F.C.C. Announces Plan to Repeal Net Neutrality

[Thinker101]

F.C.C. Plans Net Neutrality Repeal in Victory for Telecoms

Get ready for buying your internet the same way you buy an airline ticket. Economy, Business Class, and First Class. The corporations will all get First Class.

Is this what you voted for, Trumpers?

And how is that different from the way it is now?

Wow. You really don't know?

No wonder you were so easily hoaxed!

Well, thanks for clearing that up...dumbass.

 

[g5000]

F.C.C. Plans Net Neutrality Repeal in Victory for Telecoms

Get ready for buying your internet the same way you buy an airline ticket. Economy, Business Class, and First Class. The corporations will all get First Class.

Is this what you voted for, Trumpers?

And how is that different from the way it is now?

Wow. You really don't know?

No wonder you were so easily hoaxed!

Well, thanks for clearing that up...dumbass.

Post 33 has a video which dumbs it down for you.

 

[Care4all]

“F.C.C. Plans Net Neutrality Repeal in Victory for Telecoms”

…and a defeat for small business and consumers.

‘While large tech companies like Netflix (NFLX, Tech30), Facebook (FB, Tech30) and Google (GOOGL, Tech30) benefit from not having to pay additional fees to ensure the speedy delivery of their content, they're less at risk from any net neutrality rollback. (Netflix confirmed as much in most recent earnings report, saying it's "popular enough... to keep our relationships with ISPs stable.")

"It's the small businesses that are creating new services online and creating jobs that will be at risk because they may not have the financing or the power that a big conglomerate like Google or Netflix has to protect themselves," says Chris Lewis, VP of government affairs at Public Knowledge, a tech advocacy group.’

The FCC's net neutrality fight is coming. Here's why it matters

Yet another disastrous consequence of Trump.

PRECISELY!!!! The financing not flowing for startups because of the uncertainty of whether the ISP will allow them to run freely at optimum speed without ISP interference.....

THIS is the BIGGEST MISTAKE for the ''little'' people the gvt could make!!!!!!

WHAT A TERRIBLE TERRIBLE DECISION..... all to pay their ISP campaign donors back...but on our backs....

trump aint no ''job creator'' he is a JOB KILLER

 

[Thinker101]

F.C.C. Plans Net Neutrality Repeal in Victory for Telecoms

Get ready for buying your internet the same way you buy an airline ticket. Economy, Business Class, and First Class. The corporations will all get First Class.

Is this what you voted for, Trumpers?

And how is that different from the way it is now?

Wow. You really don't know?

No wonder you were so easily hoaxed!

Well, thanks for clearing that up...dumbass.

Post 33 has a video which dumbs it down for you.

Great video, unfortunately I can't read lips.

 

[Care4all]

It seems like a good thing at face value
But the govt regulating anything they shouldnt be, shouldnt happen.
We all know you give those fuckers an inch and they take a mile.

It only seems that way to you because you know nothing.

Your immaturity is also coming through with your "government bad, corporations good". Who told you that government was bad and that they shouldn't regulate anything? The same people who told you that cutting taxes for the rich will trickle down prosperity on everyone. Why do you continue to believe them after it's been so clear how much they've lied to you?

Nobody. And i didnt say that.
I clearly stated they shouldnt regulate what they arent supposed to.
Our Government IS bad. Most corrupt and biggest war mongers.
If you want the govt to regulate everything from the toilet paper you have to pay someone to wipe your ass with to redistribution of wealth, pass an amendment.

have you liked the way the internet has worked the past 20 years?

THAT'S what you are GIVING UP

 

[g5000]

Get ready for buying your internet the same way you buy an airline ticket. Economy, Business Class, and First Class. The corporations will all get First Class.

Is this what you voted for, Trumpers?

And how is that different from the way it is now?

Wow. You really don't know?

No wonder you were so easily hoaxed!

Well, thanks for clearing that up...dumbass.

Post 33 has a video which dumbs it down for you.

Great video, unfortunately I can't read lips.

Have you even read this topic?

 

[busybee01]

No they don't.
Netflix is not an ISP.
Your ISP can charge you more to access Netflix since Netflix uses so much bandwidth. That could hurt Netflix sales.

