The Briefing Room
General Category => National/Breaking News => Topic started by: driftdiver on June 11, 2018, 08:10:36 pm
-
http://www.fox13news.com/consumer/-net-neutrality-ends-your-internet-provider-can-change-how-you-use-the-internet (http://www.fox13news.com/consumer/-net-neutrality-ends-your-internet-provider-can-change-how-you-use-the-internet)
NEW YORK (AP) - Your ability to watch and use your favorite apps and services could start to change -- though not right away -- following the official demise Monday of Obama-era internet protections.
Any changes are likely to happen slowly, as companies assess how much consumers will tolerate.
The repeal of "net neutrality" took effect six months after the Federal Communications Commission voted to undo the rules, which had barred broadband and cellphone companies from favoring their own services and discriminating against rivals such as Netflix.
-
Monkeys COULD fly out of my butt.
-
Will the internet providers start charging more for connectivity to their competitors?
hmmm
-
Monkeys COULD fly out of my butt.
And circle Uranus? :cool:
It's Dead Jim.
(http://bmmetaldoors.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/bones372v321-270x250.jpg)
-
Monkeys COULD fly out of my butt.
But this actually will happen.
-
But this actually will happen.
Then why didn't they do it before the so-called "Net Neutrality" was passed?
-
Then why didn't they do it before the so-called "Net Neutrality" was passed?
Because it fell under "common carrier", which effectively gave net neutrality. However, companies have still tried to violate it and have been fined
-
Then why didn't they do it before the so-called "Net Neutrality" was passed?
Speaking as someone who as worked for and with several of them, well, what makes you think they didn't?
-
Let the damn free market work it out. The Gubbermint needed to GTFO and it did. Lets rock.
-
Let the damn free market work it out. The Gubbermint needed to GTFO and it did. Lets rock.
:amen: :amen: and :amen: again.
-
And yet nothing has changed with my internet...
-
:amen: :amen: and :amen: again.
@Wingnut @Bigun
How is it a free market? A very small number of companies own all the infrastructure. They've been caught colluding and price fixing numerous times. They write the federal regulations and are determined to keep prices inflated.
They'll introduce the changes slowly to avoid public backlash which could jeopardize the policy.
-
@Wingnut @Bigun
How is it a free market? A very small number of companies own all the infrastructure. They've been caught colluding and price fixing numerous times. They write the federal regulations and are determined to keep prices inflated.
They'll introduce the changes slowly to avoid public backlash which could jeopardize the policy.
@driftdiver
As far as I know, there is nothing to prevent anyone who cares to jumping in and competing. THAT my friend is a free market!
-
@Wingnut @Bigun
How is it a free market? A very small number of companies own all the infrastructure. They've been caught colluding and price fixing numerous times. They write the federal regulations and are determined to keep prices inflated.
And yet in 2010 when the NN advocates first tried to implement their statist internet agenda they could only find four times where this so called collusion actually happened.
They'll introduce the changes slowly to avoid public backlash which could jeopardize the policy.
And that's where the free market will take over. Smaller ISP's will pop up offering unlimited unthrottled internet at a price that beats the cabal if ISP's that you speak of.
And while I'm thinking about it...if what you say is true...why haven't the cell phone companies engaged in the same kind of shenanigans everyone is fearful the ISP's will do?
-
@driftdiver
As far as I know, there is nothing to prevent anyone who cares to jumping in and competing. THAT my friend is a free market!
@Bigun
Right.... nothing other then a few tens of billion dollars in infrastructure. Meanwhile the telecoms control federal regulations which can easily push out any startups.
-
For those who think NN is all that and a bag of chips consider this:
Additionally, the FCC also has the power to "partially regulate the capital investment of existing companies" and determine "which companies (if any) can enter the ISP market," per Tuttle. In total, the Internet being under Title II's jurisdiction puts "nearly $1 trillion of GDP and 2.5 million jobs under a new regulatory regime," according to the American Action Forum. And what the FCC constitute's as "abuse" can be changed at any moment.
What this means is that Title II entrenches the FCC's tentacles into the ISP market and controls it with an iron fist.
