FCC votes to kill net neutrality rules

[DCPatriot]

You can bet if Net Neutrality was imposed during the Obama Administration, it was anything but.

And that's what I'm going to take from all this.   

[txradioguy]

@InHeavenThereIsNoBeer
What they are doing is turning the internet over to companies that make Microsoft look generous and giving.  The companies providing access will be competing with the companies trying to use the internet for business.  Which means it won't be a level playing field.

The Federal government will be better how than independent companies?

And besides...there IS regulation on the ISP's...every hear of Anti-trust laws?

Also "neutrality" is a big killer of innovation. If the ISP's are forced to provide everyone the same service...where is the incentive to make better and faster service? Answer: There is none.


By your line of thinking we should force Ferrari to produce their sports car...but in the interest of "fairness" and "neutrality" sell it at the same price as a Ford Focus.


The free market is rife with instances where if you want better...you pay more.  This is nothing new. 

[driftdiver]

Does internet II use tcp/ip?

Its faster because the equipment it uses is faster.   Its also private which means it doesn't have the bottlenecks that the regular internet has.

[txradioguy]

Google slows down YouTube videos for people who aren't using Google Chrome, too... and if you're not on a Google-verified ISP.

You're not going to stop the throttling of bandwidth by imposing "neutrality" on the ISP's...they will find ways around it.

[driftdiver]

The Federal government will be better how than independent companies?

And besides...there IS regulation on the ISP's...every hear of Anti-trust laws?

Also "neutrality" is a big killer of innovation. If the ISP's are forced to provide everyone the same service...where is the incentive to make better and faster service? Answer: There is none.

Of course the feds won't but the individual companies aren't concerned about fairness.   They are concerned about profit and only profit.  They could give a crappola about their customers as long as they keep paying.

The propaganda you are repeating is garbage.  Fronteir just offered 150MBps internet, before this ruling.    They were motivated to provide faster internet to keep paying customers.  So what little free market existed will disappear.

No, this ruling means competitors or sites they don't like will be put on the slow lane.  Where the traffic is blocked, turned aside or otherwise made difficult to find.   These companies arent just into internet access.  They are into phone service, shopping, movies, financial advice and anything else effected by the internet.

[driftdiver]

Google slows down YouTube videos for people who aren't using Google Chrome, too... and if you're not on a Google-verified ISP.

You're not going to stop the throttling of bandwidth by imposing "neutrality" on the ISP's...they will find ways around it.

Sure except in this case its the company thats in your house.   You have no way around it.   Go to another company?  They do the same thing.

[txradioguy]

Of course the feds won't but the individual companies aren't concerned about fairness.

Neither is the Federal Government...they are only concerned about control...and you seem to have no problem with that.

The propaganda you are repeating is garbage.  Fronteir just offered 150MBps internet, before this ruling.    They were motivated to provide faster internet to keep paying customers.  So what little free market existed will disappear.

How is it garbage.  Prove it wrong.  If anyone is guilty of propaganda here it's you pushing the Government meme on this.

Guess what...and I know this will shock you...but free market internet has survived just fine for roughly 25-30 years WITHOUT net "neutrality" laws...it's advanced from 2400 baud modems and 10mb hard drives to what we have today...all without these draconian government imposed "neutrality" laws.  Free market expansion won't die because net neutrality was repealed...it will die if the Federal Government forces everyone do accept the same generic across the board vanilla internet service that everyone else has.

You're pushing for something that will disincentive companies from a) offering premium service for a premium price to those that can afford it and b) de-motivate companies who want to provide low cost bare bones services for a low cost to people as well.

What's the point of research and innovation....where's the motivation to further the tech if everyone is going to have to provide the exact same service?

There isn't any.

The profits the ISP's make is put back into R&D to bring us faster internet...better modems and farther reach of the spectrum.

Net "neutrality" is the Obamacare of the Internet. 

