:50 pm to Centinel
quote:
No, you let the market make the rules of the road in that market
As a general rule, sure, until they do things or produce situations that necessitate intervention. Like breaking laws, creating negative externalities, engaging in rent-seeking, over consolidation, and certain market failure situations.
quote:
Providing internet service is not anywhere the same as preventing pollution of public land and water.
One keeps you from watching porn at high speed. The other can kill y
No one said they are socially equivalent, what is in question is the broken logic that not just some, but all producers and providers in a market must engage in a detrimental behavior for it to be deemed a problem needing correction. Raising the stakes by using rivers and pollution just illustrates further the idiocy of that reasoning. If you know your reasoning process is shite applied when the stakes are higher, it’s doesnt make it any less shite when the stakes are lower.
Furthermore, you don’t spend millions annually on lobbying efforts as an oligopoly industry for the ability to preserve a tool many have already abused if you aren’t expecting to get a ROI on it. You want to deconstruct this into common sense, start using a little.
This post was edited on 11/21/17 at 2:53 pm
Posted on 11/21/17 at 2:51 pm to JohnnyKilroy
quote:
Question for all the anti-NN people: The federal government and the largest corporations on earth are telling you that they want to reduce their power and marketshare over the internet. Why do you trust them?
Huh?
Posted on 11/21/17 at 2:51 pm to bonhoeffer45
You can't debate with Centinel. He use to sell otter boxes and now he installs cable for Comcast.
Posted on 11/21/17 at 2:53 pm to Centinel
quote:
which to prevent an ISP from intentionally harming the business of another company by limiting their access to customers in this way?
quote:
None of this has anything to do with NN.
ummm yesss it does, when you don't treat all traffic the same.
Posted on 11/21/17 at 2:55 pm to GeorgeTheGreek
quote:
eorgeTheGreek
You can't debate with Centinel. He use to sell otter boxes and now he installs cable for Comcast
Is this true? Honestly explains quite a lot if so.
Posted on 11/21/17 at 2:57 pm to bonhoeffer45
quote:
Is this true? Honestly explains quite a lot if so.
From what I gathered he was an AF Radio guy who now does IT in the private sector.
Posted on 11/21/17 at 2:58 pm to bonhoeffer45
quote:
No one said they are socially equivalent, what is in question is the broken logic that not just some, but all producers and providers in a market must engage in a detrimental behavior for it to be deemed a problem needing correction.
The stakes have everything to do with it. Issues that affect public health have a much greater stake than issues of providing internet access.
That's why our anti-trust laws are written like they are.
quote:
Raising the stakes by using rivers and pollution just illustrates further the idiocy of that reasoning.
No, it doesn't. It's the whole reason environmental regulation and anti-trust regulation are completely different and have different thresholds.
quote:
Furthermore, you don’t spend millions annually on lobbying efforts as an oligopoly industry for the ability to preserve a tool many have already abused if you aren’t expecting to get a ROI on it.
The ROI isn't in the ability to throttle content. The ROI is rolling back the Title II regulations.
quote:
You want to deconstruct this into common sense, start using a little.
This is rather hilarious coming from you of all people. Just about all your arguments on this board revolve around appeals to emotion.
This one is no different.
Posted on 11/21/17 at 2:59 pm to Centinel
quote:Great. If I carry this out, will I then have toppled the electric company monopoly? Further, will my actions remove their classification as a utility? After all, your own criteria stated that they are only a utility because they are the only provider of power.
Are you going to sell the power? If so, then you are.
quote:Of course not, that would be silly, wouldn't it? Almost as if..
You have multiple power lines and transformers in your neighborhood?
quote:There it is! Industries with large barriers to entry, specifically expensive infrastructure, naturally lend themselves to monopolies! Why would a dozen power companies want to compete in the same neighborhood? They wouldn't. Why would customers want to bear the costs of paying for infrastructure multiple times over? They wouldn't. It is in everyone's best interest to have one well-regulated provider for utilities.
natural monopoly.
Such is the case for ISPs, whether you agree or not. Satellite and wireless simply cannot compete with laying cable/fiber.
I don't know if light regs are the answer, and I don't know if Title II or something similar is the answer. I just know that free markets aren't exactly free where natural monopolies are concerned, and we have to do something to protect consumers and businesses alike.
