Internet Fast-Lanes Would Be Banned Under FCC Proposal

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Oh for goodness' sake, can we please just get on with the show already? Waiting around for a decision from the Federal Communications Commission is like sitting around watching grass grow.

The step would allow the FCC to regulate Internet service providers (ISPs) like public utilities, including ensuring that ISPs cannot block any Internet content. They would also be prohibited from creating so-called Internet fast-lanes for companies and websites willing to pay for faster delivery of their content.
Click to expand...
 
FCC's been on the ball recently.

This, the municipal broadband ruling, and the fine-hammer coming down on malfeasance.
 
Are you in the area for Google Fiber CombatChrisNC? I'm too far away from that area unfortunately. ;)
 
I'm in Winston presently, so I'm outside of the RDU and Charlotte areas. But it's still good for the state, the economy, and the for the US internet infrastructure on the whole - so I can't be too upset. This is a TWC state mostly, and if Google can give them a swift kick in the junk it'll be good for everyone's speed and price.

As mentioned in the other thread, I miss Salisbury's fiber. 50x50 for $45, 100x100 for $85, 1000x1000 for $105.
 
CombatChrisNC said:
FCC's been on the ball recently.

This, the municipal broadband ruling, and the fine-hammer coming down on malfeasance.
Click to expand...
Hasn't Google been dropping seriously major dough on this battle? So I guess that's what happens when a few (ignorant) rich people mess with other (smarter) rich people that base their entire business model and future survivability off of the internet.

This wasn't because they care what 'we the people' think but because they like money and cared what companies like Google thought.

My $.02 anyway.
 
I think as long as they get it right, and keep everything free and open, who cares if it is going to take them to the end of the month to let us know. As long as they get it right... If not, we burn the internet down.
 
I'll believe it when I see it. FCC's been pro-telco for so long it's hard to buy it until it's in writing.
 
Yes, companies like Amazon, Google, Netflix have been pumping cash into these fights. I wish it were just the public which had the FCC's ear, but the above companies seem to have the consumer and the public in mind when choosing their battles. I have no problems being allied with that list, in this regard.
 
CombatChrisNC said:
Yes, companies like Amazon, Google, Netflix have been pumping cash into these fights. I wish it were just the public which had the FCC's ear, but the above companies seem to have the consumer and the public in mind when choosing their battles. I have no problems being allied with that list, in this regard.
Click to expand...

For now. This generations heroes become next generations enemies...
 
Wait for the fine print. It'll probably say fast lanes are banned, but there's 8 new "slow" lanes allowed.
 
Draxanoth said:
Wait for the fine print. It'll probably say fast lanes are banned, but there's 8 new "slow" lanes allowed.
Click to expand...

I doubt that. By no fast lanes, it means no slow lanes either. It means a packet is a packet no matter what and there will be no discrimination based on the source, the contents, or the destination.
 
CombatChrisNC said:
I doubt that. By no fast lanes, it means no slow lanes either. It means a packet is a packet no matter what and there will be no discrimination based on the source, the contents, or the destination.
Click to expand...

It doesn't mean anything until we see the entirety of the implemented rules. Or have we learned nothing from the last 100 years of governance?
 
Draxanoth said:
It doesn't mean anything until we see the entirety of the implemented rules. Or have we learned nothing from the last 100 years of governance?
Click to expand...

Indeed. The last time Wheeler described his vision of Net Neutrality it literally meant the opposite of what people meant by it. We'll see if he abandoned his telco shill ways a few months later now.

I'm not buying it yet, but will try to be optimistic.
 
Pure-Platinum-190 said:
Hasn't Google been dropping seriously major dough on this battle? So I guess that's what happens when a few (ignorant) rich people mess with other (smarter) rich people that base their entire business model and future survivability off of the internet.

This wasn't because they care what 'we the people' think but because they like money and cared what companies like Google thought.

My $.02 anyway.
Click to expand...
Yup, I agree entirely... but in the end, at least us little people win. Problem though is that Obama and many cronies in Washington are bought and paid for and may block this action, or at least delay it indefinitely.
 
