Net Neutrality (FCC voted to repeal, Congress still needs to vote)

[QKSILVR73 257]

Verizon is already capping stream speeds on Netflix and youtube. Freaking assholes, it still has to go to Congress.

 

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/isps-free-discriminate-internet-services,36122.html

[Regal 78]

Congressional Review Act is our only hope.

[M2A not 1 4]

48 minutes ago, Zahzi said:

The principle that Internet service providers should enable access to all content and applications regardless of the source, and without favouring or blocking particular products or websites.

Basically, the use of the internet, and information transferred, should not affect the speed, price, or quality of the network to an individual. For example, a university student downloading course materials should get the same speeds as a family downloading a movie.

zuccini's taste gud

Even though I do not think killing net neutrality will get as bad as people say (I doubt ANY ISP's will make packages to use specific services like YT, Social media, etc) but still, the fact that ISP's now can discriminate against certain services such as lowering speed for Youtube clearly does not benefit anyone beside ISP Corps.

[MAV 1617]

2 hours ago, M2A not 1 said:

zuccini's taste gud

Even though I do not think killing net neutrality will get as bad as people say (I doubt ANY ISP's will make packages to use specific services like YT, Social media, etc) but still, the fact that ISP's now can discriminate against certain services such as lowering speed for Youtube clearly does not benefit anyone beside ISP Corps.

You will probably see things like we see with cellular plans...ie after x amount of data per month steaming will be throttled...something like that...unless you pay for the Platinum package to not get throttled...

It'll not necessarily make them a boat load more money in the traditional sense but instead it'll save them money by not having to upgrade infrastructure.

[M2A not 1 4]

15 hours ago, MAVE2ICK said:

You will probably see things like we see with cellular plans...ie after x amount of data per month steaming will be throttled...something like that...unless you pay for the Platinum package to not get throttled...

It'll not necessarily make them a boat load more money in the traditional sense but instead it'll save them money by not having to upgrade infrastructure.

Could they throttle speeds without neutrality though? Wouldn't make sense if they couldn't considering cellular services do it everyday.

[Savage 111]

Someone needs to assasinate the man that's doing this

[PoptartRex 3292]

11 minutes ago, Savage said:

Someone needs to assasinate the man that's doing this

 

[Guest]

20 hours ago, Fyshie said:

No, ISPs will not enter an agreement. If you have only one option for an ISP, there will likely be more set up. If there's not... tough luck.

You rebuttal yourself with the exact reason that disbanding Net Neutrality is a very bad idea.

 

Do you know what happened before Net Neutrality was a thing?

 

I'll give you an example. Prior to Net Neutrality being a thing, T-Mobile had a music app called ISIS or ISYS (Changed name after the militant group emerged) and they throttled or denied access to other music apps, but because they were partnered with the ISIS app, ISIS got the fastlane of access and was not throttled. If I liked Pandora, fuck me. (And because of the lack of regulation, fuck Pandora too)

 

If I like Google, but my ISP is partnered with Bing and decides to redirect me to Bing if I go to Google, then that's fucked.

 

So as you say, why not just switch ISPs? 

To that I'd say, there's a shitload of people on Comcast that want to get rid of Comcast, but they have no other options so they are forced to use the service they aren't happy with, which means Comcast has no competition and therefore no incentive to offer better services. Why would they? Their consumers are stuck and have no choice but to use Comcast.

 

Right now I can use whatever website and whatever search engine and whatever music app I decide to use based on the services they provide. I do NOT have the luxury to choose different ISP's because there are no other ISP's to choose from. So if Net Neutrality dies, and my ISP decides to block/throttle my favorite sites, I'm fucked as the consumer and the other businesses that I frequent are fucked as the business. 

 

Repealing Net Neutrality goes completely against the republican platform of free market capitalism and small business.

If there comes a day when most ISP's have to compete with each other then sure, there would be no need for net neutrality. But that simply isn't the reality in the US, a vast majority of our country only has 1 or 2 options.

[Armalisk 28]

3 minutes ago, McDili said:

You rebuttal yourself with the exact reason that disbanding Net Neutrality is a very bad idea.

 

Do you know what happened before Net Neutrality was a thing?

 

I'll give you an example. Prior to Net Neutrality being a thing, T-Mobile had a music app called ISIS or ISYS (Changed name after the militant group emerged) and they throttled or denied access to other music apps, but because they were partnered with the ISIS app, ISIS got the fastlane of access and was not throttled. If I liked Pandora, fuck me. (And because of the lack of regulation, fuck Pandora too)

 

If I like Google, but my ISP is partnered with Bing and decides to redirect me to Bing if I go to Google, then that's fucked.

 

So as you say, why not just switch ISPs? 

To that I'd say, there's a shitload of people on Comcast that want to get rid of Comcast, but they have no other options so they are forced to use the service they aren't happy with, which means Comcast has no competition and therefore no incentive to offer better services. Why would they? Their consumers are stuck and have no choice but to use Comcast.

 

Right now I can use whatever website and whatever search engine and whatever music app I decide to use based on the services they provide. I do NOT have the luxury to choose different ISP's because there are no other ISP's to choose from. So if Net Neutrality dies, and my ISP decides to block/throttle my favorite sites, I'm fucked as the consumer and the other businesses that I frequent are fucked as the business. 

 

Repealing Net Neutrality goes completely against the republican platform of free market capitalism and small business.

If there comes a day when most ISP's have to compete with each other then sure, there would be no need for net neutrality. But that simply isn't the reality in the US, a vast majority of our country only has 1 or 2 options.

T-Mobile sponsors terrorism confirmed.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Fyshie said:

Free market = minimal regulation. Net neutrality = big boy regulations

That’s not an argument that’s just a statement.

 

repealing net neutrality literally means that the market for services has its options reduced in number. As a consumer, why would I support this? 

[Savage 111]

37 minutes ago, McDili said:

That’s not an argument that’s just a statement.

 

repealing net neutrality literally means that the market for services has its options reduced in number. As a consumer, why would I support this? 

Or it's just another reason y someone needs to assassinate this man

[Bubbaloo - Reusable P Cup 2934]

Your boy Trump brought the retard that leads the FCC... so there’s that.