Senate Vote Passes to Save Net Neutrality

Discussion in '[H]ard|OCP Front Page News' started by Kyle_Bennett, May 16, 2018.

  1. Kyle_Bennett

    Kyle_Bennett El Chingón Staff Member

    Messages:
    52,843
    Joined:
    May 18, 1997
    We would suggest that we did not see that coming! The US Senate has voted to save Net Neutrality, and that means it is on to the House of Representatives. Should you wish to easily contact your local representative, hit this link to do it the easy way!


    BREAKING NEWS: The Senate voted to save net neutrality. Now we need the House of Representatives to do the same, or else the FCC will let ISPs like Comcast and Verizon ruin the internet with throttling, censorship and expensive new fees. Write your lawmakers now!
     
    MatthewK, DejaWiz, F.E.A.R. and 4 others like this.
  2. Derangel

    Derangel [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    15,822
    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2008
    Of course it's basically split down party lines outside of a few exceptions. Ugh. The fucking two party system at "work" like usual.
     
    runudownquick and KazeoHin like this.
  3. BSmith

    BSmith [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,035
    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2017
    It is sad that it is "BREAKING NEWS" when the idiots do what they are supposed to be doing anyway!
     
    Last edited: May 16, 2018
  4. Retronym

    Retronym Something big is coming.

    Messages:
    23,418
    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2007
    speed.png

    Help me, Congress. You're my only hope!

    :rolleyes:
     
    MatthewK, DejaWiz, knowom and 2 others like this.
  5. Derangel

    Derangel [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    15,822
    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2008
    And you're part of what 5% of the country that can get those speeds? Not that NN has fuck all to do with internet speed.
     
    FreeLow, sonsonate, Armenius and 11 others like this.
  6. spaceman

    spaceman [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    14,520
    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2005
    I already only have one choice for high speed internet. $90 for 60/10..........So yeah. Fuck giving them more power over it.
     
  7. Gweenz

    Gweenz [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,150
    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2003
    Eat it, Pai!
     
    sonsonate, J3RK and DejaWiz like this.
  8. kju1

    kju1 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,503
    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2002
    Even if the House passes it the President has to sign it. Or they have to have enough votes to overrule his veto....I just dont see it happening.
     
  9. Retronym

    Retronym Something big is coming.

    Messages:
    23,418
    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2007
    It has nothing to do with anything.

    We have the same internet as always without the legislation right now.

    It's like volcano insurance for Florida.
     
  10. gusphase

    gusphase [H]Lite

    Messages:
    75
    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2017
    Again, net neutrality laws don't actually prevent throttling or price increases. While the real problem, a lack of competition and investment in New technology remains. Net neutrality advocates can only point to incredibly extreme and unlikely scenarios to make their case, and they don't really address the real issue. I' actually in favor of "fast lanes" for certain services as long as certain rules are in place. In many ways, fast lanes already exist even under net neutrality laws. I swear, this is the abortion debate for millennials.
     
    Kinestron, Armenius, Retronym and 4 others like this.
  11. Ocean

    Ocean [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,206
    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2003
    All Republicans voted against saving net neutrality except for:
    Susan Collins (Maine), John Kennedy (Louisiana), and Lisa Murkowski (Alaska)
     
  12. modi123

    modi123 [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,789
    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2006
    Huh? Care to 'splain that one, Lucy?
     
  13. ZacharyS

    ZacharyS Gawd

    Messages:
    751
    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2006
    I know this was in jest, but net neutrality literally has nothing to do with raw internet speeds. It is about the internet companies being able to limit your access to specific parts of the internet and then charging you more to access those parts or even just restricting access outright so that you are forced to use their own services and would not be allowed to even use their competitor's.
     
  14. Derangel

    Derangel [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    15,822
    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2008
    Unlikely my ass. Care to point to me what is unlikely about what ISPs have already bloody done in the past? Are you too young to remember when Comcast throttled and blocked all torrent traffic? How about Comcast and others throttling the fuck out of Netflix in order to blackmail them into paying more for the bandwidth they were already paying for? You really think that won't happen again?
     
