It is the ultimate goal of ISPs. They wanted a system exactly like the cable channel model.Has any ISP ever proposed anything like what is depicted in this image?
It is the ultimate goal of ISPs. They wanted a system exactly like the cable channel model.Has any ISP ever proposed anything like what is depicted in this image?
Logic and common sense led me to this conclusion...What lead you to this conclusion? Do you know what this net neutrality actually is?
Speeds will not slow and there will still be tiered speed packages.Logic and common sense led me to this conclusion...
For 2 reasons:
Govt regulations for the most part do not bring the bottom up, they always bring the top down.
Secondly, and the most obvious, if all bits are equal now then when the system is reaching peak capacity the ISP will be forced to slow down the entire pipeline. They will most likely counter this by placing caps on usage by customers.
I just find it amazing that some of you like the fact that 3 un-elected people have made this decision without even revealing what all of the regs are going to be. I just dont understand your thinking...Also remember, Republicans will be in charge sooner or later and they will wield the power to do as they please with the internet. I hope you like that thought...
No that is not what I was saying. I mean Comcast was slowing down Netflix traffic only. So while your speeds were great on everything else they would be s*** when using netflix to stream anything it would only effect your netflix streaming. So lets say you had 60 down you netflix stream would still be in SD and not change into HD like it should. The min Netflix paid comcast off on a peering agreement those streams all like magic worked just fine and everyone got HD streams. Comcast pretty much said pay us or we will slow down your connection to our customers.
That is what Net Neutrality is there to stop and s*** like in this pic.
My thing is it won't be long before the government get to act dub and demand fast
If that's the case Im fine. I selfishly enjoy my fast internet.Speeds will not slow and there will still be tiered speed packages.
The current FCC will rip them apart of they attempted to stifle connections.If that's the case Im fine. I selfishly enjoy my fast internet.
Do you know when this goes into affect? Thank you for the info.The current FCC will rip them apart of they attempted to stifle connections.
I believe it's immediate.Do you know when this goes into affect? Thank you for the info.
Speeds will not slow and there will still be tiered speed packages.
It's because of the signature isn't it? The signature is too bulbous.^Part of the reason why people oppose this.
When the phone service when common carrier innovation didn't stifle. We got call waiting, star mother f***ing 69, DSL, etc.This needs to be restated. Internet is not going to slow down. Not sure how that conclusion could be drawn.
High speed internet is a growing business for ISPs. Cable TV growth is expected to slow in the near future. High speed Internet is not expected to slow thus they will focus on this service because that where more money will be made. It's a service that they will long support and keep competitive. The profit that ISPs make on providing Internet service is very high. There's no reason for ISPs to suddenly slow your data.
Link?It is the ultimate goal of ISPs. They wanted a system exactly like the cable channel model.
This won't go into actual effect for another couple of years, if at all. Comcast will file a lawsuit challenging it, which will cause the new rules to "pause" so that the court could let Comcast and the FCC hash it out in court.Do you know when this goes into affect? Thank you for the info.
You gave an example yourself, Netflix. Because of charging Netflix, if this was rampant, Netflix would have to increase subscription price to cover the costs. The opposite is what would be the most beneficial for ISPs, charging the customer, not corporations, for content access. You see it with HBO Go, Showtime Anywhere, etc. Need to be a subscriber to access it. It will be interesting to see how the stand alone HBO Go works out.Link?
This won't go into actual effect for another couple of years, if at all. Comcast will file a lawsuit challenging it, which will cause the new rules to "pause" so that the court could let Comcast and the FCC hash it out in court.
I tend to approach any new regulation with skepticism. Who knows what the ISPs may do now. Yes, they have tried to pull off some evil crap in the past, like throttling Netflix. As a result, Netflix agreed to pay Comcast (or was it Verizon?) a boatload of money to pay for increased infrastructure. What will they do in the future under the new rules? From my experience, government involvement usually results in increased prices. Hope that doesn't happen. I like my $35 per month for 50Mb/sec.
Has any ISP ever proposed anything like what is depicted in this image?
The people that are fearful of prices rising are over reacting because a fact that has been glanced over in this thread. The FCC has given municipalities the go ahead to create their own internet providers.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...es-against-state-limits-on-city-run-internet/
This is going to create some serious competition to ISPs. I don't see prices going up, but going down if this expands. Cities don't have shareholders to please like the telecommunications companies. Actually, the cities do, the people that live there.
I would gladly pay a monthly utility bill for gigabit internet to my city rather than verizon!
Republican brainwash is real. What if posting on this site took 20x longer to load because the ISP deemed it as not a "high priority"? We have been granted internet freedom. You don't hate freedom, do you? If so,
do they get access to the poles to run the lines? that is the big issue there. Comcast and the like will just say those are our poles and they're full.
Red/Blue Dem/Repub they are all f***ing us, they just different dildos....yea you haven't heard much objection from the GOP other than barking Cruz. no one listens to him anymore
Companies don't own the poles.do they get access to the poles to run the lines? that is the big issue there. Comcast and the like will just say those are our poles and they're full.
Companies don't own the poles.
You gave an example yourself, Netflix. Because of charging Netflix, if this was rampant, Netflix would have to increase subscription price to cover the costs. The opposite is what would be the most beneficial for ISPs, charging the customer, not corporations, for content access. You see it with HBO Go, Showtime Anywhere, etc. Need to be a subscriber to access it. It will be interesting to see how the stand alone HBO Go works out.
Just wait for the conspiracies. The FCC has to go through formal processes before the new rules become official. Then 60 days after that some of the changes take effect others will take longer. Some of the ISPs will sue. It's going to be a while before the final rules are posted. Someone will find death camps within the rules when they're finally shared.
The Content Industry Connect conference, which was held in Toronto yesterday, featured a panel of leading television executives from Bell, the CBC, Corus, Rogers, and Shaw Media. Several people were live-tweeting the event when a comment from Rogers Senior Vice President David Purdy caught my eye. According to Kelly Lynne Ashton, a media policy expert, Purdy called on the Canadian government to shut down the use of virtual private networks:
Yes. This is to make sure it doesn't get out of hand. The big hurdle I wanted them to pass was forcing ISPs to lease their cable line to other companies. That would be the end game for all ISP/Cable monopolies due the fact it would obliterate barriers to entry. That's the next step. It happened with the telephone lines and should happen with cable lines as well.Is the domination of a few cable companies so bad it's become an Antitrust issue?