Author Topic: Net Neutrality  (Read 2937 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline 9999hp

  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 116
  • Location: Present
Net Neutrality
« on: Tue, 21 November 2017, 16:28:32 »
Anyone else read the news? What do ya'll think about it? Initially, I was pretty damn outraged, the whole nine yards. Doing a little more digging however, and listening to different perspectives (There's very few against NN), I'm kind of at a lost. One argument is the status quo as usual (NN) the other is chaos (deregulation).

The argument is generally fear mongering tactics, which actually hold some weight this time if you go down that rabbit whole; the whole nickel and diming/censorship of the internet if NN is repealed. The other leaving power to the consumer (supposedly), and letting supply and demand decide the environment. There are several smaller pros and cons to each, however that's the gist of it.

I'm still a bit worried. As far a political sides its kind of what you'd expect. Left leans towards NN, right leans towards ANN(Anti-Net Neutrality); Left is more government, Right is less.


Online tp4tissue

  • * Destiny Supporter
  • Posts: 11778
  • Location: Official Geekhack Public Defender..
  • OmniExpert of: Rice, Top-Ramen, Ergodox, n Females
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #1 on: Tue, 21 November 2017, 16:29:42 »
Dis' is the ONLY thing i care about... and would get out of bed for..

EVERYONE ELSE..   imagine not getting full bandwidth towards your TORRENT Traffic. !!!



You would be reduced to living as the Plebs who use netflix..

Offline fohat.digs

  • * Elevated Elder
  • Posts: 5437
  • Location: 34.04 N 84.47 W
  • weird funny old guy
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #2 on: Tue, 21 November 2017, 17:24:49 »
The FCC ruled that the internet is a "common carrier" - that is - a utility - serving the public good.

The overwhelming majority of human beings, from the "far left" to the "far right" agree and believe that the internet should be open to all, just like the public roads (which you don't "pay for" directly) and utilities like electricity and telephone (which you do pay for directly), but which are obligated to provide service to everyone. That is not just a vague notion of the "social contract" but a carefully crafted component that is a cornerstone of the charters granted to those public providers.

Trump and Pai seek to re-define the internet as something that is not a "common carrier" but rather as a service that can be bought and sold by whomever and to whomever at whatever price the market might bear. The arguments by companies like Comcast and Verizon that net neutrality inhibits freedom and innovation are spurious and are totally and absolutely the opposite of the truth.

There are 2 books that I cannot recommend highly enough:

"The Master Switch"
"The Attention Merchants"

written by Tim Wu, who -surprise- is the man who actually coined the term "Net Neutrality" in the first place

Don't take my word for it, research this stuff yourself.
But what’s wrong with inequality, anyway? Answers to this question are rarely satisfying, but they do serve as a political litmus test about the kind of inequality that matters. A Marxist might concern herself with how economic inequality divides society into classes, allowing capitalists to wield wealth as a weapon, disempower workers, and extract their labor. The humanitarian position tends to prioritize sufficiency of resources and basic rights; feminists, environmentalists, and advocates for the undocumented, the disabled, and minorities would say social inequalities matter, too, and that part of the problem with economic inequality is that it reinforces them.
New research has shown us that economic, social, racial, and gender inequality are inextricably linked—and that the effect of high inequality is to create even more inequality. Many other economists have shown that high levels of inequality hurt democracy because, among other things, they allow rich people and corporations to buy the support of politicians.
- Atossa Araxia Abrahamian 2018

Online trizkut

  • * Global Moderator
  • Posts: 1185
  • Location: MA
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #3 on: Tue, 21 November 2017, 18:40:40 »
The other leaving power to the consumer (supposedly), and letting supply and demand decide the environment.



This would work if the consumers had options.  Outside of metropolitan areas most consumers are left with choosing between 1 or 2 ISPs.  This is largely due to ISPs silently agreeing not to encroach on the others' territory and reap the benefits of what are essentially localized monopolies.

This is a battle that's been fought for years now, and every month or two they try to silently repeal it while some other commotion is in the forefront.  The FCC has received 20+ million complaints about the repeal, and the site has been taken offline multiple times from sheer traffic from complaints alone.  Despite that, the FCC chooses not to even acknowledge those complaints exist when they announce the repeals. 


There's been a lot of talk about Trump opposing the AT&T-Time Warner merger, but he doesn't seem to care at all about the Sinclair-Tribune merger.


While I don't believe ISPs will immediately go the route of "pay $x to access Y site," but rather start by offering priority/better speeds to customers who enroll in double/triple play phone/tv packages.  But it's likely a slippery slope from there.  These providers are basically getting avenues to potentially double, triple, or even more by demanding more money from consumers and money from companies for prioritized traffic (they want that netflix money as they only seem capable of increasing speeds, but not being able to handle load, so they impose bandwidth caps on their customers).  Pai, and the congresspeople who are supporting the repeal preach of "bringing back innovation," but if anything, this only stifles it.  Startups will have an even harder time competing with the "big guys," as they simply won't have the funds to pay off all these ISPs in order to compete.


imagine not getting full bandwidth towards your TORRENT Traffic. !!!
 [/i][/size][/size]

This already happens; Verizon has a history of throttling traffic on certain ports or during certain hours, for example. 

