Bye Bye Net Neutrality....Another Big Government Obama Program Repealed

[PredFan]

GO TRUMP GO!

ERASE THE OBAMA ERA!!

FCC regulators overturn controversial net neutrality rules | Daily Mail Online

Good riddance.

Explain.

"Have the government fix this! It will make everything so much better!" said no one ever.

The Internet must be treated as a common carrier utility. Simple as that. I suppose you must love paying more for the same shit?

No, it should be treated as a free and open market.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

GO TRUMP GO!

ERASE THE OBAMA ERA!!

FCC regulators overturn controversial net neutrality rules | Daily Mail Online

Good riddance.

Explain.

"Have the government fix this! It will make everything so much better!" said no one ever.

The Internet must be treated as a common carrier utility. Simple as that. I suppose you must love paying more for the same shit?

No, it should be treated as a free and open market.

Then you should support net neutrality. The only 'regulation' is one rule: all data gets treated equally. Without it, your 'free and open market' idea is all a facade.

 

[Coyote]

Google that are accountsble to shareholders only. Wether it is media giants or tech giants....they tell us what to read, what is important, what to buy, what value and how to vote.

They can't exist with customers. There will always be other stockholders. Corporations are ALWAYS more scared of their customer relations than their stockholder relations. Because in reality, most corporations keep a VERY LARGE controlling chunk of stock in their own house and with their top management..

Regulation is exactly what has caused the steroidal growth of tech and corp giants. We have damn few NEW business ventures that actually have a useful products to support life and infrastructure. All we've seen for about 15 years now is mergers and acquisitions. Because when you continue to REGULATE and increase legal compliance -- only the LARGE CORPORATIONS are gonna be left. So in reality, you'll get EXACTLY the opposite effect with MORE govt intervention..

Right now -- a "successful" idea and start-up cannot raise enough cash and reporting/legal/regulation infrastructure to "go public" or independent. They are just Scooby Snacks for Google,, Amazon, Facebook or Disney.. So no one can reach the point of being a competitor with the giants.

Just like I pointed out in this one. It virtually FREEZES internet distribution capabilities. No one is gonna pay for bandwidth expansions under Net Neutrality. In 6 or 10 years, the govt will be back trying to BUILD that capability with tax dollars...

It's not regulation that caused that - it's evolution. Look at how the world was before - you had company towns, where one interest owned everything. You had monopolies that could simply crush competition. If they are powerful enough they aren't going to care too much about customer relations because customers have no one else. The problem is entities that get too large and too powerful they OWN politics. The problem is all that money flowing into our political system. The end result? One example - the tax bill - a give away to all those corporate donors who bought their politicians.

That was 100 years ago.. And confined to certain manufacturers and mining operations. It was still possible to COMPETE with the "big boys".. Cant be done today. Is NOT being done today. Because you need a literal ARMY of regulation and legal compliance to move above a certain size level. So NEW potential competition just gets EATEN alive by those BIG ENOUGH to comply with all that regulation..

Actually - what makes you think it wouldn't come back if it was economically advantageous? See...I'm not understanding your argument. What you are saying is that REGULATION allows only the biggest to win. What I am saying is LACK of REGULATION allows only the biggest to win.

There is some truth in both.

So where do you go from there?

Tax bill is not a give away to corporations. What needs to be fixed is all the targeted TAX BREAKS need to be killed. And NEITHER party will do that. Bernie was harping on how GE paid no taxes. Not at 35% OR 21%. But Bernie acted deaf and dumb as to WHY that happens. But HE KNOWS.. It's those targeted tax breaks that BOTH parties like to trade power for campaign cash.. Things like giving GE a $50 tax credit for every "energy efficient large appliance" that they sell. They accumulated SO MUCH CREDIT, they'd not have to pay A ******* PENNY for years. Only the Lparty or some principled socialist party would make that a high tax reform priority. Doesn't matter what the RATE is if you're handing out pork like a church picnic.

I don't think I said it's a give away to corporations (did I? not sure) but it IS a give away to wealthy individuals. In terms of tax rates there are two elements I support - a lower (and much simplified) corporate tax code AND ending the taxation of profits made out of the country, putting us in line with the rest of the world. I'm not sure I support as LOW a tax rate as proposed (especially since we have not seen what loop holes are erradicated) but I do support lower corporate rates.

I also don't have an issue with giving tax breaks for things that benefit us as a hole - and that would include energy efficiency. That is one good way to encourage better practices imo.

You can continue to watch jobs move overseas or fix it. Because it's easier to move or invert your company into a lower tax country.