  15. John721

    John721 [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,598
    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2006
    Like these?
    Net Neutrality Violations History
     
    Lazer1337, MrDeaf, singe_101 and 9 others like this.
  16. ZacharyS

    ZacharyS Gawd

    Messages:
    751
    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2006
    So basically in one sentence you say that net neutrality advocates can only point to extreme and unlikely scenarios, and then in the very next sentence you admit that there are already "fast lane" services that are existing.

    You're right fast lanes do already exist, and it is is 100% bullshit. Cell phone data plans should have no data caps. Period. Fast lanes to "circumvent" those data caps by not counting x services towards it is the problem net neutrality aims to fix. Not to simply get rid of those services, but by not allowing corporations to set arbitrary limits on your data to begin with. ISPs have zero right to prioritize, snoop, or control the flow of data between users, but sure keep pretending like nearly every ISP and mobile carrier in the USA isn't actively screwing over every single one of their users.
     
    MatthewK and Darth Kyrie like this.
  17. Zarathustra[H]

    Zarathustra[H] You have not picked your own. You are stupid.

    Messages:
    24,879
    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2000
    I wonder what the chances of this passing in the house would be, and if it did, if Trump would sign it, as his FCC chief under his guidance is responsible for killing it off...
     
  18. DukenukemX

    DukenukemX 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,763
    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2005
    They shouldn't stop there. They need to go after that fucker and expose him for the corruption that's going on at the FCC. Fucker is clearly bought by Verizon.

    okay-gang-lets-see-who-ajit-pai-really-is-veri7onwireless-29588240.png
     
    sonsonate, Viper16, Wierdo and 7 others like this.
  19. Derangel

    Derangel [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    15,822
    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2008
    If the House votes down party lines? Exactly zero chance. Even without that it is unlikely to pass in the House. Reps have a pretty massive majority and most people don't have the balls to step out of line with what their party says.
     
  20. DukenukemX

    DukenukemX 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,763
    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2005
    And thanks to net neutrality, it'll stay that way.

    uyKgrYk.gif
     
  21. tetris42

    tetris42 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    4,016
    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2014
    The President does not have to sign it and it doesn't need a 2/3 majority. If he just lets it sit there for 10 days, it will pass regardless. He has to actually veto it for it to need a 2/3 majority from congress.
     
  22. BigJayDogg3

    BigJayDogg3 [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,751
    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2009
    Frankly, as someone that's a staunch supporter of net neutrality, and as a user that will pull down 20+ GB of data a month on my cell phone, I disagree with that. Unlike DSL/Cable/Fiber/etc., mobile services have an actual limit to the amount of traffic that can be delivered at a particular time. If you walk into a football game and everyone is trying to upload a 5GB video to YouTube, that's going to kill the speeds for everyone nearby. In that situation, prioritizing old man Kelly who uses .5 GB a month and just wants to send a text message and throttling me is fine in my book.

    Where I have a problem is when they want to throttle for the sake of throttling. When AT&T first started doing their throttling, I could be in a situation that would not be excessively crowded, and I'd have speeds that absolutely crawled. That I don't like.

    Prioritization during high use times is fine. Prioritization because fuck-you-that's-why is annoying.
     
  23. rgMekanic

    rgMekanic [H]ard|News Staff Member

    Messages:
    5,069
    Joined:
    May 13, 2013
    Every one of those are violations that the FTC would have stopped anyway. None of them are FCC jurisdiction.
     
    MacLeod, Kinestron, Armenius and 4 others like this.
  24. Trigneus

    Trigneus n00bie

    Messages:
    9
    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2016
    What does everyone here believe the "Net Neutrality" law actually accomplished? The primary things I've noticed since 2015 is my stagnate internet speed (8MB down/ 0.5 up - yes 0.5), and Facebook, twitter, and youtube censorship of wrong think. Shouldn't a "Net Neutrality" law prevent what I've noticed the last three years? Congress isn't known for truth in titles/advertising and I don't believe a hundreds of pages long net neutrality bill was what most people think.
     
    Kinestron, Armenius and kimura14 like this.
  25. Lakados

    Lakados Gawd

    Messages:
    594
    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2014
    Well they sort of saved it, don't let the headline fool you...... The senate bought themselves 17 more days to swing 22 key republican senators over from pro repeal to anti repeal, and even if they do manage to swing those 22 republican votes over Trump can still veto it and cause the repeal to happen anyways.