No ISP is going to slow down Netflix. That's a death sentence for the ISP. Doing so is going to cost the ISP customers. Fuck with people's internet, and they may take it like consumers. Fuck with people's Netflix, and they will revolt like peasants.

Where are they going to go? At best we have a oligopoly with internet providers. In many areas of the country you have only 1 provider.

 

[busybee01]

It seems like a good thing at face value
But the govt regulating anything they shouldnt be, shouldnt happen.
We all know you give those fuckers an inch and they take a mile.

The trouble is that when you have a monopoly or oligopoly there is no competition. They will take the mile. Essentially you will be nickel and dimed to death. That is why you need regulation. This decision will stifle innovation because start ups will be hard pressed to deal with the higher costs.

 

[MisterBeale]

Get ready for buying your internet the same way you buy an airline ticket. Economy, Business Class, and First Class. The corporations will all get First Class.

Is this what you voted for, Trumpers?

And how is that different from the way it is now?

Wow. You really don't know?

No wonder you were so easily hoaxed!

Well, thanks for clearing that up...dumbass.

Post 33 has a video which dumbs it down for you.

Great video, unfortunately I can't read lips.

Here's a YouTube version, Click the "CC" Button, that will be "close caption" for you.

 

[MisterBeale]

1200 Internet Providers by Zip Code | HighSpeedInternet.com

 

[iceberg]

I can't wait for the day Fox News loses their shit because an ISP blocked them.

and i can't wait for the fallout of people that leave for the next provider for services.

the problem is still the gov created a monopoly of sorts by only allowing 1 or 2 providers per an area. open that up and suddenly if provider A blocks content A, user A goes to provider B and problem solved.

i'd rather competition was opened up than the gov clamped down. once the gov starts regulating things it does not give it back. removing net neutrality is a rare example of gov giving back control.

open up the market. let the users decide.

now - when has a provider ever blocked anything of such a large nature? i've never heard any actual stories of it happening before obama saved us from a created problem with more rules.

 

[Balancer]

I think I'll just purchase a VPN.

The problem is that if they are not stopped, then the VPN will also be banned. They are already effectively fighting in China. There are talks about the blocking of VPN in Russia. So the rest of the world is also potentially in this queue ...

I would look at the place of Westerners with concern about attempts at state regulation of the Internet in Russia as well as in Russia with concern about the state of affairs in China. These are all links of the same chain. Any state always wants to limit as much as possible the freedoms of its citizens. And if in the second half of the last century the West was a beacon of freedom for the rest of the world, since the late 1990s in the West there has been an obvious trend towards ever more restrictive restrictions on freedom of opinion and freedom of speech.

 

[MisterBeale]

I can't wait for the day Fox News loses their shit because an ISP blocked them.

and i can't wait for the fallout of people that leave for the next provider for services.

the problem is still the gov created a monopoly of sorts by only allowing 1 or 2 providers per an area. open that up and suddenly if provider A blocks content A, user A goes to provider B and problem solved.

i'd rather competition was opened up than the gov clamped down. once the gov starts regulating things it does not give it back. removing net neutrality is a rare example of gov giving back control.

open up the market. let the users decide.

now - when has a provider ever blocked anything of such a large nature? i've never heard any actual stories of it happening before obama saved us from a created problem with more rules.

I've heard that argument made as well.

I could get on board with that if we got rid of the FCC to quit protecting the big ISP's.

 

[busybee01]

It seems like a good thing at face value
But the govt regulating anything they shouldnt be, shouldnt happen.
We all know you give those fuckers an inch and they take a mile.

It only seems that way to you because you know nothing.

Your immaturity is also coming through with your "government bad, corporations good". Who told you that government was bad and that they shouldn't regulate anything? The same people who told you that cutting taxes for the rich will trickle down prosperity on everyone. Why do you continue to believe them after it's been so clear how much they've lied to you?

Nobody. And i didnt say that.
I clearly stated they shouldnt regulate what they arent supposed to.
Our Government IS bad. Most corrupt and biggest war mongers.
If you want the govt to regulate everything from the toilet paper you have to pay someone to wipe your ass with to redistribution of wealth, pass an amendment.

have you liked the way the internet has worked the past 20 years?

