Net Neutrality is Live





  • So does this mean that Comcast and the rest can no longer restrict the throughput on bittorrent?



  • Correct, at least for the moment.



  • @Dashrender said:

    So does this mean that Comcast and the rest can no longer restrict the throughput on bittorrent?

    When the ruling goes into effect. Which may be anywhere from 3 weeks to 90 days (or more). It seems that the commission has a set period of time where they can add additional comments to the ruling.



  • From what I've read it'll take a year or two before they get all the lawsuits sorted out



  • @MattSpeller said:

    From what I've read it'll take a year or two before they get all the lawsuits sorted out

    But it will be up to judges sooner than that if the law is held or allowed to be applied while the lawsuits flow.



  • @JaredBusch said:

    @MattSpeller said:

    From what I've read it'll take a year or two before they get all the lawsuits sorted out

    But it will be up to judges sooner than that if the law is held or allowed to be applied while the lawsuits flow.

    This seems to be what most I see most. The ruling will be applied despite ongoing lawsuits, when/if lawsuits succeed then the ruling will be amended/removed.



  • This is the part of things that is wrong and why I really do not like them applying Title II.
    Yes we need something here, but Title II itself is old and outdated.

    Of course with the do nothing political mindset that we have running the U.S. maybe this is the only thing that could get put in place.

    In another expansion of its authority, the agency claimed power to judge whether Internet service providers offer fair terms for accepting Web traffic from the likes of video streamer Netflix and data shippers such as Cogent Communications Holdings Inc. and Level 3 Communications Inc.



  • @Dashrender According to Mark Cuban, it means that QVC can't be on Comcast any more. The logic escapes me so far.



  • @doyle.jack said:

    @Dashrender According to Mark Cuban, it means that QVC can't be on Comcast any more. The logic escapes me so far.

    Um.... okay, interesting.



  • @scottalanmiller said:

    Um.... okay, interesting.

    Yeah, he says it in this video: http://www.breitbart.com/video/2015/02/26/cuban-fcc-net-regs-will-spill-over-tv-as-you-know-it-is-over/

    I'm still trying to comprehend the silliness of his comments.



  • @doyle.jack said:

    @Dashrender According to Mark Cuban, it means that QVC can't be on Comcast any more.

    And nothing of value would be lost there.



  • @doyle.jack said:

    @scottalanmiller said:

    Um.... okay, interesting.

    Yeah, he says it in this video: http://www.breitbart.com/video/2015/02/26/cuban-fcc-net-regs-will-spill-over-tv-as-you-know-it-is-over/

    I'm still trying to comprehend the silliness of his comments.

    Ah, you are misreading this. I read this and the only bit I got was "Mark Cuban is a moron and doesn't know the difference between a LAN and the Internet and should stop talking."



  • @scottalanmiller said:

    Ah, you are misreading this. I read this and the only bit I got was "Mark Cuban is a moron and doesn't know the difference between a LAN and the Internet and should stop talking."

    I actually didn't read anything. I just watched the video and listened to the dummy talk.



  • @doyle.jack said:

    @scottalanmiller said:

    Ah, you are misreading this. I read this and the only bit I got was "Mark Cuban is a moron and doesn't know the difference between a LAN and the Internet and should stop talking."

    I actually didn't read anything. I just watched the video and listened to the dummy talk.

    I feel sorry for you.



  • I'm trying to follow Mark's logic - he's saying that the cable companies will have to change how they deliver cable channels based on this ruling? is that where QVC comes into the conversation?

    What does a dedicated service for specific channels have to do with an open service like access to the internet? They aren't the same at all. In the case of Cable, you are paying a fee for access to specific channels, with an ISP you're paying for access to this thing called the internet, with access to the nearly infinitely different sites on it, many of which come and go at a drop of a hat.



  • So basically he is saying that people will only get shows that you want to watch and not pay for shows you don't want to watch. What is the problem?



  • Also does anybody younger than 50 actually watch QVC?



  • I agree with Mark about QVC going away. They cannot compete on the internet when you are a click away from amazon, ebay, or many other sites that have low, low prices.