    To be fair the current Net Neutrality laws are broken and mostly unenforceable, they need a good solid rewrite from people who know how things work.
     
  26. Despotes

    Despotes Gawd

    Messages:
    763
    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2005
    Please govt save our internet because it sucked before Net "Neutrality"! ROFL!
    "Affordable" Care Act. LOL!
     
  27. kju1

    kju1 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,503
    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2002
    And you think hes gonna just let this one slide why?
     
  28. Derangel

    Derangel [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    15,822
    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2008
    The FTC might have been able to step in on some of them, but the FCC's jurisdiction is ALL interstate communication. The internet is communication therefor it falls under the FCC.
     
  29. Mut1ny

    Mut1ny [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,732
    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2013
    Why are ISP's trying so hard to get rid of it then? Think about that...
     
    haste. and Darth Kyrie like this.
  30. Lizard Testes

    Lizard Testes Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    444
    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2016
    No?
     
  31. NoOther

    NoOther [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,546
    Joined:
    May 14, 2008
    You can't really save something that did not exist in the first place...
     
    Armenius likes this.
  32. Farkle

    Farkle Lurker

    Messages:
    706
    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2007
    ...and this has nothing to do with Net Neutrality, it's not about your bandwidth service tier, it's about providers creating fast lanes for particular services and potentially charging for access to those fast lanes, while the rest of the network traffic without subscription is just bulk QoS speeds (limited in comparison, with high latency routing based on whatever they pay cheapest tiered bandwidth for.)
     
  33. NoOther

    NoOther [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,546
    Joined:
    May 14, 2008
    Probably because it is shitty legislation that doesn't actually fix any problems. What the legislation does is give uneven power to services to clog up the internet and not have to pay for it. Real net neutrality would necessitate a different system than we currently have and you would have Google/Facebook/Netflix actively lobbying against it.
     
    Armenius likes this.
  34. Derangel

    Derangel [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    15,822
    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2008
    Yep because ISPs totally never did anything that NN tells them not to before NN was put in place. Those ISPs are so fucking trustworthy. They would never do anything like block competing apps from phones, throttle the shit out of competing streaming services, throttle every video service not willing to pay them, block all peer-to-peer communication services, freely admit to the Supreme Court that they would love to do fastline bullshit, block competing internet based payment services on cell devices, redirect users' search queries to search sites that paid them a fee for every redirect. That would never ever happen if we didn't have Net Neutrality.

    PS: Bush had a far large effect on increasing insurance costs than Obama. ACA has issues, but it isn't the sole cause of insurance premiums being where they are.
     
    Andy735 and Darth Kyrie like this.
  35. Trigneus

    Trigneus n00bie

    Messages:
    9
    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2016
    Perhaps ISP CEO's align with my view that ineffective regulations just waste money. If the Internet needs regulation, then don't screw around - declare internet providers as common carriers, like landline telephone. Someone can not be denied land line telephone service because they think an unapproved or unexpected way. The only online censorship allowed would be what is mandated by law instead of up being up to the whims of individual companies.
     
  36. Geforcepat

    Geforcepat Gawd

    Messages:
    810
    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2012
    Good.
    The only reason people think they care about this is because they think their netflix or whatever "streaming" service will go away. relax people your netflix will be fine. you gotta admit the internet and all media forms have done a good job of getting my generation espically. hyped and worried/rilled up over nothing. and frankly i expected better from the [H] community.
     
    Kinestron and Armenius like this.
  37. Derangel

    Derangel [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    15,822
    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2008
    The fuck are you talking about? Do you really think that Google, Netflix, etc don't pay for bandwidth? If these BILLION PLUS DOLLAR A YEAR ISPs actually updated their fucking networks there wouldn't be any congestion.
     
  38. knowom

    knowom Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    263
    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2008
    perhaps you were looking at this wrong 4 ms ping is solid
     
  39. Bigshrimp

    Bigshrimp Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    170
    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2009
    I honestly feel that no matter how many people write to their representatives and congressman, they won't save it. They could give two shits what the common folk want. They live in their own world and have their own agendas. Just look at how much progress they have made in other areas of legislation. :(
     
    tetris42 and Darth Kyrie like this.