No, this ruling means competitors or sites they don't like will be put on the slow lane.  Where the traffic is blocked, turned aside or otherwise made difficult to find.

 

You just perfectly described government controlled internet.

[InHeavenThereIsNoBeer]

The Federal government will be better how than independent companies?

And besides...there IS regulation on the ISP's...every hear of Anti-trust laws?

Also "neutrality" is a big killer of innovation. If the ISP's are forced to provide everyone the same service...where is the incentive to make better and faster service? Answer: There is none.


By your line of thinking we should force Ferrari to produce their sports car...but in the interest of "fairness" and "neutrality" sell it at the same price as a Ford Focus.


The free market is rife with instances where if you want better...you pay more.  This is nothing new.

Where is the incentive to make better and faster service (ignoring those of us who are lucky enough to have competition via multiple broadband providers)?  You answered it in your last paragraph.  Service tiers.

Most people get broadband via the cable company, because that's what's available to them.  When the cable company determines that its video on demand market is suffering from Prime and Netflix and decides to provide its users with a lower quality service to those sites, where it the incentive for companies to provide innovative/improved multimedia services (just so the ISPs can copy their ideas and then stab them in the back)?

[InHeavenThereIsNoBeer]

@InHeavenThereIsNoBeer
What they are doing is turning the internet over to companies that make Microsoft look generous and giving.  The companies providing access will be competing with the companies trying to use the internet for business.  Which means it won't be a level playing field.

@driftdiver

Agreed.  I've worked for a couple of the biggest ISPs.  Even if you don't have evil corporate types looking to do very bad things, the developers and such are going to want to use every tool to improve their users' experiences (as viewed from the devs' perspective of course, where the in-house solution will always appear to be the best).  You just can't give people an unfair advantage and expect them not to end up using it, even if they feel like they're doing the right thing by doing so,

[driftdiver]

[Please upgrade to our premium bandwidth package to view this content.]

[txradioguy]

When the cable company determines that its video on demand market is suffering from Prime and Netflix and decides to provide its users with a lower quality service to those sites, where it the incentive for companies to provide innovative/improved multimedia services (just so the ISPs can copy their ideas and then stab them in the back)?

Where is there any proof this has happened...ISP's stealing technology from multi media services? I've seen small innovative companies bought by internet providers and the founds of said small company becoming very rich in the process.

What will IF the VoD market loses significant ground to say Hulu or Netflix is you'll see them scrap their own in house service and partner with one of the more successful VoD services and offer discounted rates if not outright say "buy our two year package and get Netflix on us" and both companies will make a pile of money together.

It will be similar to what you see T Mobile doing currently with Netflix and Verizon doing with Hulu.

That WON'T happen if the restrictive net "neutrality" rules are forced on everyone.

I lived in Europe for almost 7 years...I've see what top down government controlled internet and cell service has to offer...and it's nothing compared to what we have in an open market in the states.

[txradioguy]

[Please upgrade to our premium bandwidth package to view this content.]

And the people with the income to do that will open their wallet.  What's wrong with that?

I chose the option of 100mb/s internet speed when I got my package with Spectrum. I could have chosen lower speeds or higher speeds. With net neutrality there won't be that option to chose to pay for your bandwidth...it will all be the same for the same price. That's not fair at all.

We open our wallet to "upgrade" to business or first class on an airline.

We upgrade the sound system or chose leather over cloth for the seats in a car.

Hell we pay to get a pass to move to the front of the line at Disney.

Why should the internet be any different?

[driftdiver]

And the people with the income to do that will open their wallet.  What's wrong with that?

I chose the option of 100mb/s internet speed when I got my package with Spectrum. I could have chosen lower speeds or higher speeds. With net neutrality there won't be that option to chose to pay for your bandwidth...it will all be the same for the same price. That's not fair at all.

We open our wallet to "upgrade" to business or first class on an airline.

We upgrade the sound system or chose leather over cloth for the seats in a car.

