Say Goodbye to Net Neutrality....

[Pepe_Silvia]

Bye, net neutrality.

 

[ItStartedatHessHall]

Bye, net neutrality.

Comcast Toll on Netflix Screams for Net Neutrality | PCWorld

For those who are ignorant enough to believe everything was great prior to 2015, the link above shows why Net Neutrality came to fruition. Comcast throttled Netflix and BitTorrent usage and you best believe they haven’t spent millions to get this repealed for no reason.

If a conservative had enacted this law, I’m sure the dissenters would feel differently. This should be a bipartisan issue.

 

[Septic]

Comcast Toll on Netflix Screams for Net Neutrality | PCWorld

For those who are ignorant enough to believe everything was great prior to 2015, the link above shows why Net Neutrality came to fruition. Comcast throttled Netflix and BitTorrent usage and you best believe they haven’t spent millions to get this repealed for no reason.

If a conservative had enacted this law, I’m sure the dissenters would feel differently. This should be a bipartisan issue.

I think it's kind of fascinating that people think that companies like Comcast are fighting for this for any other reason.

If the Dems were in control, the lobbyists would have targeted them. I'd love to see how much telecom money is flowing into campaign war chests across D.C.

 

[midnight orange]

I think it's kind of fascinating that people think that companies like Comcast are fighting for this for any other reason.

If the Dems were in control, the lobbyists would have targeted them. I'd love to see how much telecom money is flowing into campaign war chests across D.C.

I think it’s fascinating that advocates for net neutrality think they aren’t shilling for Netflix, Amazon, Google, etc.

 

[Pepe_Silvia]

Comcast Toll on Netflix Screams for Net Neutrality | PCWorld

For those who are ignorant enough to believe everything was great prior to 2015, the link above shows why Net Neutrality came to fruition. Comcast throttled Netflix and BitTorrent usage and you best believe they haven’t spent millions to get this repealed for no reason.

If a conservative had enacted this law, I’m sure the dissenters would feel differently. This should be a bipartisan issue.

I have noticed no difference between the internet before or after "net neutrality" was put into place. Keep the government out of something that works completely fine on its own.

 

[n_huffhines]

Comcast Toll on Netflix Screams for Net Neutrality | PCWorld

For those who are ignorant enough to believe everything was great prior to 2015, the link above shows why Net Neutrality came to fruition. Comcast throttled Netflix and BitTorrent usage and you best believe they haven’t spent millions to get this repealed for no reason.

If a conservative had enacted this law, I’m sure the dissenters would feel differently. This should be a bipartisan issue.

What is wrong with paying for data? Jesus, people

 

[Septic]

I think it’s fascinating that advocates for net neutrality think they aren’t shilling for Netflix, Amazon, Google, etc.

Does the "etc" mean "ALL" web based content?

Because yeah, I'm 'shilling' for the neutrality of that. The neutrality applies to everything.

Wait till pornhub gets throttled, half the planet is going to rage. What's going to happen when 69 gets charged a buck for Obama meme's?

 

[midnight orange]

Does the "etc" mean "ALL" web based content?

Because yeah, I'm 'shilling' for the neutrality of that. The neutrality applies to everything.

Wait till pornhub gets throttled, half the planet is going to rage. What's going to happen when 69 gets charged a buck for Obama meme's?

“The whole idea of pricing the internet as a scarce resource — and bandwidth is, given current technology, scarce, though we usually don't notice this — is ignored in most proposals to legislate network neutrality, a form of "network socialism" that can only stymie the internet's continued growth and development. The net neutrality debate takes place in the shadow of government intervention. So too the debate over the division of the spectrum for wireless transmission. Any resource the government controls will be allocated based on political priorities.”

Government Did Invent the Internet, But the Market Made It Glorious | Mises Institute

 

[Weezy]

Telecoms suck. Internet should be municpalized.

 

[armchair]

Regulating businesses to lower the cost to consumers is a misnomer. It's just moving the money around. Sure, it's possible that the cable bill could be a few dollars less. But growing the government and raising taxes just takes that money out of a different pocket. Plus innovation stagnates with unnecessary government interference. Concepts that liberals just can't understand and will never embrace.

...in keeping with the level of discourse we get from the conservatives on this board (and everywhere). Net neutrality is a big deal--but I guess you something more than a small mind to understand why.

I love all conservatives think rolling regulations back to pre-Obama is cool. Pre-Obama we had far less regulation on the financial sector, which caused one of the biggest recessions in this country since the Great Depression. There was no consumer protection agency pre-Obama. To pretend that regulation is "interference" is stupid conservative talk. Is the Clean Water Act "interference"? Only simpletons think like that.

 

[armchair]

I think it’s fascinating that advocates for net neutrality think they aren’t shilling for Netflix, Amazon, Google, etc.

are content providers, not distributors. Big difference--but you'd have to think to understand that, I suppose. Netflix has been one of the great bargains in American history for the last decade--$10 bucks or so for any/all of their content? Are you kidding? How much are you paying for Google's search service? ZERO. How much are you paying for internet or cell service? Lots more.

