Goodbye Net Neutrality

Page 6 of 9« First<3456789>
December 12th, 2017 at 4:48:15 PM permalink
terapined
Member since: Aug 6, 2014
Threads: 43
Posts: 3785
Quote: petroglyph
Excuse my ignorance. I thought it was NN now. I just didn't want anyone changing it for the worse.

Mine runs fine, the way I read it was these big providers were going to create artificial slowdowns and a fee would be charged if you weren't a customer?

Yup
We have NN now and its a wonderful thing
I am not pushed to another web site simply due to speed. I have equal access to all sites. Its Freedom
Sometimes we live no particular way but our own - Grateful Dead "Eyes of the World"
December 12th, 2017 at 4:48:36 PM permalink
AZDuffman
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 106
Posts: 7754
Quote: petroglyph
Excuse my ignorance. I thought it was NN now. I just didn't want anyone changing it for the worse.

Mine runs fine, the way I read it was these big providers were going to create artificial slowdowns and a fee would be charged if you weren't a customer?


You get a pass!

As to why repeal of NN is bad, think back.

Think back to how much better air travel was in 1977. How fares were lower and there were more flights. How much choice you had, and how that ended in 1978 and the industry was de-regulated. Remember how prices went up and choices down in the 1980s?

What you read is what they want you to think. Then think back to 1982 and how great long distance service was under federal regulation. All the choices you had. So many different providers and options. Remember how much worst it was in 1983 and the Bell System was broken up and the system deregulated?

Don't take this as a joke aimed at you. Just my way of reminding how things regulated by the feds never end up as good as industries that are allowed to innovate.
The man who damns money has obtained it dishonorably; the man who respects it has earned it
December 12th, 2017 at 8:48:28 PM permalink
JB
Administrator
Member since: Oct 23, 2012
Threads: 10
Posts: 106
Handing complete control of the internet over to monopolies does not create a free market.

The only "innovation" we're likely to see are new line items on the bill:

$9.99 for access to amazin.com
$9.99 for access to bookface.com
$9.99 for access to ewetube.com
$9.99 for access to goggle.com
$9.99 for access to macrosoft.com
$9.99 for access to nitflex.com
$9.99 for access to tweeter.com
.
.
.

On the other hand, we haven't had "true" NN for a long time. For example, try serving a website on port 80 using your residential broadband internet connection. Surprise, it's blocked. They want you to purchase a business connection for that. This is a violation of "true" NN, yet I don't have a problem with it.

After pondering the issue a lot since I started this thread, I'm optimistic that removing NN won't be the armageddon that it could be.
December 12th, 2017 at 9:46:58 PM permalink
beachbumbabs
Member since: Sep 3, 2013
Threads: 5
Posts: 1392
Fwiw, I think you were absolutely right when you started this thread. NN is a must because of the monopolistic grants to a single provider by most cities or communities. That's been going on for more than 30 years, when building a network was much cheaper. Denying competition all those years has made it too expensive to lay competing cable. And laws have to be changed everywhere individually before ISP competition could make a free market, even while the entire landscape of content and receiving changes.

Meanwhile, all these extortion fees will be passed through to the customer. We will be paying significantly more for significantly less content and worse service than we have now. And it won't improve over time.

Screwed again. NN needs to be retained.
Never doubt a small group of concerned citizens can change the world; it's the only thing ever has
December 12th, 2017 at 10:36:10 PM permalink
rxwine
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 126
Posts: 6023
Quote: AZDuffman
Don't take this as a joke aimed at you. Just my way of reminding how things regulated by the feds never end up as good as industries that are allowed to innovate.


Depends on how you look at regulation.

The purpose of referees and rules in sports is to make the game fair, so underhanded tactics, and cheating aren't responsible for wins and losses. You need someone to actively watch over the game, not just wait for it to be over and the call fouls or penalties.

Same in government as far as I'm concerned.

If you need an example, give anyone familiar with casinos, a chance to play games at 10 heavily government regulated Vegas casinos, and 10 unregulated Internet casinos and guess which ones they will pick 9 time out 10 or more. (at that's even taking away all the amenities of Vegas, with only the game itself)
No one has ever proven I am not God.
December 13th, 2017 at 5:14:22 AM permalink
AZDuffman
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 106
Posts: 7754
Quote: rxwine
Depends on how you look at regulation.

The purpose of referees and rules in sports is to make the game fair, so underhanded tactics, and cheating aren't responsible for wins and losses. You need someone to actively watch over the game, not just wait for it to be over and the call fouls or penalties.

Same in government as far as I'm concerned.

If you need an example, give anyone familiar with casinos, a chance to play games at 10 heavily government regulated Vegas casinos, and 10 unregulated Internet casinos and guess which ones they will pick 9 time out 10 or more. (at that's even taking away all the amenities of Vegas, with only the game itself)


That's not an apples to apples example. Here is a better one. Which casino will do better: the casino where the government mandates that all games be given equal space on the casino floor (i.e.: they must have the same number of tables for BJ as Let-It-Ride) or the casino where player play dictates the types of tables and their placement.

Are you in favor of Casino Neutrality?
The man who damns money has obtained it dishonorably; the man who respects it has earned it
December 13th, 2017 at 5:46:08 AM permalink
terapined
Member since: Aug 6, 2014
Threads: 43
Posts: 3785
Quote: rxwine
If you need an example, give anyone familiar with casinos, a chance to play games at 10 heavily government regulated Vegas casinos, and 10 unregulated Internet casinos and guess which ones they will pick 9 time out 10 or more. (at that's even taking away all the amenities of Vegas, with only the game itself)


Casinos are not used by everybody
Everybody is on the internet
Everybody
NN is important because its used by everybody
Whenever I visit the library in Clearwater, the homeless have just about all the internet computer seats occupied
Sometimes we live no particular way but our own - Grateful Dead "Eyes of the World"
December 13th, 2017 at 6:33:40 AM permalink
Nareed
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 344
Posts: 12488
Don't worry. if things get too bad stateside, you can always send to Mexico for a SIM from one of the many cell companies here that have free data roaming in the US, put it in a cheap, older phone and use it as a hot spot at home.

Cell data plans are pricey and not unlimited, but it might be the better option.
If Trump where half as smart as he thinks he is, he'd be twice as smart as he really is.
December 13th, 2017 at 8:17:26 AM permalink
DRich
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 22
Posts: 907
Quote: beachbumbabs
Fwiw, I think you were absolutely right when you started this thread. NN is a must because of the monopolistic grants to a single provider by most cities or communities.


What are you talking about? I can't think of any place other than maybe rural farm land that only has a single provider. I would be willing to bet that over 99% of Americans have more than a single provider available.
December 13th, 2017 at 8:18:27 AM permalink
rxwine
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 126
Posts: 6023
Quote: AZDuffman
That's not an apples to apples example.


I just compared the regulated industry vs. the free one. About as real as it gets.
No one has ever proven I am not God.
Page 6 of 9« First<3456789>