Hell we pay to get a pass to move to the front of the line at Disney.

Why should the internet be any different?

You still don't get it.  You selected the 100MB plan while UNDER net neutrality.   Under that they ISPs could charge you for bandwidth and additional services but the internet was the same.   Now they can charge you at an application level.   So if you try to buy from their competitor they'll charge you more.   Only you don't really have a choice to go elsewhere because you only really have a couple providers and they are all doing the same thing.

Pay more for netflix, more for amazon, more to shop where you want instead of at the Verizon store, more for buying a Sprint cell phone than for a verizon cell phone.   Oh wait thats political content they don't like, they'll just block that traffic so you cant see it.  Except you won't know they are doing it because you don't know the information is even out there in the first place.

[txradioguy]

You still don't get it.  You selected the 100MB plan while UNDER net neutrality.   Under that they ISPs could charge you for bandwidth and additional services but the internet was the same.   Now they can charge you at an application level.   So if you try to buy from their competitor they'll charge you more.   Only you don't really have a choice to go elsewhere because you only really have a couple providers and they are all doing the same thing.

Pay more for netflix, more for amazon, more to shop where you want instead of at the Verizon store, more for buying a Sprint cell phone than for a verizon cell phone.   Oh wait thats political content they don't like, they'll just block that traffic so you cant see it.  Except you won't know they are doing it because you don't know the information is even out there in the first place.

Again I find myself shocked that someone on a Conservative website is defending and advocating for a clearly liberal.policy and using all their buzzwords and scare tactic to of the left to sell this crap of a plan.

Everything you described about restrictions on content can and will happen with "neutrality".

As I said earlier it's Obamacare for the Internet. And for some odd reason you're all for it.

That's not very Conservative at all.

[Neverdul]

As I heard some explain it, it would be as if your phone company could charge you one rate when you called your wife (because she had brokered a deal with the phone company because of the sheer volume of her calls to her sisters, girlfriends and your MIL and because she was paying them a kick back for each call made) and a much higher rate when you called your elderly widowed mother in her nursing home or even blocking you from doing so, which would be fine if you had other choices in phone companies which is not the case with ISP’s in most areas.

Or another POV:

What Net Neutrality prevents is the UPS, even though the weight is the same, charging me more to ship a bowling ball I bought from Dick's Sporting Goods than they charge me if I bought the very same bowling ball from Target.

[driftdiver]

As I heard some explain it, it would be as if your phone company could charge you one rate when you called your wife (because she had brokered a deal with the phone company because of the sheer volume of her calls to her sisters, girlfriends and your MIL and because she was paying them a kick back for each call made) and a much higher rate when you called your elderly widowed mother in her nursing home or even blocking you from doing so, which would be fine if you had other choices in phone companies which is not the case with ISP’s in most areas.

Or another POV:

What Net Neutrality prevents is the UPS, even though the weight is the same, charging me more to ship a bowling ball I bought from Dick's Sporting Goods than they charge me if I bought the very same bowling ball from Target.

Or preventing you from even being able to connect to targets website.

A similiar analogy would be roads.  Where a company can charge you more for driving a certain road or even redirect all roads to their company stores.

[dfwgator]

Again I find myself shocked that someone on a Conservative website is defending and advocating for a clearly liberal.policy and using all their buzzwords and scare tactic to of the left to sell this crap of a plan.

Everything you described about restrictions on content can and will happen with "neutrality".

As I said earlier it's Obamacare for the Internet. And for some odd reason you're all for it.

That's not very Conservative at all.

Net Neutrality makes the Internet ‘neutral’ like the Affordable Care Act makes health care ‘affordable’.

[Blizzardnh]

This is terrible. I'm going home to drown the kids in the bathtub. I don't want them to grow up in a world without this two year-old rule.

Best post I've read today. you win the internet.

