FCC Net Neutrality Insanity Continues
-
@mlnews said in FCC Net Neutrality Insanity Continues:
yeah - heard about small ISP's whining (there was one on Security Now a few years ago) about how net neutrality was hurting him. /sigh. He was over subscribed for what he was selling. It's not 1998 anymore, people want to use the bandwidth they buy.
-
@coliver it's pretty easy to act malevolently when you are offered what you desperately want.
Be it a ton of money, a non-government job or whatever else.
-
@dustinb3403 said in FCC Net Neutrality Insanity Continues:
@mlnews said in FCC Net Neutrality Insanity Continues:
What? Blanket statement of "facts" without sources is completely normal, right. You don't need to see the sources of this information, right
Of course, why would you need facts and references? It's not like half of what I write ends up being references: https://www.travisdh1.net/lenovo
-
@travisdh1 said in FCC Net Neutrality Insanity Continues:
@dustinb3403 said in FCC Net Neutrality Insanity Continues:
@mlnews said in FCC Net Neutrality Insanity Continues:
What? Blanket statement of "facts" without sources is completely normal, right. You don't need to see the sources of this information, right
Of course, why would you need facts and references? It's not like half of what I write ends up being references: https://www.travisdh1.net/lenovo
Exaclty. It's not as if there isn't a record of everything he, you or I have said in a public fashion....
-
@dustinb3403 said in FCC Net Neutrality Insanity Continues:
@travisdh1 said in FCC Net Neutrality Insanity Continues:
@dustinb3403 said in FCC Net Neutrality Insanity Continues:
@mlnews said in FCC Net Neutrality Insanity Continues:
What? Blanket statement of "facts" without sources is completely normal, right. You don't need to see the sources of this information, right
Of course, why would you need facts and references? It's not like half of what I write ends up being references: https://www.travisdh1.net/lenovo
Exaclty. It's not as if there isn't a record of everything he, you or I have said in a public fashion....
Die Ajit Pai, die...
-
I honestly think he's simply sold out. He just doesn't care what ComCast or whomever else asks for so long as they pay him.
-
@dustinb3403 said in FCC Net Neutrality Insanity Continues:
The FCC still doesn't know what the internet is, and fundamentally has no hope of understanding it before Thursday's vote.
Quite frankly, i dont think a single person in Congress or working for the Executive Branch--at any level--knows what the internet is or how it works. They are all lawyers and real estate people or financial advisers, literally know-nothing jobs for know-nothing people.
-
@coliver said in FCC Net Neutrality Insanity Continues:
... no one can be this malevolent on purpose.
You're kidding, right? Some of us have to work extra hard not to turn dark side.
-
-
-
-
-
Looks like we don't get an open internet.
-
@tim_g said in FCC Net Neutrality Insanity Continues:
Looks like we don't get an open internet.
https://www.theverge.com/2017/12/14/16776154/fcc-net-neutrality-vote-results-rules-repealed
-
Well, that just totally <connection interrupted>
-
-
Project Loon and Musk's LEO satellite internet can't come soon enough.
-
This is what piques my curiosity about the whole issue. From my perspective as a consumer my access has been unchanged / unaffected for the last 10 years, let alone the last two. I understand the concept of Title II classification and the theoretical effects of today decision, but I'm curious what the "real" effects were when the regulation happened and what the "real" effects will be with the regulation being lifted.
-
@eddiejennings said in FCC Net Neutrality Insanity Continues:
This is what piques my curiosity about the whole issue. From my perspective as a consumer my access has been unchanged / unaffected for the last 10 years, let alone the last two. I understand the concept of Title II classification and the theoretical effects of today decision, but I'm curious what the "real" effects were when the regulation happened and what the "real" effects will be with the regulation being lifted.
Simply put, imagine wanting to go to Youtube, but ComCast has a service called NaziStream. In order for you to access YouTube's server, you have to go through ComCasts' network.
What ComCast can do is either charge YouTube or your ISP an additional fee to not throttle your internet service to YouTube.
Or they could just throttle your internet service (at the end of your ISPs network and throughout their network) and make recommendations to NaziStream (their competing service to YouTube) to you. Which then hurts YouTube and you and everyone else involved, because NaziStream and ComCast.
Thus passing a cost on to you, if YouTube or your ISP opts to pay the fee (which of course would be passed on to the consumer.)
-
@eddiejennings said in FCC Net Neutrality Insanity Continues:
This is what piques my curiosity about the whole issue. From my perspective as a consumer my access has been unchanged / unaffected for the last 10 years, let alone the last two.
How can you tell? As a consumer, the ISP controls your view of the world. If they want to make one site a little slower so that you stop using it, you don't perceive that as not getting access, it's just a normal part of selecting what site to go to. Or Google shifts it in the listings.
This is actually about freedom of speech and freedom of the press. It's one of the biggest deals that there can be. At this point, while they have to be subtle, the ISPs control the access to all communications and information of any importance.