THAT'S what you are GIVING UP

The trouble is that this is not 20 years ago. First there are fewer options when want to shop for a ISP. Secondly some ISPs are or want to become content owners. Comcast owns Universal and AT&T wants to own Warner. That creates a conflict of interest. AT&T could slow or block access to Universal connected sites since they are competitors.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

F.C.C. Plans Net Neutrality Repeal in Victory for Telecoms

Get ready for buying your internet the same way you buy an airline ticket. Economy, Business Class, and First Class. The corporations will all get First Class.

Is this what you voted for, Trumpers?

That is such BULLSHIT. For at least a decade BEFORE net neutrality, we never had this problem. Now, 2 years in, and all of a sudden, THE SKY IS FALLING.

Net Neutrality is a Bolshevik Plot to take over the internet and limit opposing voices.

Like always, commies try to hide their motives while attempting to silence opposing views.

 

[The Derp]

F.C.C. Plans Net Neutrality Repeal in Victory for Telecoms

Get ready for buying your internet the same way you buy an airline ticket. Economy, Business Class, and First Class. The corporations will all get First Class.

Is this what you voted for, Trumpers?

That is such BULLSHIT. For at least a decade BEFORE net neutrality, we never had this problem. Now, 2 years in, and all of a sudden, THE SKY IS FALLING.

Net Neutrality is a Bolshevik Plot to take over the internet and limit opposing voices.

Like always, commies try to hide their motives while attempting to silence opposing views.

What are the right-wingers gonna do when their propaganda stream is stopped by their ISP's? Do you think Comcast (owns NBC) is going to let its competitors (Fox News, Drudge, Brietbart, The Blaze) have the same level of access as its own brands? What about AT&T (finalizing deal to buy Time Warner which includes CNN)? The right-wing propaganda machine is going to be the first victim of the repeal of Net Neutrality.

 

[MisterBeale]

F.C.C. Plans Net Neutrality Repeal in Victory for Telecoms

Get ready for buying your internet the same way you buy an airline ticket. Economy, Business Class, and First Class. The corporations will all get First Class.

Is this what you voted for, Trumpers?

That is such BULLSHIT. For at least a decade BEFORE net neutrality, we never had this problem. Now, 2 years in, and all of a sudden, THE SKY IS FALLING.

Net Neutrality is a Bolshevik Plot to take over the internet and limit opposing voices.

Like always, commies try to hide their motives while attempting to silence opposing views.

What are the right-wingers gonna do when their propaganda stream is stopped by their ISP's? Do you think Comcast (owns NBC) is going to let its competitors (Fox News, Drudge, Brietbart, The Blaze) have the same level of access as its own brands? What about AT&T (finalizing deal to buy Time Warner which includes CNN)? The right-wing propaganda machine is going to be the first victim of the repeal of Net Neutrality.

The problem here is you are all right, and you are letting your partisan politics get in the way.

Nobody read that last image I posted, did they?

Read the image, then read the article. Let's solve this together, keep our speech and economy separate and free from our politics, then get on with our life and all this problem solving. The process is more important than the politics.

No name calling for now, and no ad hominem or other fallacies in our discussions.



Effective ideas are out there, they've been proposed, most folks want the same thing, but all the politicians, on the left and right are in the pockets of the corporations, all of them. We all want the same things. "Yet very few in Washington seem to want to entertain the idea for consumer service."

America has an internet problem — but a radical change could solve it
America has an internet problem — but a radical change could solve it

"This is why, when you pitch net neutrality purely as a concept, both liberals and conservatives tend to say they support it.


The dangers advocates warn of aren't totally hypothetical: Comcast did try to slow down Netflix, and AT&T does use its status as an ISP to give its services an advantage. It’s important to prevent the current powers from abusing their positions, just as it is in any industry.. . ."

". . . One way to do this is a process known as “local loop unbundling.” This involves regulating ISPs to lease or open up the “last mile” of their infrastructure to other ISPs, who’d then sell internet service plans over the wires that are already in place. The immense barriers to entry for any would-be ISP would disappear.


This would be a radical change, one that’d effectively tell Comcast and Charter and Verizon that the infrastructure they helped pay for no longer belongs to them alone. But it could result in a floodgate of competition, potentially bringing far more choice between price and speeds in all parts of the country.