<snip>
The FCC can also subject ISPs to a slew of taxes under Title II. Per Tuttle, the FCC has the power to levy taxes against companies subject to Title II. Tuttle points out that "telecommunications companies are generally subject to higher state and municipal taxes than other businesses."
Between the onerous taxes and regulations, the FCC could make it more difficult for smaller ISPs to thrive in the market while increasing costs for consumers.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/18613/7-reasons-net-neutrality-idiotic-aaron-bandler (https://www.dailywire.com/news/18613/7-reasons-net-neutrality-idiotic-aaron-bandler)
-
@Bigun
Right.... nothing other then a few tens of billion dollars in infrastructure. Meanwhile the telecoms control federal regulations which can easily push out any startups.
Meanwhile under NN the FCC can do the exact same thing.
-
And yet in 2010 when the NN advocates first tried to implement their statist internet agenda they could only find four times where this so called collusion actually happened.
And that's where the free market will take over. Smaller ISP's will pop up offering unlimited unthrottled internet at a price that beats the cabal if ISP's that you speak of.
And while I'm thinking about it...if what you say is true...why haven't the cell phone companies engaged in the same kind of shenanigans everyone is fearful the ISP's will do?
@txradioguy
Until the small ISPs find a solution for the last mile (from the POP to the home) with fiber speeds there can be no alternatives.
If the market is so free now why do all the companies have the same plans and the same rates? Why do they all change billing models at the same time?
I've worked in Telecom and still have customers in telecom.
-
Throttling is necessary when people use up too much bandwidth. I remember the days of students running porn servers in their apartments to make money. When I was on vacation in May, our download speed was .6 mps. Mine at home is like 260 mps. Clearly something is messed up. I don't want .6 and I don't need 260.
If you support Net Neutrality, you basically support Trump being in charge of the internet. That's what I tell liberals when they come unglued.
-
@txradioguy
Until the small ISPs find a solution for the last mile (from the POP to the home) with fiber speeds there can be no alternatives.
If the market is so free now why do all the companies have the same plans and the same rates? Why do they all change billing models at the same time?
I've worked in Telecom and still have customers in telecom.
Actually where I live they don't. If everyone had the "same plans and same rates" as you claim...there would only be one company everywhere in the country. A National Broadband company...similar to how Deutsche Telcom rules the roost in Germany.
What I was paying and getting from Spectrum when I lived on post is completely different from what I'm getting from Windstream now that I have my own home.
I had choices between fiber cable and dsl when I made my switch...with speed choices between 25mbps and 100 mbps with pricing to match.
And as for the last mile issue...there's always satellite internet. I had that in Germany as well when again T Mobile (a.k.a. Deutsche Telcom) didn't provide service into the villiage where I lived.
There are ways...and the free market will always find a way...it's not up to the Government to pick the winners and losers in this or anything related to the free market.
-
Throttling is necessary when people use up too much bandwidth. I remember the days of students running porn servers in their apartments to make money. When I was on vacation in May, our download speed was .6 mps. Mine at home is like 260 mps. Clearly something is messed up. I don't want .6 and I don't need 260.
If you support Net Neutrality, you basically support Trump being in charge of the internet. That's what I tell liberals when they come unglued.
@Restored
And thats how they've muddled this issue. The definitions are all twisted and confusion reigns. The prior policy said the ISPs had to treat all customers the same, and treat all data the same. To me that is what the govt should do and then stop. Kinda like the electric company.
Now the govt is allowing ISPs to treat customers and data differently. Which means they can suppress anything they want, like google does with conservative ideas. It also means they can suppress competitors traffic.
As for the bandwidth, thats easy. They sell you a certain bandwidth and limit you to that bandwidth. The problem you describe is only a problem with companies that use technology which shares the bandwidth between customers.
-
If you support Net Neutrality, you basically support Trump being in charge of the internet. That's what I tell liberals when they come unglued.
@Restored and people can say "oh Trump will never do anything to shut down the internet"...and while that may be true...he's not always going to be President and there will be a radical Obama style Liberal in office again at some point who WILL feel they are in charge of the internet.
-
Now the govt is allowing ISPs to treat customers and data differently. Which means they can suppress anything they want, like google does with conservative ideas. It also means they can suppress competitors traffic.
