- 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: Wait...some of you are actually against NN??
Posted on 11/22/17 at 3:28 am to seawolf06
Posted on 11/22/17 at 3:28 am to seawolf06
quote:
Vehemently against NN. It's a scam fueled by propaganda and fear mongering.
Bull.
fricking.
shite!
You can disagree with it, but to use THAT as your talking point just shows how little you know about the topic.
It wasn't just arbitrarily imposed. It is slapped on because it was the only thing in law they could apply to stop them FROM ACTIVELY DISREGARDING THE PRINCIPLES OF NET NEUTRALITY.
The companies called the government's bluff repeatedly assuming they were impotent to stop them. They throttled connections to traffic they didn't like, and they danced around false advertisement claims and continued inspite of numerous warnings after it finally was caught beyond their plausible deniability.
This isn't a what if.
The part they want to get rid of was put in place BECAUSE these companies were abusing their government sanctioned monopolies.
This post was edited on 11/22/17 at 3:29 am
1
Posted on 11/22/17 at 6:23 am to bonhoeffer45
quote:
Asking them to subsidize the bills, hand them monopoly control in many regions, insulate them from competition and oversight, and than be allowed the rights to sell their private data and extort them as customers. Rent-seek at their expense.
The issue is the ISP's all want the privilidge of being a utility however they do not want to be treated as one on the other end and regulated as such.
The only issue to resolve is are they or are they not.
It really is that simple.
If they are utilities then NN is here to stay, if they are not it is time to climb down off the gravy train and break out the checkbook. They are going to have to forced to shite or get off the pot.
Posted on 11/22/17 at 6:27 am to cave canem
how's it hangin brother? Been across the pond lately to pick me up a real edition of the Daily Mail?
Posted on 11/22/17 at 6:27 am to TigerTatorTots
quote:
and I can't understand how anyone would be in favor of repealing NN
here is the thing about NN
it effectively freezes entry into the market and likely any major innovation that has to use physical cables to carry information
the ultimate symbolic point of NN is that we have admitted that we've allowed various forms of government to create monopolistic entities and we have decided to allow them to keep their places while regulating them in some small ways for hypothesized, potential outcomes
Posted on 11/22/17 at 6:28 am to Ole Messcort
quote:
Wait...some of you are actually against NN??
Yes
quote:Nope
gotta be trolling.
quote:Every time a NN person brings up Trump, it tells me that the NN person doesn't even know WHY people oppose NN much less comprehend why
Trump has created an army of dumbass trolls.
quote:Can you please? We have enough economic morons in the U.S.
Y'all pay $100k to my GoFundMe I'll move.
Posted on 11/22/17 at 6:34 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
it effectively freezes entry into the market and likely any major innovation that has to use physical cables to carry information
You are going to have to flesh that one out a bit brother.
Posted on 11/22/17 at 6:35 am to cajunangelle
quote:
how's it hangin brother? Been across the pond lately to pick me up a real edition of the Daily Mail?
In the Middle East right now, will pass through London and pick you up a copy in a few weeks.
Posted on 11/22/17 at 6:42 am to cave canem
quote:
You are going to have to flesh that one out a bit brother.
the reason people are concerned over NN is because monopolistic entities has formed, thanks to government aid in the initial development of the lines necessary to carry cable. new entrants do not receive the same government help and face MASSIVE barriers to entry, making entry into the market less likely
NN effectively ceases avenues for creative entrants to justify expansion. the easiest example is "budget cable". NN makes it illegal to offer certain types of throttled options, even if the cost is lower. this sort of "budget cable" could do wonders for poor people who don't need more than 5-10 Mbps (most consumers waste a ton of their download speeds). so, theoretically, a service primed to corner that market is effectively kept out of the market by NN, thus, there is no reason to try to enter the market
the entire point of government regulations is that they limit behaviors by companies that can lead to competition. NN requires that trade off, too
Posted on 11/22/17 at 6:52 am to SlowFlowPro
It's amazing how many of you would vote to make your own lives a little worse if it made the lives of others significantly worse. What is wrong with you?
Posted on 11/22/17 at 6:58 am to tmjones2
quote:
It's amazing how many of you would vote to make your own lives a little worse if it made the lives of others significantly worse.
wait
what?
the frick does that have to do with anything i've posted in this thread
This post was edited on 11/22/17 at 6:59 am
Posted on 11/22/17 at 7:03 am to SlowFlowPro
I think you know by now that this topic cannot be discussed with any kind of expectation for reason by the side of the NNers.