Again - that part I think we are in agreement with.

 

[PredFan]

Good riddance.

Explain.

"Have the government fix this! It will make everything so much better!" said no one ever.

The Internet must be treated as a common carrier utility. Simple as that. I suppose you must love paying more for the same shit?

No, it should be treated as a free and open market.

Then you should support net neutrality. The only 'regulation' is one rule: all data gets treated equally. Without it, your 'free and open market' idea is all a facade.

Let’s see: no, no, and no. Three strikes you’re out.

 

[Vandalshandle]

Mega corporations that are unregulated NEVER take advantage of that, to the disadvantage of the consumers!

 

[Balancer]

Does not this mean that the provider can block ZeroNet traffic?

Yes, an ISP in the US can now block ZeroNet. But here the big technical difficulties begin, because of which the costs of their solution do not pay off. For example, Facebook will pay the provider to block or at least cut the speed to Google+ - it's easy. The resources are centralized, the blockages are financially profitable. And on the ZeroNet lock, firstly, you will not make any money, and secondly, decentralized networks require a serious DPI, which requires the costs of funds that the providers will not use in the US until they are pressed by the relevant laws, as in Russia.

 

[flacaltenn]

Actually - what makes you think it wouldn't come back if it was economically advantageous? See...I'm not understanding your argument. What you are saying is that REGULATION allows only the biggest to win. What I am saying is LACK of REGULATION allows only the biggest to win.

There is some truth in both.

So where do you go from there?

Well you go into detail on cause/effect. On return/investment. And you need to LOOK at the miserable rate of new start-ups that never make it to puberty without getting eaten alive by the mongo predators. Capitalism can't survive when there is an aristocracy of mega giants dominating markets. THAT we agree on.

I spent 20 years in high tech start-ups in Silicon Valley. It was bad enough back then. I participated in about a dozen of very innovative, creative companies. Some of which survived to dominate a portion of their market.

TODAY -- companies HAVE to lobby. Don't WANT to lobby. But if they don't - their competitors WILL. Which is the case of this farce called net neutrality. Regulation is WRITTEN to FAVOR some and HOBBLE others. Either directly thru the regulation process or by targeted tax credit/loan policies that EXCLUDE their competition. You cannot ignore the bias and the horse trading that's become a FEATURE of having the power to pick market winners and losers. And net neutrality is simply that. Stomping on the backs of the Inet CARRIERS to detriment of some and not others. Essentially requiring them to give UNLIMITED access to their investments for free. (or in the case of "zero rating" PROHIBITING THEM to give certain content without counting their data usage -- See the ATT deal below and following post) Giving it up for free to companies that have a product that require a major slice of bandwidth to DELIVER their product - and don't want to pay "a shipping cost".

Why do you think that Netflix and Amazon moved the MAJORITY of their customer content delivery from home delivery to "FREE" Inet distribution.. Didn't cost them much at all.. Saved them TONS of cost.. OTHER companies PAID for "their shipping/handling costs"..

EVERY carrier limits user data usage. Even when they allow CERTAIN video/film/content providers to stream for FREE on their networks -- they are violating the rules of net neutrality because some of their competitors CHARGE that data usage to their customers for the SAME content. ATT precipated a lot of this when they EXEMPTED their customers from having particular streaming source from being counted against their data allotment. Competitors raised a FUSS and backed the regulation. THIS IS NOT AN APPROPRIATE role for the Fed Govt. Needs to be resolved by negotiation/litigation/contracts between providers and carriers.
See article I posted in later post).

Just like Amazon manages to get same day delivery with the USPS. Others can do this as well. But it's EASIER to OUTLAW a corporate advantage by whining to the Feds -- than creatively FIXING your disadvantage in the market. Or finding other UNIQUE advantages.

 

[flacaltenn]

Bend over - and have a Merry Trump Christmas!

NET NEUTRALITY DEAD

Build your own internet super hiway.. Don't demand that folks that have done it -- provide it for free to anyone selling bandwidth heavy data streams... Let them charge their OWN customers for the "tariffs" to deliver their content.

Would be like Amazon demanding free parcel shipment from the USPService. As it IS -- Amazon NEGOTIATES a fair price with the carriers. Beats them up pretty good. That's the way this shit should work..



Net UN-Neutrality just died..

Except many people only have 1 ISP available to them.