They were already restricting conservatives so Net Neutrality has no bearing on that. They were shutting down sites for "Hate" and restricting access to sites via ISP-driven "parental controls". It's why you can get to FR on some routers. It's also why most of Usenet disappeared from some ISP's.
-
The "Net Neutrality Act" made the Net Neutral, like the "Affordable Health Care Act" made health care affordable.
-
Today is the first time I have received a connection refusal like this:
451: Unavailable for legal reasons
We recognise you are attempting to access this website from a country belonging to the European Economic Area (EEA) including the EU which enforces the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and therefore cannot grant you access at this time.
This is where I was trying to connect to:http://www.wacotrib.com/news/courts_and_trials/ (http://www.wacotrib.com/news/courts_and_trials/)
-
Weird. I read the WacoTrib earlier this morning and just got the WacoTrib.
-
Weird. I read the WacoTrib earlier this morning and just got the WacoTrib.
You were probably connecting from within the US.
-
You were probably connecting from within the US.
Yes, I was. I assumed that you were too.
-
Yes, I was. I assumed that you were too.
It is the World Wide Web, isn't it?
-
It is the World Wide Web, isn't it?
So I've heard. But, with this net neutrality going away, who knows?
-
So I've heard. But, with this net neutrality going away, who knows?
Its a double whammy with Net Neutrality and GDPR hitting simultaneously.
General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)
GDPR is a regulation that requires businesses to protect the personal data and privacy of EU citizens for transactions that occur within EU member states. And non-compliance could cost companies dearly.
-
dfw wrote:
"The "Net Neutrality Act" made the Net Neutral, like the "Affordable Health Care Act" made health care affordable..."
And that's the post of the day, folks !!
-
Its a double whammy with Net Neutrality and GDPR hitting simultaneously.
General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)
GDPR is a regulation that requires businesses to protect the personal data and privacy of EU citizens for transactions that occur within EU member states. And non-compliance could cost companies dearly.
GDPR effects companies all over. If you collect data from the EU then it impacts you.
-
Let the damn free market work it out. The Gubbermint needed to GTFO and it did. Lets rock.
The free market only sorts things out when there is effective competition. Internet connectivity in any given place is provided by at best an oligopoly, and in some places a monopoly. With things like the AT&T - Time/Warner merger creating vertical trusts combining internet connection and content provision, ISPs will start providing incentives to buy/use the content they own (or have agreements with) and dissuade users from accessing content that doesn't add extra to their bottom line. This can also affect access to news by making favored news sources easier to access. If you think that would be good for the right, think again.
Net neutrality was a regulation that like anti-trust laws represented a pro-market intervention, rather than a pro-business (pick winners and losers) intervention, or a the sort of drag on the market that pointless regulations make (favoring large incumbents with big legal departments). I commend to your attention Luigi Zingales' "A Capitalism for the People" which explains the difference between pro-market and pro-business regulation, along with the concept of regulatory capture (which is what just happened in the repeal of net neutrality -- the industry regulated gaining effective control of the regulations so that they favor large incumbents in the market).
-
....
General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)
GDPR is a regulation that requires businesses to protect the personal data and privacy of EU citizens for transactions that occur within EU member states. And non-compliance could cost companies dearly.
Haven't read any EU "GDPR" regs yet...."it's a wacky EU thing"...not really worth hours of reading...but what is the definition of "transactions that occur within EU member states"? "BH Media Group" (Waco, "TX Tribune") lawyers must think this includes EU citizens accessing US websites as they now state "This website is intended for U.S. residents only" on the bottom of their website, and their "TOS" (Terms of Service) nows states:
"Prohibited Uses
This Site is not intended for use by persons located within the European Economic Area (EEA). We do not request or accept personal information concerning or supplied by persons who are located within the EEA at the time they access this Site. If you have accessed this Site from within the EEA, you should immediately discontinue your use. If you have supplied personal information to us in violation of this provision, whether through the registration of new user accounts or otherwise, please contact us via e-mail."
Wouldn't the local EU ISP be responsible for "blocking" (your "451 Error"?) any "non-GDPR" compliant sites? Sounds like a mess....especially for EU ISP's.