Net Neutality

#127
#127
n_huffhines said:
T-Mobile customers were paying for a plan that allowed them to stream Netflix and Pandora unlimited. This was great for consumers. Hulu can strike a similar deal with them or with AT&T, but instead, we got an FCC crackdown saying this wasn't fair to Hulu.

None of this was about the consumer at all. It was about corporations slicing up the pie. The ruling came down that T-Mobile has to offer this for every streaming service or none of them.

T-Mobile chose to offer the former, which means they incur more cost that must be passed onto consumers.

We don't need to be able to stream every freaking service on our networks. There are 104M Netflix subscribers. There are 12M Hulu subscribers. So now we have some percentage of 92M Netflix subscribers who are paying for unlimited Hulu streaming, but they aren't using it. Why on earth does it make sense to force a contract where T-Mobile users have to pay for both? They should have the choice to pay for whatever they want to pay for.

Oh yeah, I think T-Mobile had to pay $48M in the settlement. Who thinks this is good government?
Click to expand...

They settled because they lied to the customers and misrepresented what they can do. The ability to stream anything from any ISP should not be limited to some contract those two entities have. It should be my choice not theirs what I watch. That what it comes down to. It should be passive and not restrictive. You are pretty much laying out the foundation of net neutrality. They could kill the cable cutters. You know the ones that got rid of cable or dish because they didn't offer AMC or the cartoon network and nothing to stop them. Or better yet the only news channel you get is FOX. Talk about some dumb Sumbeaches.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#128
#128
Mick said:
They settled because they lied to the customers and misrepresented what they can do. The ability to stream anything from any ISP should not be limited to some contract those two entities have. It should be my choice not theirs what I watch. That what it comes down to. It should be passive and not restrictive. You are pretty much laying out the foundation of net neutrality. They could kill the cable cutters. You know the ones that got rid of cable or dish because they didn't offer AMC or the cartoon network and nothing to stop them. Or better yet the only news channel you get is FOX. Talk about some dumb Sumbeaches.
Click to expand...

Everything is based on fear-mongering...they could do this...they could do that.

Wait until they do something nefarious. Have you ever asked yourself why we're $20T in debt? Part of the problem is we are asking government to save us from non-issues and the solutions are counterproductive and costly.
 
#129
#129
n_huffhines said:
Everything is based on fear-mongering...they could do this...they could do that.

Wait until they do something nefarious. Have you ever asked yourself why we're $20T in debt? Part of the problem is we are asking government to save us from non-issues and the solutions are counterproductive and costly.
Click to expand...

What do you mean "wait until they do something nafarious"? Did you not even read the garbage you posted to try to back your position. T-mob was doing just that by your own example. Net Neutrality were guidelines not an army of ISP police that run the debt up to $20T. Get a grip with your anti-government outlook.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#130
#130
God save us from the orange monster! He's taking our internet away and will soon be rounding us up and sending us to Russian gulags!
 
#131
#131
n_huffhines said:
Everything is based on fear-mongering...they could do this...they could do that.

Wait until they do something nefarious. Have you ever asked yourself why we're $20T in debt? Part of the problem is we are asking government to save us from non-issues and the solutions are counterproductive and costly.
Click to expand...

We need more government protections to fight off the evil corporate overlords. I'm working on a plan to water plants with Gatorade which should double crop production.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#133
#133
Mick said:
What do you mean "wait until they do something nafarious"? Did you not even read the garbage you posted to try to back your position. T-mob was doing just that by your own example. Net Neutrality were guidelines not an army of ISP police that run the debt up to $20T. Get a grip with your anti-government outlook.
Click to expand...

Who was hurt by T-Mobile?

I get 2GB of data from all sources with AT&T. Is that a better deal than T-Mobile offering XGB of all data and then unlimited Netflix?

How much do you think T-Mobile's case cost the public?
 
Last edited:
#134
#134
n_huffhines said:
Who was hurt by T-Mobile?

I get 2GB of data from all sources with AT&T. Is that a better deal than T-Mobile offering XGB of all data and then unlimited Netflix?
Click to expand...