Most EVERYONE has a choice of phone copper wire (DSL), Cable or Satellite, and Wireless phone data.. Even in the sticks -- you can do it with the first 2 choices And there are regional microwave links for extremely rural areas.

there is no cable here and we just got a slow ass Dsl here only 3 or 4 years ago....before that there was only dial up....we had a promise of cable but time Warner broke that promise... we only have the 1 choice and cell phone doesn't work at my house either...

so, bull--ony on your assumption about rural living!

HughesNet,, DirectTV --- all satellite ISPs with plans from 40 to 70 per month. About 0 to $29 for installation. Quit whining.. And don't expect things out in the sticks to IMPROVE with Net Neutrality.. Nobody is gonna bust hump and risk OTHER satellite INet services if they have to have to let bandwidth hogs feed for free...

WITHOUT NN -- you have a FAR BETTER chance of others coming into the rural Inet market..

 

[flacaltenn]

Let me counter a couple misconception about the "govt NOT controlling the Internet" with NN.. I mentioned the move that ATT did to offer it's own customers A BREAK for streaming "on demand" stuff over INet for it's Dish Network service.. WASN'T CHARGING ANYONE MORE for content. But YET -- this violates the "game rules" for NN.. LARGELY because -- their competitors didn't LIKE ATT having the ability to use it's OWN resources to HELP their own customers with an amnesty on data allowances..

AT&T and Verizon respond to FCC's complaints

Carriers like AT&T and Verizon have attempted to sidestep those rules with so-called “zero-rating,” a policy that exempts certain applications and services from counting against subscribers’ data plans. Zero-rated music streaming doesn’t contribute to your overall data bucket, for example, and neither do video services.

AT&T began zero-rating its DirecTV on-demand and live-streaming mobile app in September and plans to do the same for its forthcoming DirecTV Now streaming service when it launches later in December. Verizon currently waives data charges for National Football League games, its Go90 video platform, and other participants affiliated with its FreeBee Data 360 program.

The FCC’s net neutrality rules do not expressly prohibit zero-rating, but the agency evaluates implementations on a case-by-case basis to determine whether they “hinder competition.” It found that AT&T and Verizon’s programs did. “[We have] reached the preliminary conclusion that these practices inhibit competition, harm consumers, and interfere with the ‘virtuous cycle’ needed to assure the continuing benefits of the open internet,” John Wilkins, head of the FCC’s wireless division, wrote in Thursday’s letter. “It would [be] very difficult, if not infeasible, to offer a competitively priced service.”

AT&T and Verizon beg to differ.

That decision by ATT/Verizon hurt NO ONE on the internet. It only made their competitors mad. Don't NEED the govt to STOP ATT/Verizon from giving their customers better deals that hurt NO ONE ELSE. Need the OTHER ISP providers to make SIMILAR deals to lower pricing for EVERYBODY. Which leftist still doesn't understand what happened here in this case??

There is also a totally ludicrous, horseshit comment somewhere in there that "the internet should be like the electric grid. Nobody should CARE whether it's a toaster or a computer or a hair dryer".. Well for starters WE DO OBVIOUSLY CARE about what one pokes onto the electric grid. That's why there is so much environmental messaging about conservation and energy efficiency. And penalties for ENERGY wasters and INCENTIVES for energy savers.

ANY ecosystem that is abused with no sense of conservation will suffer. The Inet is no exception. Maybe folks gotta think about the ACTUAL enviro consequences of all that streaming entertainment. AND MAYBE they need to wait the 15 minutes to download a movie or pay more to stream it.

 

[Care4all]

Bend over - and have a Merry Trump Christmas!

NET NEUTRALITY DEAD

Build your own internet super hiway.. Don't demand that folks that have done it -- provide it for free to anyone selling bandwidth heavy data streams... Let them charge their OWN customers for the "tariffs" to deliver their content.

Would be like Amazon demanding free parcel shipment from the USPService. As it IS -- Amazon NEGOTIATES a fair price with the carriers. Beats them up pretty good. That's the way this shit should work..



Net UN-Neutrality just died..

Except many people only have 1 ISP available to them.

Most EVERYONE has a choice of phone copper wire (DSL), Cable or Satellite, and Wireless phone data.. Even in the sticks -- you can do it with the first 2 choices And there are regional microwave links for extremely rural areas.

there is no cable here and we just got a slow ass Dsl here only 3 or 4 years ago....before that there was only dial up....we had a promise of cable but time Warner broke that promise... we only have the 1 choice and cell phone doesn't work at my house either...

so, bull--ony on your assumption about rural living!

HughesNet,, DirectTV --- all satellite ISPs with plans from 40 to 70 per month. About 0 to $29 for installation. Quit whining.. And don't expect things out in the sticks to IMPROVE with Net Neutrality.. Nobody is gonna bust hump and risk OTHER satellite INet services if they have to have to let bandwidth hogs feed for free...

