re: I wholeheartedly disagree with the Trump administration on getting rid of Net Neutrality

I disagree. What happened in 2015 was the private body that had regulated the internet decided to cease doing so moving forward, so the government stepped in. If the government ceases to do so, there won't be a private body with the teeth to keep net neutrality (which isn't a limitation, but a feature) alive.

The problem is that ISP's have been treated like utilities when it benefited them (allowed to run lines in public right of ways, anti-trust protection when forming geographic monopolies, subsidies to expand service to new areas, massive regulatory barriers to entry, etc), but all with zero protection for the consumer that typically comes with utility designation. There's no putting the genie back in the bottle.

Many advocates of what the Trump Administration wants to do argue that the ISP's own the pipe, so they should have full control over what's in it. However, not only is that pipe on public right of ways, but local, state, and federal government programs often heavily subsidized or even outright payed for those lines to be placed where they are. The government deserves to have a say in what those "pipes" carry as long as those pipes are restricted to just the company that installed them. Unless you want to nationalize the pipes and then allow any ISP that wants to compete in the marketplace to use them, this is the best option for ensuring consumers are protected.

Net Neutrality regulation by the FCC wasn't done to counter a problem before it happened. It was already starting to happen. AT&T and Comcast customers had brought fraud suits based on advertised speeds verses what they were actually experiencing. It was in this study that they discovered that ISP's were throttling speeds when customers used Netflix for more than an hour at a time. The speeds would suddenly slow to a crawl 2/3rds of the way into a movie.

The FCC stepped in because someone had to, and they are the only theoretically impartial body left with the teeth to keep the ISP's in line.

It's bad enough that search engines are hiding search results that run counter to a political narrative. Do you really want ISP's to also have the power to ensure those sites, if found, cannot even be loaded?

Good for you. Sadly, most here and most in the country don't understand what this truly means. Aside from the direct costs to consumers, there will be a collateral impact as well due to business to business fees for streaming and other high data services.

quote:

---

You're such a Johnny fricking one note

---

It's a product of semen overdoses

quote:

---

You don't have Verizon, TMobile, Sprint, etc?

Even ignoring the mobiles, that's still not a monopoly.

---

Ya wanna know what's funny.

Even my old arse is likely to live to see a time when young people of a future generation look at us and say, "you frickers needed wires for the Internet????!!!!"

quote:

---

It’s a great way to selient opposition view points and media

---

You should be much more worried about Google and Amazon on this front.

My favorite is the power that Akamai has over CDNs.

Thank you. The Trumpkins have literally only put one thing into account on why they’re against it: it is Obama’s policy. He did a few good things, like say Cuba. This was one of them.

The internet to compete in current society is a utility and a major channel for free speech. You can not have Comcast dictating that. As far as I’m concerned, we should primary every Republican Senator and Representative who voted for this. They sold us out to Comcast and AT&T. They don’t represent the people.

quote:

---

Thank you. The Trumpkins have literally only put one thing into account on why they’re against it: it is Obama’s policy. He did a few good things, like say Cuba. This was one of them.

---

I don't give a rat's frick that it was Obama's policy.

You dumb fricks act as if those of us who generally oppose regulations of this sort just suddenly started holding that view in the last 8 years.

That either means you're a complete fricking dumb arse or, 8 years ago, you were in high school.

Cause this shite ain't new by a long shot.

(no message)

quote:

---

If this is your argument, then I can only conclude that you are actually retarded.

It's like arguing that a gasoline generator is a substitute for the electrical grid.

---

Is there some part of the internet you can't access using mobile providers?

quote:

---

Not for internet? Are you saying you can't access the internet using TMobile, Verizon, or Sprint?

---

1. Sprint and T-Mobile don't really work in South Louisiana. They exist, but they're basically useless. You might as well have dial up internet. The only networks that work are AT&T (which is spotty as hell in downtown BR and anywhere south of LSU) and Verizon (which does work)

2. As another poster mentioned: comparing broadband internet with wireless is like comparing an electrical grid to a gasoline generator.