Offline HotRoderX

  • Posts: 540
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #4 on: Tue, 21 November 2017, 19:56:30 »
My thoughts are simply this.. name industry the government has meddled in and not screwed up? I also think there only so far you can take pricing.. before people will just say no regardless of how much they want/need the service. I also think if someone over prices something. There a good chance innovation will come into play. That is the case we suddenly see new techonology's emerge thats a boon to everyone. I also think landline based ISP's are on borrowed time. As cell services mature and standard's become better. I think the next big boon will be cell based services. Think of how nice it be if you can suddenly get your internet to the house with out the need to have a bunch of cables and crap run. When that happens that will add a lot of choice to the market.

Online trizkut

  • * Global Moderator
  • Posts: 1185
  • Location: MA
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #5 on: Tue, 21 November 2017, 21:34:09 »
My thoughts are simply this.. name industry the government has meddled in and not screwed up? I also think there only so far you can take pricing.. before people will just say no regardless of how much they want/need the service. I also think if someone over prices something. There a good chance innovation will come into play. That is the case we suddenly see new techonology's emerge thats a boon to everyone. I also think landline based ISP's are on borrowed time. As cell services mature and standard's become better. I think the next big boon will be cell based services. Think of how nice it be if you can suddenly get your internet to the house with out the need to have a bunch of cables and crap run. When that happens that will add a lot of choice to the market.


And when you hear about stories about ISPs like Comcast trying to block municipal fiber startups from even existing, or the number of net neutrality violations ISPs have had despite the rules, do you really think the consumers are going to be able to do anything?  4G/LTE still suffers from difficulties in rain/cloudy conditions.  Do you think Ajit Pai, a former Verizon lawyer, has the public's best interest in mind? 

Cellular unlimited data plans are a scam to begin with, they have the same soft caps that ISPs have, but only with a lower limit (usually 25-50GB).  And then you're throttled to 3G.  And 3G networks are no longer being maintained, so don't expect the 3G speeds you were used to pre-4G.  And they absolutely HATE when you use your phone to tether data as an alternative to internet.  So don't expect that to be a viable alternative.  One final note, the smaller cellular companies simply lease cell tower access from the bigger companies (many of whom are also ISPs).  So if the ISPs are bad, why would a cell network be a viable alternative?


Offline _rubik

  • Posts: 431
  • Location: 192.168.x.x
  • Typing on: GH60 + 65G Zealios
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #6 on: Tue, 21 November 2017, 21:41:16 »
I hate to bring personal politics into this and engage in some good ole' ad hominem reasoning, but a large reason the FCC is largely ignoring the complaints of the general public is because Ajit Pai is biased as all hell.

From his wiki page:
Quote
Pai left his Department of Justice post in February 2001 to serve as Associate General Counsel at Verizon Communications Inc., where he handled competition matters, regulatory issues, and counseling of business units on broadband initiatives.

Take that how you will, but it's hard not to see how that would impact his policy positions.

This would work if the consumers had options. 

While I believe this is a complex issue on both the socially and economically sides, I also believe that conservative policy makers are applying their financial experience into a field where they are uneducated: tech. Additionally, their economic models are entirely too optimistic and idealistic. While yes, letting that market decide the fate of it's ISPs would work in theory, the market is largely restrained by a pseudo-monopoly....

And then comes ISPs freedom over content delivery, data caps, and data collection... it's a dark time for the internet.

Offline noisyturtle

  • * Exalted Elder
  • Posts: 5254
  • comfortably numb
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #7 on: Tue, 21 November 2017, 22:12:33 »
People say violence never solves anything, but I think sometimes it does.

Offline HotRoderX

  • Posts: 540
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #8 on: Tue, 21 November 2017, 22:57:51 »
My thoughts are simply this.. name industry the government has meddled in and not screwed up? I also think there only so far you can take pricing.. before people will just say no regardless of how much they want/need the service. I also think if someone over prices something. There a good chance innovation will come into play. That is the case we suddenly see new techonology's emerge thats a boon to everyone. I also think landline based ISP's are on borrowed time. As cell services mature and standard's become better. I think the next big boon will be cell based services. Think of how nice it be if you can suddenly get your internet to the house with out the need to have a bunch of cables and crap run. When that happens that will add a lot of choice to the market.


And when you hear about stories about ISPs like Comcast trying to block municipal fiber startups from even existing, or the number of net neutrality violations ISPs have had despite the rules, do you really think the consumers are going to be able to do anything?  4G/LTE still suffers from difficulties in rain/cloudy conditions.  Do you think Ajit Pai, a former Verizon lawyer, has the public's best interest in mind? 

Cellular unlimited data plans are a scam to begin with, they have the same soft caps that ISPs have, but only with a lower limit (usually 25-50GB).  And then you're throttled to 3G.  And 3G networks are no longer being maintained, so don't expect the 3G speeds you were used to pre-4G.  And they absolutely HATE when you use your phone to tether data as an alternative to internet.  So don't expect that to be a viable alternative.  One final note, the smaller cellular companies simply lease cell tower access from the bigger companies (many of whom are also ISPs).  So if the ISPs are bad, why would a cell network be a viable alternative?

Honestly I think yea consumers weld all the power. Its just news and the media really run on fear. I mean most news websites are slanted one direction are the other. I don't care what anyone say's its just common since they would be. Most news sites are paid by advertising and if they took a more centered view or just gave facts. They would lose advertising dollars to more entertaining websites. They naturally had to devolve into these things we have today. Media outlets that will spew drama and fear.. with out fact checking. They make sure they put there own personal slant on it. That way there customers can get what they want.