Letting ISPs do as they please is like allowing private ownership of all roads. We wouldn't allow the owner of the road you live on to dictate where you can and can't drive to, would we?
Posted on 11/21/17 at 3:00 pm to bonhoeffer45
quote:
Is this true? Honestly explains quite a lot if so.
No, it's not true. You can get some of my background in this thread.
Greek boy is still butthurt I made him look like a tard on another thread. He thinks he figured out the ultimate gotcha! by saying I sell otter boxes. My 11 year old nephew uses similar argument techniques.
Posted on 11/21/17 at 3:03 pm to Centinel
Quit moving goalposts Centinel, you made an argument: “we shouldn’t regulate net neutrality until ALL the players are engaging in this behavior.”
Which is just a preposterous notion. To the point it doesn’t even need explaintion but I was kind enough to give it to you. If you want to make the cost/benefit argument instead, than do that. But 13 pages have made the case already how poorly that will go for you. I’m not throwing the term rent-seeking around for no reason, it has a specific and applicable application to this situation. People aren’t using terms like natural monopoly unfairly. These are very rudimentary economic concepts that are not in dispute.
That’s not an appeal to emotion Centinel. You clearly need to brush up on your message board buzz words.
Which is just a preposterous notion. To the point it doesn’t even need explaintion but I was kind enough to give it to you. If you want to make the cost/benefit argument instead, than do that. But 13 pages have made the case already how poorly that will go for you. I’m not throwing the term rent-seeking around for no reason, it has a specific and applicable application to this situation. People aren’t using terms like natural monopoly unfairly. These are very rudimentary economic concepts that are not in dispute.
quote:
This is rather hilarious coming from you of all people. Just about all your arguments on this board revolve around appeals to emotion.
This one is no different
That’s not an appeal to emotion Centinel. You clearly need to brush up on your message board buzz words.
This post was edited on 11/21/17 at 3:06 pm
Posted on 11/21/17 at 3:04 pm to Centinel
quote:Do I have to ask my ISP first?
You can Google the info.
It's a hard thing to google. AFAIK consumers got pissed, the FCC might have laid out a fine (on what grounds I don't know), or maybe they just stopped doing it. You said you were "well aware", I was hoping you could put it into simple terms for me.
quote:Ah, so your issue is you have a complete and total lack of understanding of the topic of NN. All of your posts make sense now.quote:None of this has anything to do with NN.
Well, here we are. Very nearly all ISPs have implemented hard data caps. The specific intent of which is to prevent widespread video streaming. What are we going to do about it? Is it even a problem in your view? Do we have any legal means by which to prevent an ISP from intentionally harming the business of another company by limiting their access to customers in this way?
Posted on 11/21/17 at 3:05 pm to Korkstand
quote:
Great. If I carry this out, will I then have toppled the electric company monopoly? Further, will my actions remove their classification as a utility? After all, your own criteria stated that they are only a utility because they are the only provider of power.
Well after you run all the power lines and transformers to all your neighbors and get up and running, I'm sure you'll get a nice visit from Uncle Sam.
quote:
Such is the case for ISPs, whether you agree or not. Satellite and wireless simply cannot compete with laying cable/fiber.
ISPs are not natural monopolies. Period. Which is why classifying them under Title II was bullshite to begin with.
Transmission of power is transmission of power. Transmission of IP packets is transmission of IP packets.
I can only buy power transmitted from the grid via my local power company.
I can buy IP packets transmitted by multiple ISPs.
I'm not saying ISPs shouldn't face regulation. I'm saying NN and Title II is not the way to do it. We have other regulatory mechanisms in place. Anti-trust laws and the FCC can both be leveraged to handle any anti-competitive issues among ISPs.
Posted on 11/21/17 at 3:07 pm to Centinel
FCC says it wants to reduce their "power" by removing NN rules.
Telecoms say that NN stifles competition.
Why does anyone trust these two entities? No way the government would ever lie right? Certainly not!
Telecoms say that NN stifles competition.
Why does anyone trust these two entities? No way the government would ever lie right? Certainly not!
Posted on 11/21/17 at 3:07 pm to biggsc
If taking away free internet porn does not lead to breaking out the guillotines I don't know what will.
Page 13 of 20
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News