    That being said, I don't have a problem with QVC going away. I understand he probably does since its a big money maker for him. Boohoo a billionaire loses a source of income.



  • Let's hope that Net Neutrality makes Mark Cuban go away.



  • I'm trying to figure out how we go from having this managed service Cable TV to a forced condition where TV shows have to delivered no different than say, Youtube? What's going to force this change? simply because they are all digital bits? I call BS.

    I buy a pipe to a dedicated service - that service is called cable, and that service does not currently allow me to choose the channels I want. Some how making the internet Title II makes the dedicated connection between my house and my cable provider subject to the Open Internet laws? Please explain that to me. I think this is where Scott got the LAN vs Internet comment before. Your connection to a cable provider for Cable TV is like a LAN, it's all contained, it has nothing to do with the internet. And then there is the internet where I have access to anything anyone publishes to it.



  • Now, if the Cable TV companies decide to move all of their content to Internet delivery, of course if that same company is also providing ISP access, they can't add priority to their content vs anything else, but they could still force bundling upon people.. oh you want ESPN, OK fine, but you can only buy ESPN with a bundle that includes QVC. Just because you never watch QVC doesn't make a difference.



  • @Dashrender said:

    I'm trying to figure out how we go from having this managed service Cable TV to a forced condition where TV shows have to delivered no different than say, Youtube? What's going to force this change? simply because they are all digital bits? I call BS.

    I buy a pipe to a dedicated service - that service is called cable, and that service does not currently allow me to choose the channels I want. Some how making the internet Title II makes the dedicated connection between my house and my cable provider subject to the Open Internet laws? Please explain that to me. I think this is where Scott got the LAN vs Internet comment before. Your connection to a cable provider for Cable TV is like a LAN, it's all contained, it has nothing to do with the internet. And then there is the internet where I have access to anything anyone publishes to it.

    Cable will go away. There is no longer a need for it. That's what he is talking about. With Netflix and Hulu, people no longer want to pay $75 for 250 channels when they only watch 10. Dish TV is actually already working on a service like this.





  • @IRJ said:

    @Dashrender said:

    I'm trying to figure out how we go from having this managed service Cable TV to a forced condition where TV shows have to delivered no different than say, Youtube? What's going to force this change? simply because they are all digital bits? I call BS.

    I buy a pipe to a dedicated service - that service is called cable, and that service does not currently allow me to choose the channels I want. Some how making the internet Title II makes the dedicated connection between my house and my cable provider subject to the Open Internet laws? Please explain that to me. I think this is where Scott got the LAN vs Internet comment before. Your connection to a cable provider for Cable TV is like a LAN, it's all contained, it has nothing to do with the internet. And then there is the internet where I have access to anything anyone publishes to it.

    Cable will go away. There is no longer a need for it. That's what he is talking about. With Netflix and Hulu, people no longer want to pay $75 for 250 channels when they only watch 10. Dish TV is actually already working on a service like this.

    Cable in it's current form might go away but I don't think everything is headed to on-demand only.. there will likely still be normal broadcast channels just using IPTV over the local ISPs network. Just a different delivery method. Many have actually started doing this.



  • Saw this earlier! Great win for the world!



  • If I understood the goober's logic right, it went something like this...

    Net Neutrality is based on the idea that all bits are created equally and should be treated equally.

    He then says that television transmissions across cable are bits just like the Internet is.

    Companies can't pay for a "fast lane" or "paid prioritization" on the Internet under these new regulations. Therefore, the same should apply to cable television. QVC actually pays the cable provider to carry their channel. And, since it's using up bits that it wouldn't be using up had QVC not paid for it, then it would not be allowed.

    He goes into it at 4:58 in the video. I feel stupider just watching him. Maybe I should bow out and quit trying to understand what he's even trying to say. I think Net Neutrality is a good thing, of course.

    A tweet from Mark Cuban: https://twitter.com/mcuban/status/570957428226809857

    I agree with @scottalanmiller, it would be great if the FCC could make him go away.



  • Good news, it would seem.



  • Good news on neutrality, I mean, not that Cuban is able to make public commentary.