- 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: Federal Communications Commission set to reverse net neutrality rules
Posted on 12/14/17 at 11:51 am to SLafourche07
Posted on 12/14/17 at 11:51 am to SLafourche07
quote:
see you edited your part about 0 innovation,
Cox has been the dominant and basically only ISP in my area for high speed internet since I was a teenager. They rarely if ever innovate. They have no need to. Their customer service is atrocious and their infastructure is dogshit.
But the reason I deleted that portion is because it has nothing to do with net neutrality.
quote:
let the government control how much they can charge.
I am not for this at all.
I am against ISPs having the ability to control the content of the internet.
I have no problem if they want to charge for different speeds and for data usage, but they should have no ability to control priorities of data or speeds of certain sites or programs.
This post was edited on 12/14/17 at 11:57 am
2
Posted on 12/14/17 at 11:52 am to Aristo
quote:
Would the FCC have any regulations to protect the consumer after NN is removed?
They'd have the same power they had in 2014.
It is an easy fix for them to be able to enforce regulations such as treating traffic equally. It really isn't difficult.
Posted on 12/14/17 at 11:53 am to Aristo
The reason this all came about was because ISPs were purposely slowing down access to their competition.
So you pay for the internet access, and Netflix pays for their access.
Comcast iirc correctly slowed down Netflix traffic to keep people from using it because it hurt their cable and direct video services.
So now you're paying for internet and Netflix but not able to utilize Netflix because Comcast wants you purchasing from their services.
Net neutrality is to prevent that. It's not up to the ISP to determine what you can access. And that's what the ISPs want.
So you pay for the internet access, and Netflix pays for their access.
Comcast iirc correctly slowed down Netflix traffic to keep people from using it because it hurt their cable and direct video services.
So now you're paying for internet and Netflix but not able to utilize Netflix because Comcast wants you purchasing from their services.
Net neutrality is to prevent that. It's not up to the ISP to determine what you can access. And that's what the ISPs want.
Posted on 12/14/17 at 11:53 am to GoCrazyAuburn
quote:
They'd have the same power they had in 2014.
didn't the FTC regulate the internet in 2014? FCC took over in 2015
Posted on 12/14/17 at 11:53 am to Breesus
can someone explain to me what exactly repealing NN will do?
Posted on 12/14/17 at 11:53 am to bonhoeffer45
quote:
And the moment you can convince the whole of the Republican Party
Passed in 2014.
quote:
Democratic Party to get behind that,
They want title 2 and it isn't for our benefit.
quote:
then title 2 is the only pathway to ensuring a content non-discriminatory internet and to prevent the extortionary tactics of often monopolistic entities to exploit.
You want to stifle investment and innovation, go for it.
Posted on 12/14/17 at 11:53 am to GoCrazyAuburn
Have the melters identified where I'll find all the dead bodies yet?
Posted on 12/14/17 at 11:55 am to SoulGlo
quote:
What's to stop a company from saying "hey, come join us, we don't mess with throttling or site control!"
Are you asking what's stopping an ISP from being created and then installed and maintained and competitive in the market? Because it sure as frick is not net Neutrality.
This crowd of people who argue that new ISPs will just sprout up all over the place have got to be the most ignorant people when it comes to this debate. It blows my mind. Yall have a fundemental misunderstanding of what the internet is and how it works. It's not just magic. You don't just decide one day to provide internet access and then have the ability to do so. There is a massive amount of infastructure that goes into an ISP.
Posted on 12/14/17 at 11:56 am to JuiceTerry
quote:
No it doesn't. That's the worst part
And not only are they not doing that, Ajit is set to overrule ANY state law that does not fall in line with his FCC.
For example, you might live in a state that has a law against hidden feee, hidden terms, and requires full price transparency billing. Ajit would like to over turn that today and force states to bend to the will of his regulatory captured FCC to maximize the corporate shilling and regulatory capture. Because nothing says consumer first like hidden fees and deceptive billing practices.
This post was edited on 12/14/17 at 11:58 am
Posted on 12/14/17 at 11:56 am to ZappBrannigan
quote:
The reason this all came about was because ISPs were purposely slowing down access to their competition.
So you pay for the internet access, and Netflix pays for their access.
Comcast iirc correctly slowed down Netflix traffic to keep people from using it because it hurt their cable and direct video services.
So now you're paying for internet and Netflix but not able to utilize Netflix because Comcast wants you purchasing from their services.
Net neutrality is to prevent that. It's not up to the ISP to determine what you can access. And that's what the ISPs want.
Bingo.
Posted on 12/14/17 at 11:56 am to Breesus
quote:
This crowd of people who argue that new ISPs will just sprout up all over the place have got to be the most ignorant people when it comes to this debate. It blows my mind. Yall have a fundemental misunderstanding of what the internet is and how it works. It's not just magic. You don't just decide one day to provide internet access and then have the ability to do so. There is a massive amount of infastructure that goes into an ISP.
You get it.