According to the FCC's latest Internet Access Services report (which is accurate as of 2015), just 24% of developed areas in America had at least two ISPs that offered official broadband speeds.FCC



Theoretically, it’d also make any need for net-neutrality (or internet-privacy) laws irrelevant — if your ISP wants to throttle YouTube and sell your browsing history without telling you first, you can just take your business to one that doesn’t.


The market would likely erase such behavior out of existence, or at least force ISPs to deploy it in a way that isn’t terrible.


The process would make the net-neutrality debate look like peanuts, and it’d probably mean a new tax when it comes time to upgrading the networks. But if you really think the internet is a public utility, it’s a more wholesale solution.

An example of the kind of internet service offered in the UK. This isn't universal, but this kind of deal just doesn't exist in the US.Virgin Media
Crucially, unbundling the local loop is also a proven solution — various European countries, including the UK, and some Asian nations already take a similar approach today. A number of them get faster and/or cheaper broadband as a result. (The US is a much larger land, of course, but the difference is still stark.)


If it wasn’t already obvious, this is all a pipe dream under the current regime. Pai’s plans are just about the exact opposite. But this change in thinking wasn’t close to occurring under the Obama administration, either. America gets cold feet whenever it thinks of even mildly socializing a part of life it considers a universal good.


Plus, since they’d have billions of dollars in cozy duopoly rents on the line, the big ISPs would fight any change with all they’ve got.


We know that because the US has technically introduced this sort of leasing and unbundling technique before, and it was either never truly enforced, or it led to private companies not being incentivized to invest in upgrading the underlying infrastructure. (This is part of why DSL is so mediocre in the US, but not in other countries.)


That “last mile” infrastructure would probably have to be nationalized to an extent, but again, this is what you do with a public utility. Yet very few in Washington seem to want to entertain the idea for consumer service. . . "

 

[The Derp]

F.C.C. Plans Net Neutrality Repeal in Victory for Telecoms

Get ready for buying your internet the same way you buy an airline ticket. Economy, Business Class, and First Class. The corporations will all get First Class.

Is this what you voted for, Trumpers?

That is such BULLSHIT. For at least a decade BEFORE net neutrality, we never had this problem. Now, 2 years in, and all of a sudden, THE SKY IS FALLING.

Net Neutrality is a Bolshevik Plot to take over the internet and limit opposing voices.

Like always, commies try to hide their motives while attempting to silence opposing views.

What are the right-wingers gonna do when their propaganda stream is stopped by their ISP's? Do you think Comcast (owns NBC) is going to let its competitors (Fox News, Drudge, Brietbart, The Blaze) have the same level of access as its own brands? What about AT&T (finalizing deal to buy Time Warner which includes CNN)? The right-wing propaganda machine is going to be the first victim of the repeal of Net Neutrality.

The problem here is you are all right, and you are letting your partisan politics get in the way.

Nobody read that last image I posted, did they?

Read the image, then read the article. Let's solve this together, keep our speech and economy separate and free from our politics, then get on with our life and all this problem solving. The process is more important than the politics.

No name calling for now, and no ad hominem or other fallacies in our discussions.



Effective ideas are out there, they've been proposed, most folks want the same thing, but all the politicians, on the left and right are in the pockets of the corporations, all of them. We all want the same things. "Yet very few in Washington seem to want to entertain the idea for consumer service."

America has an internet problem — but a radical change could solve it
America has an internet problem — but a radical change could solve it

"This is why, when you pitch net neutrality purely as a concept, both liberals and conservatives tend to say they support it.


The dangers advocates warn of aren't totally hypothetical: Comcast did try to slow down Netflix, and AT&T does use its status as an ISP to give its services an advantage. It’s important to prevent the current powers from abusing their positions, just as it is in any industry.. . ."

". . . One way to do this is a process known as “local loop unbundling.” This involves regulating ISPs to lease or open up the “last mile” of their infrastructure to other ISPs, who’d then sell internet service plans over the wires that are already in place. The immense barriers to entry for any would-be ISP would disappear.


This would be a radical change, one that’d effectively tell Comcast and Charter and Verizon that the infrastructure they helped pay for no longer belongs to them alone. But it could result in a floodgate of competition, potentially bringing far more choice between price and speeds in all parts of the country.