 

[armchair]

“The whole idea of pricing the internet as a scarce resource — and bandwidth is, given current technology, scarce, though we usually don't notice this — is ignored in most proposals to legislate network neutrality, a form of "network socialism" that can only stymie the internet's continued growth and development. The net neutrality debate takes place in the shadow of government intervention. So too the debate over the division of the spectrum for wireless transmission. Any resource the government controls will be allocated based on political priorities.”

Government Did Invent the Internet, But the Market Made It Glorious | Mises Institute

Where are the "political priorities" on the radio dial? If anything, it is dominated by right-wing/christian crazies. How about cable tV or the internet? Do explain these "political proritities" you quote. There are none. Did I mention it--stupid comment. CONTENT PROVIDERS are the internet innovators, not the distributors who benefit from the elimination of net neutrality. Without net neutrality there could be less innovation, and there will be damn sure be higher prices. Distributors do not innovate.

 

[midnight orange]

Where are the "political priorities" on the radio dial? If anything, it is dominated by right-wing/christian crazies. How about cable tV or the internet? Do explain these "political proritities" you quote. There are none. Did I mention it--stupid comment. CONTENT PROVIDERS are the internet innovators, not the distributors who benefit from the elimination of net neutrality. Without net neutrality there could be less innovation, and there will be damn sure be higher prices. Distributors do not innovate.

Why don't you go read on how the fcc determined who to sell tv spectrum to. In fact go read anything. It sounds like you get your information from a Marxist high-school dropout.The rest of what you wrote is gibberish.

 

[joevol320]

what caused the massive recession of 2007--lack of regulation of the financial sector. Regs put in place to prevent a recurrence, but regs will be rolled back by Trump and GOP. Consumer protection is a good thing--perhaps you missed the giant Wells Fargo scandal. Conservatives are always a scream--always caterwauling about Guv'mint while their pants are being pulled and their wallets emptied by corporate America. Regs tend to be put in place for good reasons--same with environment, etc.

You posts show how ignorant you are. When it comes to the economy

 

[joevol320]

Why don't you go read on how the fcc determined who to sell tv spectrum to. In fact go read anything. It sounds like you get your information from a Marxist high-school dropout.The rest of what you wrote is gibberish.

He's a marxist sheep.. he's pure comedy.. bless his ignorant heart

 

[LouderVol]

...in keeping with the level of discourse we get from the conservatives on this board (and everywhere). Net neutrality is a big deal--but I guess you something more than a small mind to understand why.

I love all conservatives think rolling regulations back to pre-Obama is cool. Pre-Obama we had far less regulation on the financial sector, which caused one of the biggest recessions in this country since the Great Depression. There was no consumer protection agency pre-Obama. To pretend that regulation is "interference" is stupid conservative talk. Is the Clean Water Act "interference"? Only simpletons think like that.

Second, this is about net neutrality--not taxes or social spending. Try to stick with the topic.

See the bolded. stay on topic. don't bring housing into an argument that has nothing to do with housing.

also this is pre-2015 Obama, not Obama in general. He waited to pass a lot of this stuff that was controversial until he was already on the way out and had nothing to lose. he didn't do it out of the goodness of his heart. he received the same millions Congress is getting now. pretending that only one side of aisle is getting paid in this argument is childish as all get out. there is no high horse there for you.

 

[114VOL]

You have no idea. ........ Really, you have no idea.

Exactly. Huge contributor to a dumbed down America, running with that tired, false narrative

 

[AustinMem]

The fatal flaw in your premise is that 1's and 0's flowing through twisted pair copper is an infinitely renewable resource. You're conflating data usage with the usage of a finite resource like water. The wires work the same way whether I'm streaming video or posting to VN.

Using your example would allow the water "company" to charge us not just for the water we consume, but now a new and additional fee for how much could flow through the pipe and how fast, or at all or which kind. But to truly make this water argument accurate, we'd also have to assume the water is being provided free of charge and in infinite supply to the water "company." They'd cease to be the water provider and simply a conduit in which they could be in a better position to strangle more cash from the water 'producers' and the end user.

Electricity costs money to produce, the more we use - the more it costs the electric company. The telecoms aren't producing data, they simply own the rights to the infrastructure.

Data, despite your attempt to paint it as a nonrenewable commodity, isn't.

This is a money grab. I'm not salty about that - the telecoms have a duty to their shareholders. Let's acknowledge that and stop trying to paint this as something it's not.

