The FCC Has Unveiled Its Plan to Repeal Its Net Neutrality Rules

TaintedSquirrel said:
The loss of title 2 is not the death of net neutrality and I'm also 99% sure it doesn't open the door for fast lanes, either.
If you're worried about this being a springboard for future regulation rollbacks that's a separate issue entirely.

Admittedly, I'm not as up-to-date on my NN regulations as I could be. -_-

As far as I can tell, articles like this one are outright false.
Click to expand...

How is that false? They are going to charge Netflix millions to get a fast lane for their customers and Netflix is going to raise their monthly rates to their customers.

They are more than likely going to charge Valve for the right to have a fast lane to their customers. Then we will see the $80 base video game.

That's what I would do if I were an ISP. Hell charge Google also. And I would block every Reddit subreddit that mentions the word Kodi due to piracy. That would protect Americans from themselves.
 
John Ransom said:
Absolutely nothing. I don't believe in net neutrality, net neutrality is only a thing because the main internet providers are mostly monopolies, when they started they were legally enforced monopolies. Today it is maintained mostly through local laws making it extremely hard to do business. Its important context because as usual instead of solving the problem we try to solve the symptom.
Click to expand...

The monopolies are mostly maintained by collusion. The big ISPs create borders and they do not cross them. There are streets in the same town/city where one side has one ISP and across the street is another and they use the same poles and trenches for both sides. There is a few cities that were lobbied to give certain ISPs domain over an area and that is BS but that is at the city level and not the FCC level. And it was all done decades before NN regs. The NN regs just make them treat all traffic the same which helps fight anti-competitive behavior. Removing NN is just to fuck over the consumers and that is all. Not all regulation is bad, sure some is and it should be absolved but not all of it.
 
cageymaru said:
How is that false? They are going to charge Netflix millions to get a fast lane for their customers and Netflix is going to raise their monthly rates to their customers.

They are more than likely going to charge Valve for the right to have a fast lane to their customers. Then we will see the $80 base video game.

That's what I would do if I were an ISP. Hell charge Google also. And I would block every Reddit subreddit that mentions the word Kodi due to piracy. That would protect Americans from themselves.
Click to expand...
Doubt it. If that were the case we would see more outrage from web giants. They are almost entirely silent.
 
TaintedSquirrel said:
Doubt it. If that were the case we would see more outrage from web giants. They are almost entirely silent.
Click to expand...

They are outraged. They have had many meetings with Trump on it. Some even joined that tech panel that eventually dissolved because nothing changed regardless of what they said. It was nothing more than a dog and pony show for the government.

Personally I no longer care. If it gets too expensive, or restrictive, I will just find something else to do.
 
TaintedSquirrel said:
Doubt it. If that were the case we would see more outrage from web giants. They are almost entirely silent.
Click to expand...

That's because they're just going to pass along the price increases to their customers. It won't hit their bottom line. Facebook and Google will charge their advertisers more and Netflix will probably increase rates. They've all been against this but it won't end up hitting their bottom line much. Because their advertisers, or you, will be covering the the cost.
 
I see places like facebook, google, youtube, netflix, linkedin, twitter, ebay, amazon, and hulu having an expensive future.
 
Depressing that this is going through. Soon will be the days when webpages will be running advertisements telling you to call your ISP, not cable providers.
 
Here's the fundamental argument:

Republicans et al hate government. They want markets to be free and open. Thus, exterminating Net Neutrality, in their eyes, will "free" companies of the evil Government's hand and allow companies to thrive and the invisible hand of the market will guide consumers in the fact they will either reject or accept companies' views/services/etc because of competition and less regulation.

The fact of the matter is that this is complete and utter bullshit.

1) ISPs and Media Companies have legal monopolies on entire segments of the U.S. population. Thus, these companies can pretty much set prices for their services that are not elastic in terms of supply and demand. You get one service. You have to pay for it. So companies charge ridiculous prices because there is literally no other alternative or very few other alternatives.
2) The barrier to entry FOR these media and ISP companies is EXTREMELY large thus prohibiting the free market expansion of startups and other small businesses. Therefore, larget companies retain their monopolies and again, charge whatever the hell they want and Joe Consumer can't do crap.
3) So what happens when we do have all these monopolies and segments of the U.S. that have no choice? The logical answer is that if you continue to do nothing and you open the floor for these companies to now segment the internet their providing, they will undoubtedly start charging the same consumers who have no other choice to use services they get for free under net neutrality, thus screwing them over more.