[corbe]

“Leave the Internet ALONE” – Ted Cruz release statement on repeal of Net Neutrality

The Right Scoop    Dec. 14, 2017 4:28 pm by The Right Scoop

Ted Cruz just released this statement from his Facebook page on the repeal of Obama’s net neutrality regulations on the internet:

Since its inception, the internet has been an oasis of freedom. It has not only been a haven for free speech but has served as a great equalizer when it comes to jobs and opportunity by dramatically reducing the barriers of entry for anyone with a new idea and broadband connection.

<..snip..>

http://therightscoop.com/leave-the-internet-alone-ted-cruz-release-statement-on-repeal-of-net-neutrality/

[Frank Cannon]

For the same reasons having the government make roads open to everyone is a benefit to everyone.

We already have the roads and the private sector built them. Now deadbeats are whining that they have to drive on the road in a Yugo and want to drive it in a Cadillac. Eff that. You want faster, better service? Get an effing job and pay for faster better service.

Net Neutrality stooges want the internet turned into a socialist waste land where everyone gets the same access. When that happens we all end up with crappy service instead of everyone getting the best and everyone's prices goes up along the way.

[jmyrlefuller]

Google slows down YouTube videos for people who aren't using Google Chrome, too... and if you're not on a Google-verified ISP.

You're not going to stop the throttling of bandwidth by imposing "neutrality" on the ISP's...they will find ways around it.

So, close those ways around it. That's what the whole point of the FCC is: to allocate scarce bandwidth and ensure the free flow of information as promised in the First Amendment.

Whatever issues you have with the Obama-era net neutrality rules, I don't trust Ajit Pai, who has handed over vast portions of TV bandwidth to mega-corporations like Nexstar and Sinclair while at the same time narrowing the spectrum to make it more scarce, to make sure Internet telecoms (who are also cable and multimedia monoliths like Comcast and Charter) don't start censoring the Internet. Pai is no conservative. Like Justice Roberts, he's a corporatist.

Take a look at any Media Matters campaign and see how quickly the corporations can be prodded to turn against conservatism. Without a robust net neutrality policy, we will likely be silenced.

[Frank Cannon]

So, close those ways around it. That's what the whole point of the FCC is: to allocate scarce bandwidth and ensure the free flow of information as promised in the First Amendment.

Whatever issues you have with the Obama-era net neutrality rules, I don't trust Ajit Pai, who has handed over vast portions of TV bandwidth to mega-corporations like Nexstar and Sinclair while at the same time narrowing the spectrum to make it more scarce, to make sure Internet telecoms (who are also cable and multimedia monoliths like Comcast and Charter) don't start censoring the Internet. Pai is no conservative. Like Justice Roberts, he's a corporatist.

Take a look at any Media Matters campaign and see how quickly the corporations can be prodded to turn against conservatism. Without a robust net neutrality policy, we will likely be silenced.

How does the speed of information A) Stifle the First Amendment and B) keep mega Corps from stifling Conservatism?

The term "neutrality" has nothing to do with free flow of information. It has to do with deadbeats wanting unlimited bandwidth to watch Netflix without paying for it.

[aligncare]

A good example of corporate behavior is amazon marketplace. Its website service developed pre net neutrality but was constantly improving and innovating and millions of people have had a good purchasing experience shopping there.  Companies want loyal customers. There’s an incentive to giving their customers the best value and service over their competitors – repeat business.  Competition works. Net neutrality was a solution to a problem that didn’t exist.

[WingNot]

The internet is like a hose with a golf ball on one end and a women with her lips around the hose on the other end.  You have to pay the girl to suck that ball thu the hose.  The more you pay the harder she sucks and the faster ball moves towards her mouth..

[goodwithagun]

The internet is like a hose with a golf ball on one end and a women with her lips around the hose on the other end.  You have to pay the girl to suck that ball thu the hose.  The more you pay the harder she sucks and the faster ball moves towards her mouth..

That's not what that analogy is about  @Frank Cannon might be able to explain why since I'm "ill equipped" to do so.