It is the ultimate goal of ISPs. They wanted a system exactly like the cable channel model.
FCC Approves Net Neutrality Rules For 'Open Internet'. Ended by orange turd and losers.
- Thread starter Plainview
- Start date
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.
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.
^Part of the reason why people oppose this.
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.
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.
It's because of the signature isn't it? The signature is too bulbous.
When the phone service when common carrier innovation didn't stifle. We got call waiting, star mother f***ing 69, DSL, etc.
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.
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.
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!
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!
Last edited:
well that is why folks wanted Net Neutrality. I mean comcast was slowing down netflix traffic or not giving them good peering. Who knows if we could have got that screen shot in the future but it would not chock me if they would pull it if they could.
The cable and media company's tried to deny cord cutting before now they are least amet it's happening and they hate it. The mean issue with internet everywhere is the cable company's also control the internet access they're not happy with someone dropping cable and going internet only.
In Canada you guys need what we have and that is 3rd party's ISP's. They use the mean guys lines to your house but they pay and handle all the back end stuff for you. That is pretty much the only way to get unlimited data at good prices now in Canada.
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.
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,
oh shut up people don't even know whats in the full 300 pages yet far as I know. Dem brainwash is alive too well really can you brainwash voters who seem to have none in the first place? This is the government here they can take a basic good idea twist it so much it turns into the dumbest idea you've ever seen.
That I don't know. I would ask whether the poles are already owned by the city or at least the city gives permission to whom ever to construct them?
oh no I think they do in Canada. well if that is the case then great no issue for a area to run their own wires to get internet.
I don't think my Netflix example is the same as what was depicted in the image (tiered pricing for access to various sites).
In any event, with the Netflix example, the two companies came to an agreement to eliminate the throttling. Sure, it's most likely that Netflix will pass the costs onto the consumers, but does anyone really think that ISPs won't start raising their rates to "increase infrastructure"?
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.
Or you know wait till all the BS in it is out there. It can go both ways you know.
Anyway Net Neutrality should stop company's from doing dumb s*** like some rogers workers want to do. So you know rogers is one of the biggest cable company's and ISP's in Canada.
http://www.michaelgeist.ca/2015/02/rogers-executive-calls-canadian-government-shut-vpns/
Wow and people want the government to have control of the net.
http://torrentfreak.com/under-u-s-pressure-paypal-nukes-mega-for-encrypting-files-150227/
http://torrentfreak.com/under-u-s-pressure-paypal-nukes-mega-for-encrypting-files-150227/
Net neutrality is a good thing, plain and simple. Take off your anti-gov't tinfoil hat for a moment. The gov't might mismanage things, but there's a 110% certainty that Comcast/TWC/Verizon is looking to screw us over.
Companies like Comcast provide not just Internet service, but outdated cable TV service as well. You lease their crappy, refurbished equipment and pay through the nose in awful tiered service levels. This model is dying. It is obvious to everyone, but yet the cable companies cling to it.
When streaming became popular, suddenly you started seeing bandwidth caps popping up. You pay for Internet service, but suddenly if you use it too much, you get cut off. Cable companies don't want you cancelling your TV service.
At my house, I only have one viable option for internet service - TWC. We need these laws to prevent them from messing with the stuff I download.
Companies like Comcast provide not just Internet service, but outdated cable TV service as well. You lease their crappy, refurbished equipment and pay through the nose in awful tiered service levels. This model is dying. It is obvious to everyone, but yet the cable companies cling to it.
When streaming became popular, suddenly you started seeing bandwidth caps popping up. You pay for Internet service, but suddenly if you use it too much, you get cut off. Cable companies don't want you cancelling your TV service.
At my house, I only have one viable option for internet service - TWC. We need these laws to prevent them from messing with the stuff I download.
Is the domination of a few cable companies so bad it's become an Antitrust issue? So would this be just another tool to push back?
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.