3
0

Net Neutrality


 invite response                
2017 Dec 1, 2:55pm   6,768 views  48 comments

by MisdemeanorRebel   ➕follow (12)   💰tip   ignore  





#Censorship #NetNeutrality #Politics

Comments 1 - 40 of 48       Last »     Search these comments

2   anonymous   2017 Dec 1, 5:16pm  

Correct. Because we have net neutrality.
3   anonymous   2017 Dec 1, 5:18pm  

Net Neutrality isn't really about free speech.
4   Patrick   2017 Dec 5, 10:23pm  

https://www.theonion.com/fcc-chair-unveils-premium-comment-line-to-fast-track-ne-1820986235
FCC Chair Unveils Premium Comment Line To Fast-Track Net Neutrality Complaints For $49.99 Per Month
5   mell   2017 Dec 5, 10:35pm  

The problem with net neutrality is that NFLX and other streamers et al are clogging the web making fat $$ while the providers can't do anything wrt charging them more for taking advantage of most of the bandwidth.
6   anonymous   2017 Dec 6, 7:36am  

mell says
while the providers can't do anything wrt charging them more for taking advantage of most of the bandwidth.


Yes, exactly. Why can't the ISPs get some kind of monopoly on content as well as the fees for the connection. They should get it all.

Each person can stream at most one movie at a time. Why should Netflix and a handful of other people that won the race get to cash in leaving the cable, DSL and Dish out of the action ? Don't they get something for having control of the actual hardware that brings us the internet ? AT&T demands their taste. Common people !
7   mell   2017 Dec 6, 10:05am  

anon_08dee says
mell says
while the providers can't do anything wrt charging them more for taking advantage of most of the bandwidth.


Yes, exactly. Why can't the ISPs get some kind of monopoly on content as well as the fees for the connection. They should get it all.

Each person can stream at most one movie at a time. Why should Netflix and a handful of other people that won the race get to cash in leaving the cable, DSL and Dish out of the action ? Don't they get something for having control of the actual hardware that brings us the internet ? AT&T demands their taste. Common people !


Pretty daft. Why do mobile service provides throttle you after you used your 4g speed? Of course you are free to buy more..
8   anonymous   2017 Dec 6, 10:12am  

If that's your position, doesn't it make more sense to "nationalize" comcast etc. and make ISP a public utility? Who paid for the infrastructure? Who built the internet?
9   mell   2017 Dec 6, 10:18am  

errc says
If that's your position, doesn't it make more sense to "nationalize" comcast etc. and make ISP a public utility? Who paid for the infrastructure? Who built the internet?


I agree with you in the sense that the companies who built the infrastructure never got their fair share, i.e. Juniper et al. And it could certainly be nationalized and probably run reasonably well as it was originating from the military in the first place. Of course there would be concerns of government censorship but we have them now as well. Not saying allowing companies to do whatever they want and block whomever they want is the holy grail, but if they do it solely based on traffic usage (and not content) why shouldn't they be allowed to have a tiered paying system and throttles?
12   zzyzzx   2017 Dec 15, 10:21am  

Some people are really getting upset over this:
I doubt it's real, but it's still pretty funny.

13   anonymous   2017 Dec 15, 10:49am  

I don't think anyone who is against net neutrality understands it very well.
14   HappyGilmore   2017 Dec 15, 10:51am  

anon_7c0c9 says
I don't think anyone who is against net neutrality understands it very well.


Funny--I think the same thing about people who aren't against it.
15   Heraclitusstudent   2017 Dec 15, 11:06am  

TwoScoopsMcGee says
It isn't Comcast or AT&T that are censoring speech on the internet.

Forget censorship.
ATT, Comcast and others are going to extort tons of money for delivering content.
They are regulating the access and there is nothing preventing them from putting a huge TOLL BOOTH on the road to your house with a fee they totally control and almost no competition.
First they will make Internet companies pay. Good you say.
Then they will make consumers pay, because it's never enough.
Expect soon to buy a package with the "Facebook service" the way you pay News networks packages, plus a Twitter option for an added $10/month.
What prevents them from doing it?
16   Heraclitusstudent   2017 Dec 15, 11:07am  

This is about layers of fat cats that you can't avoid paying just because of their position in the system.
17   HappyGilmore   2017 Dec 15, 11:20am  

Absolutely--they can charge an extra fee to access Netflix or youtube. It's not only about paying more for bandwidth.
18   Patrick   2017 Dec 15, 11:43am  

That's not true.