According to the FCC's latest Internet Access Services report (which is accurate as of 2015), just 24% of developed areas in America had at least two ISPs that offered official broadband speeds.FCC



Theoretically, it’d also make any need for net-neutrality (or internet-privacy) laws irrelevant — if your ISP wants to throttle YouTube and sell your browsing history without telling you first, you can just take your business to one that doesn’t.


The market would likely erase such behavior out of existence, or at least force ISPs to deploy it in a way that isn’t terrible.


The process would make the net-neutrality debate look like peanuts, and it’d probably mean a new tax when it comes time to upgrading the networks. But if you really think the internet is a public utility, it’s a more wholesale solution.

An example of the kind of internet service offered in the UK. This isn't universal, but this kind of deal just doesn't exist in the US.Virgin Media
Crucially, unbundling the local loop is also a proven solution — various European countries, including the UK, and some Asian nations already take a similar approach today. A number of them get faster and/or cheaper broadband as a result. (The US is a much larger land, of course, but the difference is still stark.)


If it wasn’t already obvious, this is all a pipe dream under the current regime. Pai’s plans are just about the exact opposite. But this change in thinking wasn’t close to occurring under the Obama administration, either. America gets cold feet whenever it thinks of even mildly socializing a part of life it considers a universal good.


Plus, since they’d have billions of dollars in cozy duopoly rents on the line, the big ISPs would fight any change with all they’ve got.


We know that because the US has technically introduced this sort of leasing and unbundling technique before, and it was either never truly enforced, or it led to private companies not being incentivized to invest in upgrading the underlying infrastructure. (This is part of why DSL is so mediocre in the US, but not in other countries.)


That “last mile” infrastructure would probably have to be nationalized to an extent, but again, this is what you do with a public utility. Yet very few in Washington seem to want to entertain the idea for consumer service. . . "

Poland doesn't have four ISP's that dominate 76% of the market and have regional monopolies. You're under the mistaken impression that growing market consolidation will lead to more ISP's, when we already know from the experience of telecoms and big banks that the opposite is the case. When has market consolidation ever resulted in more choices? Never. So just like how small banks were bought up and merged with larger ones, expect ISP's to follow suit. Rather than allow competition, Comcast will simply just buy up all its regional competitors, or use its lobbying might to prevent communities from expanding ISP offerings.

ISP's don't merely own the bandwidth, they also own the infrastructure to support that bandwidth. A small, regional ISP can't exist in that space because it doesn't own the infrastructure. Even if it did in a very limited capacity, its infrastructure is still competing with that of the big ISP's, who can spend more to improve service or M&A to eliminate any competition.

 

[MisterBeale]

F.C.C. Plans Net Neutrality Repeal in Victory for Telecoms

Get ready for buying your internet the same way you buy an airline ticket. Economy, Business Class, and First Class. The corporations will all get First Class.

Is this what you voted for, Trumpers?

That is such BULLSHIT. For at least a decade BEFORE net neutrality, we never had this problem. Now, 2 years in, and all of a sudden, THE SKY IS FALLING.

Net Neutrality is a Bolshevik Plot to take over the internet and limit opposing voices.

Like always, commies try to hide their motives while attempting to silence opposing views.

What are the right-wingers gonna do when their propaganda stream is stopped by their ISP's? Do you think Comcast (owns NBC) is going to let its competitors (Fox News, Drudge, Brietbart, The Blaze) have the same level of access as its own brands? What about AT&T (finalizing deal to buy Time Warner which includes CNN)? The right-wing propaganda machine is going to be the first victim of the repeal of Net Neutrality.

The problem here is you are all right, and you are letting your partisan politics get in the way.

Nobody read that last image I posted, did they?

Read the image, then read the article. Let's solve this together, keep our speech and economy separate and free from our politics, then get on with our life and all this problem solving. The process is more important than the politics.

No name calling for now, and no ad hominem or other fallacies in our discussions.



Effective ideas are out there, they've been proposed, most folks want the same thing, but all the politicians, on the left and right are in the pockets of the corporations, all of them. We all want the same things. "Yet very few in Washington seem to want to entertain the idea for consumer service."