The ONLY answer to all of this is deregulation, divestiture of assets, de-monopolization, consumer protection groups, and watchdog services that prevent ISPs from screwing consumers over. This creates a check on these companies who break the rules and do whatever they want because they literally don't have to worry about consequences or consumers changing services.

Capitalism is fine.
Unchecked capitalism is not.
 
John Ransom said:
Absolutely nothing. I don't believe in net neutrality, net neutrality is only a thing because the main internet providers are mostly monopolies, when they started they were legally enforced monopolies. Today it is maintained mostly through local laws making it extremely hard to do business. Its important context because as usual instead of solving the problem we try to solve the symptom.
Click to expand...

Then how do you fix it? The ship has sailed on competition in some areas. My in-laws are up in Bethany Beach, DE. Only ONE single TV/Internet provider. Mediacom. Horrible service. Horrible speeds. Severe lack of channels. Really damned expensive for very little. Even more expensive if you want to actually have good speeds and more channels.

There is no fix for that monopoly. You won't see FiOS running fiber up there. Comcast and Cox aren't going to spend the money to run the lines they need. That's why NN is needed so that while Mediacom is already screwing their users they at least can't nickel and dime them for access to things like Netflix.
 
Welp a majority of the people who post on here wanted this administration in the White House. They knew this was going to happen. Yay for no net neutrality?
 
America, the rest of the world already thinks your stupid. Don’t prove them right by letting this happen.

But while i’m here, I will let you in on a little secret... The rest of the world knew as soon as your President placed Pai in charge, that it was game over. Unfortunately most of you aren’t interested or intelligent enough to see what was happening.

Good luck, and sorry in advance.
 
Last edited:
TaintedSquirrel said:
I can't believe people think this will actually happen.
What about when Joe Schmo wakes up one day and tries to go watch Netflix and sees a big error that says "If you want to access this website, pay an extra $10/month"? Now imagine that happening TO THE ENTIRE COUNTRY. Imagine it with something like Facebook or Twitter (I've seen people joke about the ISP selling a "Social Media Package").

Site-specific fast lanes will never, ever happen. You can't take away something people had for free for the last 30 years and then try to charge it back to them at extra cost. For-fucking-get about it.

Pissing off every single American is not a great business strategy and not even the big telecoms are that suicidal.
Click to expand...

Except if this passes and it is made legal, it won't matter if it pisses off everybody. What are they going to do, sue? Good luck winning that. Even a class action wouldn't work as the internet providers can just point to the recent ruling and say "hey, we did everything perfectly legally".

Basically they will laugh at the angry customers knowing full well their choices are pay up, or do without. There will be no recourse.
 
TaintedSquirrel said:
Doubt it. If that were the case we would see more outrage from web giants. They are almost entirely silent.
Click to expand...

Think carefully about your words, the "web giants" you see now days the web giants are the powerful ones looking to get a stranglehold. They actually have a play here. Let' take Netflix, they are big and they can afford to pay millions or may be billions. Then Comcast offers a plan with unlimited Netflix, but really Netflix paid for your access.

So how does that work in their favor? Simple it makes sure that it is nearly impossible for some smaller streaming service to gain traction and challenge Netflix. You don't want to waste your limited bandwidth on someone else.

Facebook, Google, Apple, Microsoft, they can afford to buy their way into a monopoly position, smaller players and new startups cannot. So we end up in a world where not only do the cable cos have local monopolies but websites do too.
 
They are when there is no other choice.

TaintedSquirrel said:
I can't believe people think this will actually happen.
What about when Joe Schmo wakes up one day and tries to go watch Netflix and sees a big error that says "If you want to access this website, pay an extra $10/month"? Now imagine that happening TO THE ENTIRE COUNTRY. Imagine it with something like Facebook or Twitter (I've seen people joke about the ISP selling a "Social Media Package").

Site-specific fast lanes will never, ever happen. You can't take away something people had for free for the last 30 years and then try to charge it back to them at extra cost. For-fucking-get about it.

Pissing off every single American is not a great business strategy and not even the big telecoms are that suicidal.
Click to expand...
 