Posted on 12/14/17 at 11:56 am to Salmon
quote:
didn't the FTC regulate the internet in 2014? FCC took over in 2015
I think the FCC had gained some power prior to then, but yes it was mostly regulated by the FTC.
2010 the FCC tried an original NN order (with almost unanimous support from ISPs), but the Supreme Court shot it down because they ruled they didn't have congressional authority to regulate the internet. House proposal in 2014 made federal laws to ban the activities everyone has an issue with, and gave the FCC the authority to enforce those laws (but specified they do not have the authority to regulate the internet). Democratic senate shot it down so they could achieve Title 2.
It was never about "Net Neutrality". It was about gaining Title 2 and regulatory authority.
Posted on 12/14/17 at 11:58 am to boogiewoogie1978
Some tidbits of what Title II requires. So free market.
quote:
(4) RELINQUISHMENT OF UNIVERSAL SERVICE.--A State commission shall permit an eligible telecommunications carrier to relinquish its designation as such a carrier in any area served by more than one eligible telecommunications carrier. An eligible telecommunications carrier that seeks to relinquish its eligible telecommunications carrier designation for an area served by more than one eligible telecommunications carrier shall give advance notice to the State commission of such relinquishment. Prior to permitting a telecommunications carrier designated as an eligible telecommunications carrier to cease providing universal service in an area served by more than one eligible telecommunications carrier, the State commission shall require the remaining eligible telecommunications carrier or carriers to ensure that all customers served by the relinquishing carrier will continue to be served, and shall require sufficient notice to permit the purchase or construction of adequate facilities by any remaining eligible telecommunications carrier. The State commission shall establish a time, not to exceed one year after the State commission approves such relinquishment under this paragraph, within which such purchase or construction shall be completed.
Posted on 12/14/17 at 11:59 am to cokebottleag
I am laughing right now at all the melting because this is happening one way or another.
Telecom is a dog eat dog industry.
Telecom is a dog eat dog industry.
Posted on 12/14/17 at 11:59 am to GoCrazyAuburn
quote:
It is an easy fix for them to be able to enforce regulations such as treating traffic equally. It really isn't difficult.
I was trying to find something on the FCC website about them already being able to do this without NN, but most of the site is pretty vague.
Posted on 12/14/17 at 12:01 pm to Breesus
quote:
Are you asking what's stopping an ISP from being created and then installed and maintained and competitive in the market? Because it sure as frick is not net Neutrality.
This crowd of people who argue that new ISPs will just sprout up all over the place have got to be the most ignorant people when it comes to this debate. It blows my mind. Yall have a fundemental misunderstanding of what the internet is and how it works. It's not just magic. You don't just decide one day to provide internet access and then have the ability to do so. There is a massive amount of infastructure that goes into an ISP.
They will be the first to cry when Info Wars runs slow as shite
Posted on 12/14/17 at 12:01 pm to boogiewoogie1978
It's a beautiful day
Don't let it get away
It's a beautiful day
Don't let it get away
It's a beautiful day
Posted on 12/14/17 at 12:03 pm to Aristo
quote:
I was trying to find something on the FCC website about them already being able to do this without NN, but most of the site is pretty vague.
The FCC wouldn't be able to on their own without Title 2 re-classification. They have to have "congressional authority" to enforce or regulate anything. They tried this in 2010 and were shot down because of that. Instead of using that as a blueprint and giving them the ability to enforce such rules, they went the route of Title 2.
The 2014 proposal would have avoided all of that. It made it federal law that ISPs couldn't throttle, create fast lanes, etc. Basically treating all traffic equally. I gave the FCC authority to enforce those laws(but explicitly did not give them authority to regulate the internet). Both sides would win. Take a guess why the government didn't want that to happen?
This post was edited on 12/14/17 at 12:04 pm
Posted on 12/14/17 at 12:03 pm to tgr4ever
quote:
can someone explain to me what exactly repealing NN will do?
It will give ISPs such as Cox and Comcast the ability to slow down and speed up certain websites and programs and internet traffic based on their own decisions about content. You will have no say or check on their decisions and no ability to fight it.
For instance, Comcast establishes a paid streaming service. It pushes all data to that streaming service as priority super high speed and it throttles Netflix and Hulu and Amazon into massive loading times and picture quality that make them virtually unusable. This kills innovation because no startups will get into the streaming business because it's impossible to fairly compete. What's worse, is you, as the free market, can decide you like Netflix best and want to support it, but it doesn't matter because your ISP won't allow Netflix to operate properly on its system.
Or, Comcast strikes a deal with CNN where CNN News is given high priority and all other news networks and sites are given a lower priority.
People on here keep harping this line about just switching ISPs, however that's practically impossible for most of this country.
Posted on 12/14/17 at 12:04 pm to CorporateTiger
quote:
Do you like the Comcast et al being able to make a website basically disappear?
What if they decided your favorite conservative or nationalist website just shouldn’t be seen period?
More to the point, what do you think will happen if ESPN, for instance, decides that they want to have the only sports forums on the internet? Is there any amount of money that Chicken can come up with to keep TD in existence?
Page 9 of 14
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News