This story about the internet is the same one that's played out hundreds and Hundreds of times. I am sure it played out in the automotive market, Sure it played out in the electronics market, Tv market, Telephone market, etc etc... it plays out in the retail market even as we speak. There are some that feel Amazon is getting to the point where it needs to be dismantled because its playing a very dangerous game. Walmart use to be accused of being some giant retailer that was going to crush all other competitor now there scrambling to keep up cause consumers moved on. Google.. look at it could be argued that something needs to be done about them. They pretty much over see like 75% of the worlds internet traffic. They own Gmail and youtube just to name two of there bigger products. I mean so yea.. same story different companies

I don't honestly think I am going to persuade anyone's opinion but do wish people stop panicking some much and acting like its the end of the world. I wish people take a deep breath and see what happens. I read where most these roll backs are so they can better in force laws that already exist.. and also hold companies more accountable for there actions. While also giving consumers more power to weld against them. Keep in mind existing law is much more powerful then a newly written law. A company will just take it to court try to get a judge to over turn it then appeal it and leave it in the courts for 10-15 years trying to figure out exactly what the law is suppose to mean. A existing law most likely has already had that done so company is less likely to fight it knowing that there going to lose in the long run.

Online trizkut

  • * Global Moderator
  • Posts: 1185
  • Location: MA
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #9 on: Tue, 21 November 2017, 23:11:59 »
My thoughts are simply this.. name industry the government has meddled in and not screwed up? I also think there only so far you can take pricing.. before people will just say no regardless of how much they want/need the service. I also think if someone over prices something. There a good chance innovation will come into play. That is the case we suddenly see new techonology's emerge thats a boon to everyone. I also think landline based ISP's are on borrowed time. As cell services mature and standard's become better. I think the next big boon will be cell based services. Think of how nice it be if you can suddenly get your internet to the house with out the need to have a bunch of cables and crap run. When that happens that will add a lot of choice to the market.


And when you hear about stories about ISPs like Comcast trying to block municipal fiber startups from even existing, or the number of net neutrality violations ISPs have had despite the rules, do you really think the consumers are going to be able to do anything?  4G/LTE still suffers from difficulties in rain/cloudy conditions.  Do you think Ajit Pai, a former Verizon lawyer, has the public's best interest in mind? 

Cellular unlimited data plans are a scam to begin with, they have the same soft caps that ISPs have, but only with a lower limit (usually 25-50GB).  And then you're throttled to 3G.  And 3G networks are no longer being maintained, so don't expect the 3G speeds you were used to pre-4G.  And they absolutely HATE when you use your phone to tether data as an alternative to internet.  So don't expect that to be a viable alternative.  One final note, the smaller cellular companies simply lease cell tower access from the bigger companies (many of whom are also ISPs).  So if the ISPs are bad, why would a cell network be a viable alternative?

Honestly I think yea consumers weld all the power. Its just news and the media really run on fear. I mean most news websites are slanted one direction are the other. I don't care what anyone say's its just common since they would be. Most news sites are paid by advertising and if they took a more centered view or just gave facts. They would lose advertising dollars to more entertaining websites. They naturally had to devolve into these things we have today. Media outlets that will spew drama and fear.. with out fact checking. They make sure they put there own personal slant on it. That way there customers can get what they want.

This story about the internet is the same one that's played out hundreds and Hundreds of times. I am sure it played out in the automotive market, Sure it played out in the electronics market, Tv market, Telephone market, etc etc... it plays out in the retail market even as we speak. There are some that feel Amazon is getting to the point where it needs to be dismantled because its playing a very dangerous game. Walmart use to be accused of being some giant retailer that was going to crush all other competitor now there scrambling to keep up cause consumers moved on. Google.. look at it could be argued that something needs to be done about them. They pretty much over see like 75% of the worlds internet traffic. They own Gmail and youtube just to name two of there bigger products. I mean so yea.. same story different companies

I don't honestly think I am going to persuade anyone's opinion but do wish people stop panicking some much and acting like its the end of the world. I wish people take a deep breath and see what happens. I read where most these roll backs are so they can better in force laws that already exist.. and also hold companies more accountable for there actions. While also giving consumers more power to weld against them. Keep in mind existing law is much more powerful then a newly written law. A company will just take it to court try to get a judge to over turn it then appeal it and leave it in the courts for 10-15 years trying to figure out exactly what the law is suppose to mean. A existing law most likely has already had that done so company is less likely to fight it knowing that there going to lose in the long run.


You haven't listed any facts.  These are just thoughts that are running through your head, and they're incredibly uninformed. 

If repealing net neutrality is so good, why have we been fighting it for the past 3 years?  Did you even check my links as examples of what ISPs will do to you after net neutrality is repealed?  Your notes about news/media outlets and amazon/google make absolutely no sense.  By repealing net neutrality, ISPs could very well restrict access to specific news sites, further altering and restricting the views of its consumers (the same thing will likely happen with the Tribune-Sinclair merger, but with TV). 

And google and amazon, just because they have to pay a few more fees every year, that's not going to ruin them.  It's just going to make it harder for the next startup to compete with them.   


It just seems to me like you've bought into Pai's false narrative that repealing net neutrality will spur innovation, which it won't.
« Last Edit: Tue, 21 November 2017, 23:14:45 by trizkut »

Offline 9999hp

  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 116
  • Location: Present
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #10 on: Wed, 22 November 2017, 02:03:30 »
Thanks for your comments, it's help me think a little bit more clearly about it.