TripleSeven said:
So, for example, we have our base data plan for 20 euros, that includes comms and 5gb of internet traffic, and then we can add a data plan for 10gb to use on video sites for another 6 euros.
Click to expand...
But this is riduclous. 10GB is 10GB, it doesnt matter if you download 10GB in text files from wikipedia or 10GB in snapchat video streams. What they are trying to do is get you locked into a particular set of websites like a TV package.
 
homernoy said:
Hey, another reason to love the Republicans. The never fuck over citizens to appease corporate interests, so as an individual I feel safe and secure. Thank goodness for that........
Click to expand...

You have a lot of brainwashed ones right here on [H] that voted these assholes in and the rest of us have to pay for their stupidity.
 
TaintedSquirrel said:
I can't believe people think this will actually happen.
What about when Joe Schmo wakes up one day and tries to go watch Netflix and sees a big error that says "If you want to access this website, pay an extra $10/month"? Now imagine that happening TO THE ENTIRE COUNTRY. Imagine it with something like Facebook or Twitter (I've seen people joke about the ISP selling a "Social Media Package").

Site-specific fast lanes will never, ever happen. You can't take away something people had for free for the last 30 years and then try to charge it back to them at extra cost. For-fucking-get about it.

Pissing off every single American is not a great business strategy and not even the big telecoms are that suicidal.
Click to expand...

We live with ISP monopolies in most regions, you think they give a shit what you think?
 
They sky is falling, the sky is falling!

The hyperbole here rivals a Star Citizen fan forum.
 
mavrocket said:
Obviously you haven't read the thread...
Click to expand...

It's a shitty plan. It opens doors that maybe shouldn't be opened. Simple as that. It invites pricing models, oddly bundled services, that many people (like the people on this site as an example) probably don't want or need half the time.

Now this MIGHT be hyperbole, but it's well within the realm of possibility. How about they bundle access to all of your favorite porn sites. Now you have a nice "porn package" showing up on your bill. Maybe you're lucky like me where pretty much the only time I bother with porn is actually WITH my wife, but many people aren't lucky, and maybe they don't want that as a line item on their bill. Yes, I'm making an extreme example, and who knows, maybe it won't ever be like that, but things like this bill, make shit like this just a STEP more possible. Also, I'm sure many people don't give a fuck if that IS a line item on their bill. Still, one more shitty little possibility for some people.

I have a multi-user Netflix account. I have a wife and four kids. I have five separate Steam accounts. We use a LOT OF FUCKING DATA in my house. I've got one kid with a PS4 and one with an XBOne that I pay subscriptions for. Why would I all of a sudden want to have to pay for a package that has enough bandwidth to support all of that on top of paying for the services themselves, AND the games/media we pay for on top of that. Not to mention Amazon Prime fees, the movies I occasionally buy on there, the channels I pay for there, etc. I already pay something like $100 a month for JUST internet service through Comcast. Now why would I want to give them ANY additional options for billing me beyond all of these bills I already pay?

You know, it may never come to any of that. However, large providers are out to make money. Anything that allows them to make a little more, you can bet they're going to exploit it. If you like that, good for you. Some people don't. This could just be one more way to repackage and resell the same thing we already have. Maybe it's all surface. Maybe not though. I'm of the opinion that things are already working ok, people are somewhat ok with how things are, so why mess with it? Why not focus all this effort on their part on something else?
 
No "net neutrality" laws for decades -> everything is fine
"net neutrality" laws for 18 months -> nothing changes
Go back to how it was for decades -> OMG MAD MAX INTERNET COMCAST RUNS BARTERTOWN
 
c_porter said:
No "net neutrality" laws for decades -> everything is fine
"net neutrality" laws for 18 months -> nothing changes
Go back to how it was for decades -> OMG MAD MAX INTERNET COMCAST RUNS BARTERTOWN
Click to expand...

You're not incorrect there. Not much has changed. Not much PROBABLY will change now either. However, it does make it just THAT much more possible. Look at games and all the big companies like 2K, Ubi, EA (yes, the shitty companies :p ) and their microtransaction-only policies JUST NOW coming into existence. Things are evolving. EVERYTHING is moving more and more toward a nickel and dime the fuck out of everyone for everything model that ANYTHING that could be even a mild deterrent will become more and more welcome to consumers I think. It's the potential for abuse that looks so ugly.