Posted on 11/22/17 at 7:05 am to Parmen
quote:
Glad NN is going away. Free market is gonna free market :)
The fact that so many down voted this statement is testament to how bad our education system is. The reason we have internet in the first place is our free enterprise system.
Posted on 11/22/17 at 7:11 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
the easiest example is "budget cable". NN makes it illegal to offer certain types of throttled options, even if the cost is lower. this sort of "budget cable" could do wonders for poor people who don't need more than 5-10 Mbps (most consumers waste a ton of their download speeds). so, theoretically, a service primed to corner that market is effectively kept out of the market by NN, thus, there is no reason to try to enter the market
You are normally a pretty good poster but the above proves beyond the shadow of a doubt you are absolutly clueless on this topic
Posted on 11/22/17 at 7:16 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
the reason people are concerned over NN is because monopolistic entities has formed, thanks to government aid in the initial development of the lines necessary to carry cable. new entrants do not receive the same government help and face MASSIVE barriers to entry, making entry into the market less likely
NN effectively ceases avenues for creative entrants to justify expansion. the easiest example is "budget cable". NN makes it illegal to offer certain types of throttled options, even if the cost is lower. this sort of "budget cable" could do wonders for poor people who don't need more than 5-10 Mbps (most consumers waste a ton of their download speeds). so, theoretically, a service primed to corner that market is effectively kept out of the market by NN, thus, there is no reason to try to enter the market
the entire point of government regulations is that they limit behaviors by companies that can lead to competition. NN requires that trade off, too
I don't follow you. NN doesn't stop Budget Cable, Inc. from offering me 10 Mbps service if that's what I want.
It does stop them from selling me 10 Mbps service, then slowing down my connection to Youtube unless I pay for their premium 20 Mbps tier.
Posted on 11/22/17 at 7:20 am to TigerTatorTots
quote:
I'm pretty damn right of the aisle and I can't understand how anyone would be in favor of repealing NN
Then you haven't looked at the details nor understand what it sets the foundation for.
Government controlled internet is NOT the answer. We don't want the same setup as China.
Posted on 11/22/17 at 7:23 am to TigerTatorTots
quote:
But lets just trust Comcast bc they didn't do that before.
Comcast is a great example of WHY NN is NOT needed.
They got caught filtering torrent traffic. What happened next? The public let them know flat out that was not acceptable. Many customers dumped comcast and the financial blow was felt.
What was the result? In this so called world where the people have no choice the people FORCED comcast to stop w/out the government stepping in.
This doesn't even get into the details of the torrent traffic filtering and how Comcast wasn't offering a higher priced package to allow it. They were just trying to lighten the load on their shitty network.
This post was edited on 11/22/17 at 7:25 am
Posted on 11/22/17 at 7:24 am to brouski
quote:
It does stop them from selling me 10 Mbps service, then slowing down my connection to Youtube unless I pay for their premium 20 Mbps tier.
Yep, it also stops me from buying a small LA cable company and throttling all LSU sports and demanding more money or even your cell provider from doing the same.
Offer the ISP's a free market, forced pipe sharing with lifted NN and not a single one will take it, the last thing these clowns want is free market competition.
Posted on 11/22/17 at 7:26 am to cave canem
quote:
Offer the ISP's a free market, forced pipe sharing with lifted NN and not a single one will take it, the last thing these clowns want is free market competition.
You realize it was free market before NN, right? You realize your theoretical example did not exist during these times when it was of great need to manage network traffic, right? You realize even more competition exists now than then, right?
Posted on 11/22/17 at 7:46 am to TigerTatorTots
CNET: Netflix Throttled Users in 2016
Will NN prevent Netflix, YouTube, etc. from the practice of secretly throttling users and assigning them to tiers?
quote:
Netflix: We're the ones throttling video speeds on AT&T and Verizon The streaming service says that for five years it's been slowing down video to wireless users to save them from themselves.
quote:
If you watch Netflix on Verizon or AT&T, the streaming video service is keeping you from getting the full picture -- and it claims it's for your own good. A week after the wireless carriers were accused of throttling video speeds on their networks, Netflix has stepped forward to take the blame for the degraded video quality.
Will NN prevent Netflix, YouTube, etc. from the practice of secretly throttling users and assigning them to tiers?
Posted on 11/22/17 at 7:50 am to BobABooey
quote:
Will NN prevent Netflix, YouTube, etc. from the practice of secretly throttling users and assigning them to tiers?
NO!! That is just it. This has no impact on content controllers like Google, Twitter, facebook, amazon, etc.
This is EXACTLY why all those companies are pushing NN hard. They want full control via their massive lobbying power and ISPs can do nothing to protect their own interests or their customers.
Page 3 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News