I'm trying to have a detached view on this subject currently, because like some I see it as a snowball that has been put into action a long time ago. Currently, I don't believe it to be in our best interest, and yes it could be, provided that many of us in the US were not limited to 1 ISP with decent speed, and a couple more with terrible ones. Some only have 1 option or no internet.

The ISP limitation is the biggest hinge, otherwise it sounds good on paper. I think the language being used is fairly misleading, and in a competitive market wouldn't be such a big deal since the ISPs would have to fight for our dollar. And without Government involvement in that scenario, would most likely (historically) be better for our wallets and experience.

As far as our part goes, and I'm really trying not to do this, but I don't think the average person either cares enough or is of strong enough fortitude to forgo the internet for a period time to show anyone we mean business. I think a sizeable portion are capable of this, but or at least in limited amounts, but not company destroying/changing levels.

For my own part, should I see any new fees levied, I plan to cut my internet down to the bare minimum or change service providers to a different(****tier speed) ISP. It may be "extreme" to only use it for necessities(Paying bills etc), should anything change with my phone, I'll go get a prepaid. Anything I can do to limit my participation further in the bull****tery.

My silver lining is that one, I have plenty of "offline" hobbies; and two, as much as I fear stifling of free speech other more oppressed countries have been getting around that for years and we might see a big migration to that. And even history serves right, we will see innovation in defiance of this in the form of projects like GOLEM, the decentralized internet; although that may not be the chosen one. In the current "meta", it seems like services like that are just BEGGING to be created and honestly I think we're gonna continue to get ****ed over by every greedy power hungry corps until the end of time unless we as a civilization can adapt and become reliant as a self-determined mass instead of these singular antigenic corporations.

I do think it's somewhat ironic that vocal complaints about the ineptitude of our government  is at an all time high, yet people want to try and appeal to their states' reps even though they put us here in the first place by not having a goddamn backbone or being out of touch with the American people.



Offline fohat.digs

  • * Elevated Elder
  • Posts: 5437
  • Location: 34.04 N 84.47 W
  • weird funny old guy
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #11 on: Wed, 22 November 2017, 06:40:11 »

You haven't listed any facts.  These are just thoughts that are running through your head, and they're incredibly uninformed. 


+1

But what’s wrong with inequality, anyway? Answers to this question are rarely satisfying, but they do serve as a political litmus test about the kind of inequality that matters. A Marxist might concern herself with how economic inequality divides society into classes, allowing capitalists to wield wealth as a weapon, disempower workers, and extract their labor. The humanitarian position tends to prioritize sufficiency of resources and basic rights; feminists, environmentalists, and advocates for the undocumented, the disabled, and minorities would say social inequalities matter, too, and that part of the problem with economic inequality is that it reinforces them.
New research has shown us that economic, social, racial, and gender inequality are inextricably linked—and that the effect of high inequality is to create even more inequality. Many other economists have shown that high levels of inequality hurt democracy because, among other things, they allow rich people and corporations to buy the support of politicians.
- Atossa Araxia Abrahamian 2018

Offline dante

  • Posts: 2553
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #12 on: Wed, 22 November 2017, 07:58:10 »
What a perfect time to return to BBS's!

Online tp4tissue

  • * Destiny Supporter
  • Posts: 11778
  • Location: Official Geekhack Public Defender..
  • OmniExpert of: Rice, Top-Ramen, Ergodox, n Females
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #13 on: Wed, 22 November 2017, 08:05:56 »
What a perfect time to return to BBS's!


You might own the car,  but they own the road..

Offline fohat.digs

  • * Elevated Elder
  • Posts: 5437
  • Location: 34.04 N 84.47 W
  • weird funny old guy
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #14 on: Sat, 25 November 2017, 08:49:44 »
www.nytimes.com/  had this to say:

“Under my proposal, the federal government will stop micromanaging the internet,” Mr. Pai said in a statement. “Instead, the F.C.C. would simply require internet service providers to be transparent about their practices so that consumers can buy the service plan that’s best for them and entrepreneurs and other small businesses can have the technical information they need to innovate.”

Millions of Americans live in what we call “single access” communities. There is only one television provider or one internet service provider. While metro communities do have some competition, in a lot of RedState America, there may be only one provider, unless you count your cell phone provider, or few options.

But, how, exactly, does that help persuade a conservative that Net Neutrality is still smart for the internet?

Conservatives have begun contending that Net Neutrality is a bad business model, micromanaging what business can and can’t do in how they provide a service to their community.

Let’s say, in a large part of conservative America, Time Warner/Charter, AT&T, Verizon or some other entity decided boy, they sure don’t like the reporting of Fox News. Fox News has been kind of mean to them lately. The response? They slow Fox News website up. Maybe they don’t like Rush Limbaugh or they think Alex Jones online TV show is a bandwidth suck and they just don’t like him. Well, they can slow him up or prevent you from visiting the website altogether.

What choice do you have as a consumer if Net Neutrality is repealed: none.

In fact, we’ve already had cases where providers have done exactly that.

www.eff.org/ said:

“ISPs have incentives to shape Internet traffic and the FCC knows full well of instances where consumers have been harmed. AT&T blocked data sent by Apple’s FaceTime software, Comcast has interfered with Internet traffic generated by certain applications, and ISPs have rerouted users’ web searches to websites they didn’t request or expect,” said EFF Senior Staff Attorney Mitch Stoltz. “These are just some examples of ISPs controlling our Internet experience. Users pay them to connect to the Internet, not decide for them what they can see and do there.”