I see you want to keep the discussion on the mobile side that has more limitation that wired connection. You are also probably in a metropolitan area that may have more than one wireless carrier. Let me ask you something Why cant t-Mobile offer unlimited hulu to one person and unlimited Netflix to another? The answer is they can. Netflix just pays them to sabotage the others. T-Mobile uses AT&T towers. Go figure.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#136
#136
Mick said:
I see you want to keep the discussion on the mobile side that has more limitation that wired connection. You are also probably in a metropolitan area that may have more than one wireless carrier. Let me ask you something Why cant t-Mobile offer unlimited hulu to one person and unlimited Netflix to another? The answer is they can. Netflix just pays them to sabotage the others. T-Mobile uses AT&T towers. Go figure.
Click to expand...

You seemed concerned about businesses making decisions on who they want to make deals with.

Does it piss you off that Target has Starbucks cafes but not Dunkin Donuts?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#138
#138
Mick said:
What do you mean "wait until they do something nafarious"? Did you not even read the garbage you posted to try to back your position. T-mob was doing just that by your own example. Net Neutrality were guidelines not an army of ISP police that run the debt up to $20T. Get a grip with your anti-government outlook.
Click to expand...

Seems like the T mobile customers could have chosen another carrier if they felt so violated. Money talks and bs walks though. Kind of shines light on the real motive behind NN advocates. They want to impose their preferences on the internet using the federal gov't instead of allowing the market to sort it out and innovate because they don't want the consumer to choose against their preferences.
 
#141
#141
Mick said:
I see you want to keep the discussion on the mobile side that has more limitation that wired connection. You are also probably in a metropolitan area that may have more than one wireless carrier. Let me ask you something Why cant t-Mobile offer unlimited hulu to one person and unlimited Netflix to another? The answer is they can. Netflix just pays them to sabotage the others. T-Mobile uses AT&T towers. Go figure.
Click to expand...

You don't have to live in a metro area to get multiple carriers. My parents live in a town of under 30k and there are 4 wireless carriers.

Why is it right to force T-Mobile to offer both Netflix and Hulu? If you run a gas station, should you be forced to carry both Coke and Pepsi? Why is this wise? Can you not see the fundamental problem with this? It's this simple:

You're forcing a cost on the market and interrupting an existing, voluntary arrangement.

This is one decision. It's not that big of a deal. It's a drop in the bucket. But over time, these layers of regulation do not go away. They pile up and the costs get out of control.

People who support NN love hypotheticals, so here's one...the next startup who was going to change the market by inventing a new technology that led to more competition can't enter the market under these conditions. They can't possibly offer unlimited data and they can't stand out without offering something in between totally unlimited and 100% capped, so they never happen. And the old, less effective system is frozen in time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#147
#147
Septic said:
It was until yesterday. It's what allowed the FCC to position the net neutrality laws under title 2.
Click to expand...

Um, no.
From wikipedia

"Public utilities (just "utilities" in British English) are typically defined as companies that supply what are considered basic (essential) services to homes and businesses, such as electricity, gas, telephone, water and sewer connections. They should not be confused with non-connective services such as cellular telephone companies, nor to optional services such as satellite dish or cable-tv providers."

But I get it that progs would have everything classified as a utility because they think it gives them a excuse to get their grubby hands in it.
 
Last edited:
#148
#148
n_huffhines said:
You don't have to live in a metro area to get multiple carriers. My parents live in a town of under 30k and there are 4 wireless carriers.

Why is it right to force T-Mobile to offer both Netflix and Hulu? If you run a gas station, should you be forced to carry both Coke and Pepsi? Why is this wise? Can you not see the fundamental problem with this? It's this simple:

You're forcing a cost on the market and interrupting an existing, voluntary arrangement.

This is one decision. It's not that big of a deal. It's a drop in the bucket. But over time, these layers of regulation do not go away. They pile up and the costs get out of control.

People who support NN love hypotheticals, so here's one...the next startup who was going to change the market by inventing a new technology that led to more competition can't enter the market under these conditions. They can't possibly offer unlimited data and they can't stand out without offering something in between totally unlimited and 100% capped, so they never happen. And the old, less effective system is frozen in time.
Click to expand...

Not going to argue with you anymore on this. I hope your cost goes down and service go up. Must suck turning you phone into a mobile hot spot for all your internet needs. I've used that setup before under the old unlimited plans. My concerns for you and me are real. AT&T will never let T-Mobile overtake them on their towers. AT&T will throttle T-Mobile to death.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#150
#150
Pepe_Silvia said:
!
Click to expand...

Awesome. That pocture says it all. Some on here want to paint this net neutrality thing as some huge coup. Lol. This will have little to no effect on the vast majority of peoples lives.

This is just yet another silly thing people can blame and rip Trump over.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top