While I agree with your premise, I think your analogy is incorrect. This would be like the water company to go to a "plan" based program. For around the same price as you used to pay for your water, you now get water that is unfiltered/untreated, aka your non-potable water. (You really think they are going to lower their base prices more than around 10 dollars just because they can now sell you additional packages?) If you want clean water (something you can cook with or drink) you need our "Clean Water" plan, an additional 10 dollars. The water supplied is lukewarm. Through deals with suppliers, you also are now going to need a "hot water" plan, in case you want your house to be able to be supplied with hot water (software in your hot water heater disables the heating element unless you have the plan and are paid up), $10. Oh you want cold water too? You need to add our cold water plan, add $10. Water pressure into the house has also been reduced for all but those who are Premium level customers.
So now you are paying more than you were before, for worse service.

 

[AustinMem]

The internet pipes and the water pipes don't carry unlimited quantities. Water, sewer, and electricity require regulation because it's not feasible to have multiple options. With internet access there are almost always 2 terrestrial options, usually 3, and even 4 or more in many cases. Plus there are multiple wireless options.

Wrong, the United States actually has one of the worst ISP coverage distributions. In many places there is only 1 provider. Even with places that have more than 1, the other provider is sometimes just a subsidiary/distributor for the other provider. In other words, they "lease" bandwidth from the other provider (think Boost Mobile or Safe Talk), which the primary provider can control as they wish.
Your wireless options still have to connect to an internet backbone, which is again controlled by some of those ISPs providing service.

As for those who think people are being conspiracy theorists for believing that the companies would actually do all of this when net neutrality is repealed, leaks have already shown Comcast has a plan in place to monetize this to their gain. None of the companies are likely dumb enough to roll out all of the changes at once, they do have their 5 and 10 year road maps to gradually roll out the changes and we, being the lazy people we are, will just bury our heads in the sand as long as we are not inconvenienced too much.
Look at how game companies have implemented "loot boxes" to go from 1 time charge when person buys a game, to perpetual income by taking away things that before were in the game by default, and making users either pay for them, or perform a frustrating "grind" to unlock the content.

 

[AustinMem]

What is wrong with paying for data? Jesus, people

This isn't paying for data, this is you paying for data but the company limiting what you can use that data for unless you pay them more to allow you that ability.

 

[AustinMem]

Why don't you go read on how the fcc determined who to sell tv spectrum to. In fact go read anything. It sounds like you get your information from a Marxist high-school dropout.The rest of what you wrote is gibberish.

Elimination of net neutrality actually negatively impacts capitalism. It would allow potential for providers to limit new companies from entering a market that the provider feels could be competition. They could easily throttle bandwidth to degrade user experience, and frustrating customers to drop the service. They could limit access to the service, requiring a different package in order to get the access. For a service/company trying to break into a market and build a user base, this is business killing. The only saving grace so far has been that the primary providers in the internet provider space have been slow to understand emerging market trends.

 

[midnight orange]

Elimination of net neutrality actually negatively impacts capitalism. It would allow potential for providers to limit new companies from entering a market that the provider feels could be competition. They could easily throttle bandwidth to degrade user experience, and frustrating customers to drop the service. They could limit access to the service, requiring a different package in order to get the access. For a service/company trying to break into a market and build a user base, this is business killing. The only saving grace so far has been that the primary providers in the internet provider space have been slow to understand emerging market trends.

You assume that the internet in the future will only be provided through Comcast and att wired drops. Net neutrality will likely retard the incentive to develop other isp delivery innovations all to prevent a worst case scenario that has not come to fruition. Recheck your definition of capitalism. If you want to challenge the local govt monopolies that isp's operate under, that would be increasing capitalism.

 

[LouderVol]

Wrong, the United States actually has one of the worst ISP coverage distributions. In many places there is only 1 provider. Even with places that have more than 1, the other provider is sometimes just a subsidiary/distributor for the other provider. In other words, they "lease" bandwidth from the other provider (think Boost Mobile or Safe Talk), which the primary provider can control as they wish.
Your wireless options still have to connect to an internet backbone, which is again controlled by some of those ISPs providing service.

As for those who think people are being conspiracy theorists for believing that the companies would actually do all of this when net neutrality is repealed, leaks have already shown Comcast has a plan in place to monetize this to their gain. None of the companies are likely dumb enough to roll out all of the changes at once, they do have their 5 and 10 year road maps to gradually roll out the changes and we, being the lazy people we are, will just bury our heads in the sand as long as we are not inconvenienced too much.
Look at how game companies have implemented "loot boxes" to go from 1 time charge when person buys a game, to perpetual income by taking away things that before were in the game by default, and making users either pay for them, or perform a frustrating "grind" to unlock the content.

that worked out real well for EA.

 

[n_huffhines]

This isn't paying for data, this is you paying for data but the company limiting what you can use that data for unless you pay them more to allow you that ability.

You failed to demonstrate why it's not paying for data. It's still paying for data, it's just a different system which would actually mirror usage, as opposed to my neighbors paying the same as me when I use 10x more data.

 

[n_huffhines]

Liberals Are Freaking Out About Net Neutrality Because They Don't Understand Capitalism: Podcast - Hit & Run : Reason.com