Say that your local home owned provider in red state Nebraska, a wireless transmitter on the prairie decides it doesn’t want to carry any twitter content. They don’t like Trump. And with a flick of a switch, Twitter is inaccessible to all users on their network. Whether or not they inform someone, as Chairman Pai argues matters, is meaningless, as hundreds of their customers have no real alternative.

Companies like AT&T, Verizon and others have announced proudly their social agenda supports. What would stop them from blocking, say, all super social conservative content that goes against their stated corporate position?  Remove Net Neutrality and really, nothing.

Oh, you want to run a website that attacks LGBT characters on NBC/Universal owned networks? Well, that’ll cost you more, because they can pay more than you can to make sure your website is nearly inaccessible. Nothing would stop someone from paying a provider not for them to be in the fast lane, but to ensure you are in the slow lane for traffic. Suddenly, your content is worthless.

Abandoning Net Neutrality opens up a door to the worst of possibilities on the internet.

Conservatives think tanks and googlers will respond that the expansion of Title II and past actions point out that content-based censorship can be handled by monopolistic claims. There are a few problems with this as a standard, though. In order to invoke monopolistic claims after you’ve removed net neutrality, you’d have to show that consumers had absolutely no other options. Recent changes have allowed that 3G Cell Phone service can be equated with an alternative access to broadband technology; so, even though there are many markets where there is only one real provider, the sheer existence of alternative 3G/4G cell connections lances those protections — consumers have “some sort” of choice.

In fact, in the one main case on it — AT&T blocking FaceTime, the FCC, prior to Net Neutrality, basically gave a pass to AT&T, meaning it was consumers who ended up helping to change that decision. Great, say conservatives, proof that consumers can demand change and the reason why businesses would never do something like that again, right?  WRONG.

A battle-it-out with a high profile manufacturer of a product they carry is one thing, actively blocking or preventing their access. It is far more difficult for consumers to recognize when content is slowed down in delivery as to whether or not it is the provider or the website itself, and they have a harder time sorting out who to blame. Consumers are also less likely to jump to rally for, say, conservative or liberal websites that could go out of favor with third tier providers, and slowing down content, rather than blocking it, is not, in fact, a denial of service and as a result would not fall under Title II or the prior communication monopoly acts.

There is too much at risk for all of us.

- Chris Reeves 2017

But what’s wrong with inequality, anyway? Answers to this question are rarely satisfying, but they do serve as a political litmus test about the kind of inequality that matters. A Marxist might concern herself with how economic inequality divides society into classes, allowing capitalists to wield wealth as a weapon, disempower workers, and extract their labor. The humanitarian position tends to prioritize sufficiency of resources and basic rights; feminists, environmentalists, and advocates for the undocumented, the disabled, and minorities would say social inequalities matter, too, and that part of the problem with economic inequality is that it reinforces them.
New research has shown us that economic, social, racial, and gender inequality are inextricably linked—and that the effect of high inequality is to create even more inequality. Many other economists have shown that high levels of inequality hurt democracy because, among other things, they allow rich people and corporations to buy the support of politicians.
- Atossa Araxia Abrahamian 2018

Offline Shapey Fiend

  • Posts: 88
  • Location: Ireland
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #15 on: Wed, 29 November 2017, 05:18:39 »
This is mostly a problem in the US. They need to dismantle the monopolies. In the EU wherever you are you've generally got a choice between 7 or 8 ISP's at the very least. That's why our internet packages are cheaper and better in most cases. Our mobile phone packages are the same. I have unlimited (national calls) and 15 gig of data on my mobile phone for €20 a month.

Offline noisyturtle

  • * Exalted Elder
  • Posts: 5254
  • comfortably numb
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #16 on: Wed, 29 November 2017, 13:55:55 »
True. Even in a big tech-centric metropolis like Seattle I have literally zero other ISP options other than Comcast. THAT should be illegal. No, it is NOT the same as energy and water. Internet is a luxury service like cable television.

Offline digi

  • elite af tbh
  • * Exquisite Elder
  • Posts: 2771
  • keyboard game on fleek
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #17 on: Wed, 29 November 2017, 14:28:18 »
I like it, it will force people to go outside again. TP will get the Vitamin D he needs and return to eating meat.

Online tp4tissue

  • * Destiny Supporter
  • Posts: 11778
  • Location: Official Geekhack Public Defender..
  • OmniExpert of: Rice, Top-Ramen, Ergodox, n Females
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #18 on: Wed, 29 November 2017, 14:35:30 »
I like it, it will force people to go outside again. TP will get the Vitamin D he needs and return to eating meat.



I will stockpile canned meats..  then trade them for veggie cans..

All the unsuspecting newbers will die of disease,  then I could go in and raid their stuff..

Muahahahahhahaha....

Offline digi

  • elite af tbh
  • * Exquisite Elder
  • Posts: 2771
  • keyboard game on fleek
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #19 on: Wed, 29 November 2017, 14:36:46 »
I like it, it will force people to go outside again. TP will get the Vitamin D he needs and return to eating meat.



I will stockpile canned meats..  then trade them for veggie cans..

All the unsuspecting newbers will die of disease,  then I could go in and raid their stuff..

Muahahahahhahaha....

Ooo good point, I never took you as a prepper.

Offline fohat.digs

  • * Elevated Elder
  • Posts: 5437
  • Location: 34.04 N 84.47 W
  • weird funny old guy
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #20 on: Wed, 29 November 2017, 18:08:23 »

THAT should be illegal. No, it is NOT the same as energy and water. Internet is a luxury service like cable television.