America has an internet problem — but a radical change could solve it
America has an internet problem — but a radical change could solve it

"This is why, when you pitch net neutrality purely as a concept, both liberals and conservatives tend to say they support it.


The dangers advocates warn of aren't totally hypothetical: Comcast did try to slow down Netflix, and AT&T does use its status as an ISP to give its services an advantage. It’s important to prevent the current powers from abusing their positions, just as it is in any industry.. . ."

". . . One way to do this is a process known as “local loop unbundling.” This involves regulating ISPs to lease or open up the “last mile” of their infrastructure to other ISPs, who’d then sell internet service plans over the wires that are already in place. The immense barriers to entry for any would-be ISP would disappear.


This would be a radical change, one that’d effectively tell Comcast and Charter and Verizon that the infrastructure they helped pay for no longer belongs to them alone. But it could result in a floodgate of competition, potentially bringing far more choice between price and speeds in all parts of the country.

According to the FCC's latest Internet Access Services report (which is accurate as of 2015), just 24% of developed areas in America had at least two ISPs that offered official broadband speeds.FCC



Theoretically, it’d also make any need for net-neutrality (or internet-privacy) laws irrelevant — if your ISP wants to throttle YouTube and sell your browsing history without telling you first, you can just take your business to one that doesn’t.


The market would likely erase such behavior out of existence, or at least force ISPs to deploy it in a way that isn’t terrible.


The process would make the net-neutrality debate look like peanuts, and it’d probably mean a new tax when it comes time to upgrading the networks. But if you really think the internet is a public utility, it’s a more wholesale solution.

An example of the kind of internet service offered in the UK. This isn't universal, but this kind of deal just doesn't exist in the US.Virgin Media
Crucially, unbundling the local loop is also a proven solution — various European countries, including the UK, and some Asian nations already take a similar approach today. A number of them get faster and/or cheaper broadband as a result. (The US is a much larger land, of course, but the difference is still stark.)


If it wasn’t already obvious, this is all a pipe dream under the current regime. Pai’s plans are just about the exact opposite. But this change in thinking wasn’t close to occurring under the Obama administration, either. America gets cold feet whenever it thinks of even mildly socializing a part of life it considers a universal good.


Plus, since they’d have billions of dollars in cozy duopoly rents on the line, the big ISPs would fight any change with all they’ve got.


We know that because the US has technically introduced this sort of leasing and unbundling technique before, and it was either never truly enforced, or it led to private companies not being incentivized to invest in upgrading the underlying infrastructure. (This is part of why DSL is so mediocre in the US, but not in other countries.)


That “last mile” infrastructure would probably have to be nationalized to an extent, but again, this is what you do with a public utility. Yet very few in Washington seem to want to entertain the idea for consumer service. . . "

Poland doesn't have four ISP's that dominate 76% of the market and have regional monopolies. You're under the mistaken impression that growing market consolidation will lead to more ISP's, when we already know from the experience of telecoms and big banks that the opposite is the case. When has market consolidation ever resulted in more choices? Never. So just like how small banks were bought up and merged with larger ones, expect ISP's to follow suit. Rather than allow competition, Comcast will simply just buy up all its regional competitors, or use its lobbying might to prevent communities from expanding ISP offerings.

ISP's don't merely own the bandwidth, they also own the infrastructure to support that bandwidth. A small, regional ISP can't exist in that space because it doesn't own the infrastructure. Even if it did in a very limited capacity, its infrastructure is still competing with that of the big ISP's, who can spend more to improve service or M&A to eliminate any competition.

I can't discuss this with you because you didn't read the article. I don't have any mistaken impressions at all.

The article is opposed to market consolidation. We all are.

The idea here is to either mandate that the infrastructure be owned by the public or the big ISP's be required to rent the capital infrastructure at regulated costs in trade for their de facto monopolies. Competition is the best way to get that infrastructure built, beyond that, there is no incentive to expand capacity, maintain reliability, or extend the infrastructure to areas where there is little to no profit incentive to do so. With competition from co-op ISP's, local government ISP's and other strategies, the big boys would have to step up their game.

I have friends, both conservative and liberal, continually complain about poor service and limited options. This is a solution.