Great idea...no "fast lanes." Bravo to the mental depth it took to come up with such a brilliant notion. There are no fast lanes--effective the day the government decrees that all ISPs everywhere must furnish the same bandwidth all the time to each and every customer, even if, say, Mom & Pops Sporting Goods doesn't need the bandwidth that Netflix consumes--simply because the two businesses are completely different and require completely different "lanes" for their central businesses. But they can't have different bandwidth, that would be morally wrong, says the majority of the FCC! If such regulations have the unintended effect of pricing little M&P's Sporting Goods right out of the Internet business market, killing all "fast lanes" is still the right thing to do, and it's because the government said so, and for no other reason. What a great reason for "no fast lanes"...! What's next for an Encore? (What can the government screw up next, I wonder? The space program? The university system? What? Medical treatment--uh, scratch that--already screwed! )

If you've looked at many of the asinine public statements coming from these politically appointed, politically motivated FCC Commissioners, and you aren't absolutely horrified by the degree of technical ignorance that exists among those five (5) individuals then there's something wrong with your reading comprehension...;) Yea, just 5 non-technical, political appointees--who are suddenly tasked with setting Internet policy in the US for all 320,000,000 Americans--gag, choke--how did *that* happen? The stupidity here is monstrous. Just the sort of thing that government bureaucracies do best...!

"The Internet? Nothing wrong there--it's great--so, yea, we wouldn't be your personal, loving government if we didn't try to ruin it, would we?"
 
CombatChrisNC said:
I'm in Winston presently, so I'm outside of the RDU and Charlotte areas. But it's still good for the state, the economy, and the for the US internet infrastructure on the whole - so I can't be too upset. This is a TWC state mostly, and if Google can give them a swift kick in the junk it'll be good for everyone's speed and price.

As mentioned in the other thread, I miss Salisbury's fiber. 50x50 for $45, 100x100 for $85, 1000x1000 for $105.
Click to expand...

who in salisbury was offering these speeds?
 
CombatChrisNC said:
I doubt that. By no fast lanes, it means no slow lanes either. It means a packet is a packet no matter what and there will be no discrimination based on the source, the contents, or the destination.
Click to expand...

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA that's funny. Wait until the laywers put it in writing before you determine what it actually means. It will be some bloated ambiguous piece of shit with so many loopholes nothing will change.
 
Ducman69 said:
Yup, I agree entirely... but in the end, at least us little people win. Problem though is that Obama and many cronies in Washington are bought and paid for and may block this action, or at least delay it indefinitely.
Click to expand...

Obama really? You don't seriously believe he is going to be the one to block regulations for large corporations right? Oh that's right, the new congress loves regulating business, it will definately be obama that fucks this up... I'm going to take that as a joke, because if it's not it doesn't shine a good light on you....
 
Wierdo said:
Indeed. The last time Wheeler described his vision of Net Neutrality it literally meant the opposite of what people meant by it. We'll see if he abandoned his telco shill ways a few months later now.

I'm not buying it yet, but will try to be optimistic.
Click to expand...

Well that didn't take long:

http://arstechnica.com/business/2015...s-old-clients/

Wheeler wrote. "For example, there will be no rate regulation, no tariffs, no last-mile unbundling. Over the last 21 years, the wireless industry has invested almost $300 billion under similar rules, proving that modernized Title II regulation can encourage investment and competition."
Click to expand...

No last-mile unbundling, so little progress. Big talk, action falls short as usual.
 
Wierdo said:
Well that didn't take long:

http://arstechnica.com/business/2015...s-old-clients/



No last-mile unbundling, so little progress. Big talk, action falls short as usual.
Click to expand...

Depends on what you wanted ... they are looking at preserving the open aspects of the internet (which this would allow them to do and mandate) ... if they try to control pricing and access they would incur the wrath of Wall Street and the States ... seems like a reasonable compromise
 
Thank god the government is stepping in and preventing people from spending money!

People are too stupid to spend their own money correctly.

Really, we should just get lifestyle credits from the government instead of currency, when you think about it.
 
kbrickley said:
Depends on what you wanted ... they are looking at preserving the open aspects of the internet (which this would allow them to do and mandate) ... if they try to control pricing and access they would incur the wrath of Wall Street and the States ... seems like a reasonable compromise
Click to expand...

I'm not so much concerned about that part, just the unbundling of the last mile would've let multiple ISPs offer services to each household ala Europe, but now the only competition will come from expensive and pointless investment in multiple lines, a major obstacle to having a free market in this sector imho.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top