Until recently (the last 4 decades or so) there was a solid bilateral understanding that in order for utility providers to be granted monopolies in their markets, they had to agree to 2 things:

(1) Provide uniform, high-quality service to the entire area, taking the "difficult" installations along with the easy ones,

and

(2) Accept regulation and present regular reports and proposals to governing boards proving that their prices were fair and that any price increases were justified.

I cannot recommend the book "The Master Switch" by Tim Wu strongly enough if you really want to understand how this works (and doesn't).


But what’s wrong with inequality, anyway? Answers to this question are rarely satisfying, but they do serve as a political litmus test about the kind of inequality that matters. A Marxist might concern herself with how economic inequality divides society into classes, allowing capitalists to wield wealth as a weapon, disempower workers, and extract their labor. The humanitarian position tends to prioritize sufficiency of resources and basic rights; feminists, environmentalists, and advocates for the undocumented, the disabled, and minorities would say social inequalities matter, too, and that part of the problem with economic inequality is that it reinforces them.
New research has shown us that economic, social, racial, and gender inequality are inextricably linked—and that the effect of high inequality is to create even more inequality. Many other economists have shown that high levels of inequality hurt democracy because, among other things, they allow rich people and corporations to buy the support of politicians.
- Atossa Araxia Abrahamian 2018

Offline AuthenticDanger

  • Posts: 235
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #21 on: Wed, 29 November 2017, 18:23:22 »
Internet is a luxury service like cable television.

Is it? Have you tried to search for a job recently without internet access?

Staying in contact with family and colleagues is also made much easier with the Internet. You can do you banking online as well as pay your bills. You can get your news online as well.

Having access to the Internet has become all but an absolute requirement to succeed in the 21st Century.

I'm not saying that everything that's on the internet isn't luxurious. Clearly we have Netflix and other ways to indulge, but, just like how 900 numbers don't make telecom a luxury, they don't invalidate the public service nature of the Internet.
F Keys belong on the left.

Offline Shapey Fiend

  • Posts: 88
  • Location: Ireland
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #22 on: Fri, 01 December 2017, 17:37:24 »
The Internet certainly is a requirement to do anything now. Say if you're homeless it's yet another thing you've got to get sorted out like a fixed address, wait a month for an electricity bill, then buy a phone sim providing aforementioned to prove you're not a terrorist, apply for work. Internet cafes are all closing. Guess we've still got libraries.

Offline Leslieann

  • * Elevated Elder
  • Posts: 2088
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #23 on: Fri, 01 December 2017, 18:15:09 »
Having access to the Internet has become all but an absolute requirement to succeed in the 21st Century.

When even the poorest countries are getting internet and cell phones, that should tell you something.
Filco MJ2 L.E. w/Vortex case, hand milled case, custom feet, custom paint, Klaxxon key caps, lubed and o-ringed Jailhouse Blues made from vintage Cherry MX Blues, HID Liberator, stainless steel universal plate, 3d printed adapters, removable cord, sound dampened. Winkey blockoff plate | Magicforce 68 w/Outemu Blues |KBT Race S L.E. w/Ergo-Clears, custom WASD keyset | Das Pro w/browns (Costar model) | IBM Model M (x2)

Offline _rubik

  • Posts: 431
  • Location: 192.168.x.x
  • Typing on: GH60 + 65G Zealios
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #24 on: Sat, 02 December 2017, 09:59:03 »
Maybe is would be a good idea to collect partition links etc, so people can take what little action we're allowed.  :-X

Offline noisyturtle

  • * Exalted Elder
  • Posts: 5254
  • comfortably numb
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #25 on: Thu, 14 December 2017, 12:17:37 »
Well it's over - Net Neutrality is dead. Expect your internet and phone bills to triple over the next few months. RIP Democracy.  :'(

Offline fohat.digs

  • * Elevated Elder
  • Posts: 5437
  • Location: 34.04 N 84.47 W
  • weird funny old guy
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #26 on: Thu, 14 December 2017, 12:22:36 »
Thanks, Trump!
But what’s wrong with inequality, anyway? Answers to this question are rarely satisfying, but they do serve as a political litmus test about the kind of inequality that matters. A Marxist might concern herself with how economic inequality divides society into classes, allowing capitalists to wield wealth as a weapon, disempower workers, and extract their labor. The humanitarian position tends to prioritize sufficiency of resources and basic rights; feminists, environmentalists, and advocates for the undocumented, the disabled, and minorities would say social inequalities matter, too, and that part of the problem with economic inequality is that it reinforces them.
New research has shown us that economic, social, racial, and gender inequality are inextricably linked—and that the effect of high inequality is to create even more inequality. Many other economists have shown that high levels of inequality hurt democracy because, among other things, they allow rich people and corporations to buy the support of politicians.
- Atossa Araxia Abrahamian 2018

Offline MKULTRA

  • Posts: 1197
  • Location: IN
  • telling it how it is
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #27 on: Thu, 14 December 2017, 12:54:12 »
Net Neutrality laws are only necessary because of regulatory capture of the FCC and other commissions by the ISP's. Even Google had to stop their fiber projects because it was impossible to get permits to lay fiber. ISP's are monopolistic in most areas of the country. You don't have to look any further than the donations given by the ISP's to various campaigns.

Get money out of politics.

Online ygor

  • Posts: 369
  • Location: 559/697*65/*598
  • eat a butt, monkey lord
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #28 on: Thu, 14 December 2017, 13:00:27 »
****.
I generally hate all keycaps. Keycaps are for poofs. Real men touchtype on stems. Non-functional artisans are awesome, I use them for the ESC key ... escape is for cowards anyways, real men go frontal assault.

