re: FCC to free Internet From Obama's “Net Neutrality” Rules

quote:

---

ISP’s are just trying to use the regulatory system to arrange a rent-seeking relationship by using their already established market power of near monopolies in many areas to extort customers and online businesses of more money.

---

And this is because of what??? Not federal involvement.

The local governments are limiting competition and need to be stopped.

The problem is not with the federal government. Keep them out of this or it will be FUBAR.

This is the same government that actually set prices for things like chickens and lumber during the depression. The same government that created telephone monopolies that kept cellular service at bay for decade. The same government that regulated broadcast TV so much that for years most of the country had at best 3 networks to choose from.

You people are crazy if you want the internet regulated like a utility.

quote:

---

I dont know I guess this doesnt bother me.and the example of paying an extra 5-10 for whatever sites means i have to pay an extra 70-120 per yr wouldnt bother me either

---

So you would be OK if an ISP decided to charge you $10/mo for TD.com but let another LSU Board be free?

You know where everyone would go? The free one.

TD.com would cease to exist.

quote:

---

Well that's just good business sense. But that's an entirely different conversation in terms of should ISPs be allowed to own content. For the very reason above.

---

it proves caps are bullshite

quote:

---

What needs to happen next is the local governments need to quit regulation of ISP availability. People are tied to cable providers, for example, because of local agreements with cities or parishes and the provider.

---

You are under the mistaken impression that ISPs only deal with government. They deal with one another to stay off each other's territory, too.

It just makes sense from a business perspective. Infrastructure is costly. If you ran an ISP and were competing with a neighboring ISP over two neighborhoods, would you just fight it out so both companies build out infrastructure in both neighborhoods, splitting the customers.. or would you make a deal, you take one neighborhood and they take the other? This way, your infrastructure costs are cut in half, yet you acquire the same number of customers as if you had actually competed. Now both companies can charge more per customer AND their investments are paid off in half the time. Local government may come in later asking their cut for not raising a stink about it, or whatever.

The ISP industry lends itself to natural monopolies. The only way around it is improved wireless networks and/or LEO satellite internet. Until these techs advance to make wide coverage cheaper, the immense infrastructure costs will assure that the local ISP monopolies remain, regardless of government involvement.

Competition is the answer. The monopolies are coming quickly to end-- throttling will not be an issue.

If you truly want to end throttling then complain about local franchises of cable and ISPs.

I think a lot of supporters of NN are actually these big monopoly ISP shills.

The monopolies will only become more engrained if the FCC treat the internet like a utility.

quote:

---

Or we just use current anti-trust laws to force ISPs to divest their media content lines of business.

Problem solved and no regulating ISPs like utilities required.

---

I absolutely agree that ISP should not be able to own the content companies.

Still dangerous to allow ISPs the ability to control and throttle traffic.

quote:

---

It MIGHT happen, so let's create a bureaucracy.

How about we wait until it DOES happen, craft the policy based on the facts, and then hold violators accountable?

---

We did wait. Tech folks have been talking about Net Neutrality for a very long time. Then an ISP started blocking internet calling. Then another ISP started throttling Netflix. Then another, and another. Now data caps are becoming the norm, which is a less direct (though still very effective) way to throttle streaming services.

So then we crafted policy based on these facts, and it was good.


And now we are repealing said policy to wait for more facts? When will you start paying attention?

Having the internet under Title II regulation is a BAD IDEA. I don't care what you call it, or what you think the consequences will be. This was a power play by The Feds in order to get their hooks into the internet and to exercise control over it. The rest of this crap about ISPs charging this or charging that is scare tactics put out by statists who will say anything to justify their power grab.

quote:

---

VPN

---

This is nowhere near a complete solution.

Not only can your ISP determine that you are using a VPN and throttle that connection, but most have already implemented the end-around defense and set up data caps.

quote:

---

We did wait. Tech folks have been talking about Net Neutrality for a very long time. Then an ISP started blocking internet calling. Then another ISP started throttling Netflix. Then another, and another. Now data caps are becoming the norm, which is a less direct (though still very effective) way to throttle streaming services.

So then we crafted policy based on these facts, and it was good.


And now we are repealing said policy to wait for more facts? When will you start paying attention?

---

Fair enough. I shot off on something where I am inadequately informed. Mea culpa.

TBS, the thread I was replying did use "might", so I assumed this had not already been a thing.