WITHOUT NN -- you have a FAR BETTER chance of others coming into the rural Inet market..

Utter bull crap....Hughesnet is over a $100 a month for the speed and use-sage we need for my small business....

And maybe you should inform yourself on net neutrality and what can be done to your service without it!!!!

 

[WaitingFor2020]

GO TRUMP GO!

ERASE THE OBAMA ERA!!

FCC regulators overturn controversial net neutrality rules | Daily Mail Online

Idiot. You realize this means you're going to be paying more for less, right?
No, of course you don't. You're an idiot.

 

[WaitingFor2020]

so obama fixed a problem we didn't have by regulating a monopoly the government created in the first place.

It created lots of good paying jobs for federal workers who sat around all day doing nothing but watch porn on the web while chasing the women around the office like most government employees.

You must like monopolies. So don't complain when you suddenly find there's only one ISP serving your geographic area and they charge a fortune.

 

[flacaltenn]

Build your own internet super hiway.. Don't demand that folks that have done it -- provide it for free to anyone selling bandwidth heavy data streams... Let them charge their OWN customers for the "tariffs" to deliver their content.

Would be like Amazon demanding free parcel shipment from the USPService. As it IS -- Amazon NEGOTIATES a fair price with the carriers. Beats them up pretty good. That's the way this shit should work..



Net UN-Neutrality just died..

Except many people only have 1 ISP available to them.

Most EVERYONE has a choice of phone copper wire (DSL), Cable or Satellite, and Wireless phone data.. Even in the sticks -- you can do it with the first 2 choices And there are regional microwave links for extremely rural areas.

there is no cable here and we just got a slow ass Dsl here only 3 or 4 years ago....before that there was only dial up....we had a promise of cable but time Warner broke that promise... we only have the 1 choice and cell phone doesn't work at my house either...

so, bull--ony on your assumption about rural living!

HughesNet,, DirectTV --- all satellite ISPs with plans from 40 to 70 per month. About 0 to $29 for installation. Quit whining.. And don't expect things out in the sticks to IMPROVE with Net Neutrality.. Nobody is gonna bust hump and risk OTHER satellite INet services if they have to have to let bandwidth hogs feed for free...

WITHOUT NN -- you have a FAR BETTER chance of others coming into the rural Inet market..

Utter bull crap....Hughesnet is over a $100 a month for the speed and use-sage we need for my small business....

And maybe you should inform yourself on net neutrality and what can be done to your service without it!!!!

Small biz in a place that where you connect on a cell? Sounds like a challenge anyways. Think of how much money you're wasting not being able to use that cell at home. For the average consumer or small biz -- DSL or 25Mbit service is completely adequate. And HughesNet is NOT $100/month unless your business is COMPLETELY video or music heavy.. Not just the Inet portion...

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

Explain.

"Have the government fix this! It will make everything so much better!" said no one ever.

The Internet must be treated as a common carrier utility. Simple as that. I suppose you must love paying more for the same shit?

No, it should be treated as a free and open market.

Then you should support net neutrality. The only 'regulation' is one rule: all data gets treated equally. Without it, your 'free and open market' idea is all a facade.

Let’s see: no, no, and no. Three strikes you’re out.

You don't even understand the issue then. Thus, your comments are void of use. We're even playing the same sport, chum.

 

[PredFan]

"Have the government fix this! It will make everything so much better!" said no one ever.

The Internet must be treated as a common carrier utility. Simple as that. I suppose you must love paying more for the same shit?

No, it should be treated as a free and open market.

Then you should support net neutrality. The only 'regulation' is one rule: all data gets treated equally. Without it, your 'free and open market' idea is all a facade.

Let’s see: no, no, and no. Three strikes you’re out.

You don't even understand the issue then. Thus, your comments are void of use. We're even playing the same sport, chum.

I understand it perfectly. You however, simply believe the crap you are spoon fed.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

The Internet must be treated as a common carrier utility. Simple as that. I suppose you must love paying more for the same shit?

No, it should be treated as a free and open market.

Then you should support net neutrality. The only 'regulation' is one rule: all data gets treated equally. Without it, your 'free and open market' idea is all a facade.

Let’s see: no, no, and no. Three strikes you’re out.

You don't even understand the issue then. Thus, your comments are void of use. We're even playing the same sport, chum.

I understand it perfectly. You however, simply believe the crap you are spoon fed.

Let’s see: no, and no.

 

[longknife]