Offline _rubik

  • Posts: 431
  • Location: 192.168.x.x
  • Typing on: GH60 + 65G Zealios
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #29 on: Thu, 14 December 2017, 13:05:45 »

Offline noisyturtle

  • * Exalted Elder
  • Posts: 5254
  • comfortably numb
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #30 on: Thu, 14 December 2017, 13:15:11 »
Well they done did it. ****

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/14/technology/net-neutrality-repeal-vote.html

“We are helping consumers and promoting competition,”

Literally the exact opposite.

Offline _rubik

  • Posts: 431
  • Location: 192.168.x.x
  • Typing on: GH60 + 65G Zealios
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #31 on: Thu, 14 December 2017, 13:32:00 »
Well they done did it. ****

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/14/technology/net-neutrality-repeal-vote.html

“We are helping consumers and promoting competition,”

Literally the exact opposite.

How on earth can you promote competition when the ISPs have a monopoly on half the country.

Online Findecanor

  • Posts: 3870
  • Location: Stockholm, Sweden
  • Does not take bull****
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #32 on: Thu, 14 December 2017, 13:38:41 »
Well it's over - Net Neutrality is dead in the USA.
Fixed that for you.

Will US Internet service companies move to Canada and Mexico?
... Or could state governments override FCC rules locally?
Smoking is assault. I defend myself.
Daily driver: Phantom (Lubed Cherry MX Clear, Lasered Cherry PBT keycaps with Row A. Plastic "Frankencase". Custom firmware, Swedish layout)

Online Bastimret

  • Posts: 214
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #33 on: Thu, 14 December 2017, 13:41:22 »
Well they done did it. ****

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/14/technology/net-neutrality-repeal-vote.html

“We are helping consumers and promoting competition,”

Literally the exact opposite.

Boy I can't wait to see the buffet-like menu of ISP's I have to choose from come this time next year, so that I, as a conscientious consumer, can choose which company to give my money to!  /s

Online tp4tissue

  • * Destiny Supporter
  • Posts: 11778
  • Location: Official Geekhack Public Defender..
  • OmniExpert of: Rice, Top-Ramen, Ergodox, n Females
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #34 on: Thu, 14 December 2017, 13:50:14 »
On the one hand..

We're all going to die..


On the other hand..

PERHAPS,  having crappy internet leads to people using less of it, which may be better over the long run..

Online Bastimret

  • Posts: 214
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #35 on: Thu, 14 December 2017, 14:05:08 »
On the one hand..

We're all going to die..


On the other hand..

PERHAPS,  having crappy internet leads to people using less of it, which may be better over the long run..


We will devolve back to having to rent our porn from brick and mortar stores....

Online ygor

  • Posts: 369
  • Location: 559/697*65/*598
  • eat a butt, monkey lord
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #36 on: Thu, 14 December 2017, 14:48:35 »
TBF I remember spending just as much time online with a 56k dial-up connection... Internet speed isn't really the issue though.
I generally hate all keycaps. Keycaps are for poofs. Real men touchtype on stems. Non-functional artisans are awesome, I use them for the ESC key ... escape is for cowards anyways, real men go frontal assault.

Offline microsoft windows

  • Blue Troll of Death
  • * Exalted Elder
  • Posts: 3621
  • President of geekhack.org
    • Get Internet Explorer 6
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #37 on: Thu, 14 December 2017, 15:25:01 »
I AM OUTRAGED. I DEMAND THAT ALL INTERNET TRAFFIC BE SENT ONLY TO DEVICES RUNNING INTERNET EXPLORER 6.  IF YOU DON'T USE IE6, THEN YOU DON'T DESERVE INTERNET ACCESS.
CLICK HERE!     OFFICIAL PRESIDENT OF GEEKHACK.ORG    MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN MERRY CHRISTMAS

Offline noisyturtle

  • * Exalted Elder
  • Posts: 5254
  • comfortably numb
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #38 on: Thu, 14 December 2017, 16:29:32 »
I've never honestly wished for someone's death, but this 'man' doesn't deserve to breath the same air as civilized society

Online ygor

  • Posts: 369
  • Location: 559/697*65/*598
  • eat a butt, monkey lord
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #39 on: Thu, 14 December 2017, 17:01:11 »
I've never honestly wished for someone's death, but this 'man' doesn't deserve to breath the same air as civilized society

I generally hate all keycaps. Keycaps are for poofs. Real men touchtype on stems. Non-functional artisans are awesome, I use them for the ESC key ... escape is for cowards anyways, real men go frontal assault.

Offline 9999hp

  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 116
  • Location: Present
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #40 on: Thu, 14 December 2017, 18:10:44 »
so who's calling what now? Taking bets? How long before we're charged for premium packages?

Offline noisyturtle

  • * Exalted Elder
  • Posts: 5254
  • comfortably numb
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #41 on: Mon, 11 June 2018, 16:04:43 »
Just goes to further prove the term Democracy is utterly meaningless when a government doesn't even need to use force, they just straight up ignore the voice of the people. Even to go as far as to actively make fun of the fact there is nothing we can do to fight it, not even attempting to hide their corruption or intentions whatsoever.

I guess that's the secret to ruling a Democracy, just ignore the people's voices and do whatever you want regardless.