Just wait until Microsoft drops their traditional Office packages for 365 only. Now your ISP is going to sell you an Office 365 Accelerator package that gives you more than 256Kb bandwidth to access your office files. :p

Oh, Comcast detects your constant connections to AWS that you store a lot of data or some VMs in. Now there's an extra AWS surcharge on your bill.

All hypothetical, but does any of it sound good to you?
 
FCC will also order states to scrap plans for their own net neutrality laws.
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy...crap-plans-for-their-own-net-neutrality-laws/

It isn't clear yet exactly how extensive the preemption will be. Preemption would clearly prevent states from imposing net neutrality laws similar to the ones being repealed by the FCC, but it could also prevent state laws related to the privacy of Internet users or other consumer protections. Pai's staff said that states and other localities do not have jurisdiction over broadband because it is an interstate service and that it would subvert federal policy for states and localities to impose their own rules.

Here in North Carolina, some areas that the ISPs say are covered with broadband aren't and they have been collecting subsidiaries from the federal government for decades to serve these communities. So some of the larger cities were trying to build their own infrastructure and expand broadband to the suburbs and country living folks. With this announcement that states will lose their rights to regulate broadband within their own borders, I would assume that this effectively kills expansion of broadband to rural areas that the states were doing. The broadband providers have sued the state to prevent them from implementing their own internet services as they have argued that it is illegal for the state or local government to build its own broadband infrastructure. Verizon earlier this year announced that they were going to pull their wireless broadband option, but now it seems that the state won't even be able to build their own network to serve their citizens.

And before you say, "That's two different issues!" I'm going to bet you a dollar that it gets rolled into one by the ISP lobbyists.

Here is my local electric company Roanoke Electric Cooperative trying to get broadband out to its customers that are supposed to be covered by DSL, Cable, etc but in actuality you can't even get 56K dialup here because the infrastructure is so outdated. And yes, many of the people live just outside the city.

Roanoke Electric Cooperative’s broadband initiative enters next phase.
http://roanokeelectric.com/content/roanoke-electric-cooperative’s-broadband-initiative-enters-next-phase
 
J3RK said:
You're not incorrect there. Not much has changed. Not much PROBABLY will change now either. However, it does make it just THAT much more possible. ... stuff ... All hypothetical, but does any of it sound good to you?
Click to expand...

The FCC will use their Title II power over the internet to turn US telecom into 1984-style state pripagando that bans all political dissent and brainwashes everyone into accepting a hellish existence.

Sure, it's a hypothetical, but does that sound good to you?
 
c_porter said:
No "net neutrality" laws for decades -> everything is fine
"net neutrality" laws for 18 months -> nothing changes
Go back to how it was for decades -> OMG MAD MAX INTERNET COMCAST RUNS BARTERTOWN
Click to expand...

I couldn't connect to Youtube for years until Net Neutrality happened. It was Ring Around the Rosie arguing with my ISP about my equipment as they wanted me to rent a modem for an additional $10 a month and wanted to sell me Cable TV with a $50 phone service too. I even bought a modem identical to the ones on their network and they blamed it also for the buffering. Overnight after net neutrality went into effect I could connect and stream without buffering. I wonder how long it will take for me to start buffering after it is reversed?
 
Don't be worried about access to YouTube, Hulu, or Netflix.

Worry about paying more to access [H]. It will be the small websites that could suffer the most. The big guys will enter deals to lower the cost of accessing them, and by extension choke off smaller sites.
 
c_porter said:
The FCC will use their Title II power over the internet to turn US telecom into 1984-style state pripagando that bans all political dissent and brainwashes everyone into accepting a hellish existence.

Sure, it's a hypothetical, but does that sound good to you?
Click to expand...

I think Donald Trump is already on his way to doing this.......... and more
 
The best way to fight for NN and to best implement it for the long-term is for Congress to pass laws to enshrine NN into law. As it is now, all it would take would be a Democratic president for it to be changed back and etc, etc.

Contact your members of Congress.
 
Reminds me of Lily Tomlins character on SNL.. "We're the phone company, we don't care"... that's exactly whats going to happen. They'll tell you how they are going to screw you, and then they are going to screw you... and when you scream about it, they will point to when they told you that you were about to get screwed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top