Offline fohat.digs

  • * Elevated Elder
  • Posts: 5437
  • Location: 34.04 N 84.47 W
  • weird funny old guy
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #42 on: Mon, 11 June 2018, 19:28:10 »

I guess that's the secret to ruling a Democracy Republic, just ignore the people's voices and do whatever you want regardless.


Fixed that for you.

Very important distinction.
But what’s wrong with inequality, anyway? Answers to this question are rarely satisfying, but they do serve as a political litmus test about the kind of inequality that matters. A Marxist might concern herself with how economic inequality divides society into classes, allowing capitalists to wield wealth as a weapon, disempower workers, and extract their labor. The humanitarian position tends to prioritize sufficiency of resources and basic rights; feminists, environmentalists, and advocates for the undocumented, the disabled, and minorities would say social inequalities matter, too, and that part of the problem with economic inequality is that it reinforces them.
New research has shown us that economic, social, racial, and gender inequality are inextricably linked—and that the effect of high inequality is to create even more inequality. Many other economists have shown that high levels of inequality hurt democracy because, among other things, they allow rich people and corporations to buy the support of politicians.
- Atossa Araxia Abrahamian 2018

Online ygor

  • Posts: 369
  • Location: 559/697*65/*598
  • eat a butt, monkey lord
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #43 on: Mon, 11 June 2018, 19:50:33 »
****.

What are our options here, fohat?
I generally hate all keycaps. Keycaps are for poofs. Real men touchtype on stems. Non-functional artisans are awesome, I use them for the ESC key ... escape is for cowards anyways, real men go frontal assault.

Offline fohat.digs

  • * Elevated Elder
  • Posts: 5437
  • Location: 34.04 N 84.47 W
  • weird funny old guy
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #44 on: Tue, 12 June 2018, 07:37:35 »

What are our options here?


Short-term: Congressional legislation that defines internet providers as "common carriers" like other utilities such as electricity and telephones.

Long-term: Constitutional amendment to get dark money out of elections.
But what’s wrong with inequality, anyway? Answers to this question are rarely satisfying, but they do serve as a political litmus test about the kind of inequality that matters. A Marxist might concern herself with how economic inequality divides society into classes, allowing capitalists to wield wealth as a weapon, disempower workers, and extract their labor. The humanitarian position tends to prioritize sufficiency of resources and basic rights; feminists, environmentalists, and advocates for the undocumented, the disabled, and minorities would say social inequalities matter, too, and that part of the problem with economic inequality is that it reinforces them.
New research has shown us that economic, social, racial, and gender inequality are inextricably linked—and that the effect of high inequality is to create even more inequality. Many other economists have shown that high levels of inequality hurt democracy because, among other things, they allow rich people and corporations to buy the support of politicians.
- Atossa Araxia Abrahamian 2018

Offline noisyturtle

  • * Exalted Elder
  • Posts: 5254
  • comfortably numb
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #45 on: Tue, 12 June 2018, 09:16:14 »
What are our options here, fohat?

Remember what happened in Ukraine a few years back? I think that's our next step.

Offline fohat.digs

  • * Elevated Elder
  • Posts: 5437
  • Location: 34.04 N 84.47 W
  • weird funny old guy
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #46 on: Tue, 12 June 2018, 10:09:35 »

Remember what happened in Ukraine a few years back?


Yes, Russia has made great strides in taking over our country, and their success is growing by the day.

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/36222733-russian-roulette

But what’s wrong with inequality, anyway? Answers to this question are rarely satisfying, but they do serve as a political litmus test about the kind of inequality that matters. A Marxist might concern herself with how economic inequality divides society into classes, allowing capitalists to wield wealth as a weapon, disempower workers, and extract their labor. The humanitarian position tends to prioritize sufficiency of resources and basic rights; feminists, environmentalists, and advocates for the undocumented, the disabled, and minorities would say social inequalities matter, too, and that part of the problem with economic inequality is that it reinforces them.
New research has shown us that economic, social, racial, and gender inequality are inextricably linked—and that the effect of high inequality is to create even more inequality. Many other economists have shown that high levels of inequality hurt democracy because, among other things, they allow rich people and corporations to buy the support of politicians.
- Atossa Araxia Abrahamian 2018

Offline Blaise170

  • * Esteemed Elder
  • Posts: 1298
  • Location: Boston, MA
  • ALPS キーボード
    • XYZ
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #47 on: Tue, 12 June 2018, 14:00:49 »
I'm glad to be living in a state where our lawmakers actually care enough to try to bypass the FCC. Here's to hoping that some legislation will be released soon for MA and that the push to repeal federally (also sponsored by a Mass senator) will go through.
I proxy anything including keyboards (キーボード / 鍵盤), from both Japan (日本) and China (中國). For more information, you may visit my dedicated webpage here: https://www.keyboards.es/proxying.html

View my current and past keyboards here: https://deskthority.net/wiki/User:Blaise170

Offline microsoft windows

  • Blue Troll of Death
  • * Exalted Elder
  • Posts: 3621
  • President of geekhack.org
    • Get Internet Explorer 6
Re: Net Neutrality
« Reply #48 on: Wed, 13 June 2018, 15:39:06 »
I ONLY USE WEB SITES THAT ARE DESIGNED SPECIFICALLY FOR WINDOWS 98 AND WINDOWS ME. SO THEREFORE, NET NEUTRALITY IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT. IT MUST BE REINSTATED AT ALL COSTS!
CLICK HERE!     OFFICIAL PRESIDENT OF GEEKHACK.ORG    MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN MERRY CHRISTMAS