A little snark is OK even for anons. Just don't make it personal.

Clue: using the word "you" is probably a personal attack.
19   HappyGilmore   2017 Dec 15, 11:48am  

anon_7c0c9 says
So explain


HappyGilmore says
Absolutely--they can charge an extra fee to access Netflix or youtube. It's not only about paying more for bandwidth.


Or Patrick.net if they so choose.
20   mell   2017 Dec 15, 12:29pm  

Heraclitusstudent says
Expect soon to buy a package with the "Facebook service" the way you pay News networks packages, plus a Twitter option for an added $10/month.


Great! I'm all for it. Facetwat is clogging up the bandwith immensely while making the population dumber, leftoider and sadder. They can't charge enough for the FB package, maybe start at $100, better $1000 to save the kids.
21   mell   2017 Dec 15, 12:32pm  

Imagine the deflated female fake-egos, built-up with fake-likes from bots and a horde of thirsty beta and omega schlobs. Suddenly no access to fake-likes anymore, this could be yuuuge!
22   Heraclitusstudent   2017 Dec 15, 12:36pm  

mell says

Great! I'm all for it. Facetwat is clogging up the bandwith immensely while making the population dumber, leftoider and sadder. They can't charge enough for the FB package, maybe start at $100, better $1000 to save the kids.

The point is: you will pay more one way or an other. It's a toll booth not a service on a free market.
23   HappyGilmore   2017 Dec 15, 12:42pm  

mell says
Great! I'm all for it. Facetwat is clogging up the bandwith immensely while making the population dumber, leftoider and sadder. They can't charge enough for the FB package, maybe start at $100, better $1000 to save the kids.


Tell me again how it's the libtards that are superior and want to tell us how to live our lives?
24   mell   2017 Dec 15, 12:54pm  

Heraclitusstudent says
mell says

Great! I'm all for it. Facetwat is clogging up the bandwith immensely while making the population dumber, leftoider and sadder. They can't charge enough for the FB package, maybe start at $100, better $1000 to save the kids.

The point is: you will pay more one way or an other. It's a toll booth not a service on a free market.


That was a bit ironic, I get your point. However it is no different than charging people for different service-tiers now, business, normal vs high-speed dsl etc. I doubt that there will be huge increases as there will be alternative providers jumping in, and they should have the right to charge those more that use services extensively that clog bandwidth. It's only fair to those that don't use it much. In any case I am split on it and I am sure there are better solutions than one way or the other, I'm sure if we take the time to think we can come up with something that is better than the two extremes.

HappyGilmore says
mell says
Great! I'm all for it. Facetwat is clogging up the bandwith immensely while making the population dumber, leftoider and sadder. They can't charge enough for the FB package, maybe start at $100, better $1000 to save the kids.


Tell me again how it's the libtards that are superior and want to tell us how to live our lives?


Sure. They do it almost everywhere. While FB is proven to be detrimental. I am not saying access to FaceTwat should be denied, that would be a leftoid thing,I am just saying providers should be free to charge what they want for it. That is not the same as denying access. Maybe we can take some of the added profits - should they charge more if NN i repealed - and fix our broken roads in SV.
25   anonymous   2017 Dec 15, 12:59pm  

No one owns the internet and no one can selectively sell parts of it to increase their own profits.

Until now of course. Cable companies own the internet now since they hold a monopoly on the fastest pipelines and they will extort money for access to certain parts because they like money.
26   Heraclitusstudent   2017 Dec 15, 1:04pm  

mell says
However it is no different than charging people for different service-tiers now, business, normal vs high-speed dsl etc. I

The difference is: right now the only features they can compete on are what they actually produce: bandwidth and price.
Now they will divert competition toward things they didn't produce: For example you might premium for normal access to Netflix even though your overall bandwidth is not better.

This is actually a good example of why the absence of regulation is not a good regulation.
27   Heraclitusstudent   2017 Dec 15, 1:07pm  

This will also limit competition between existing Internet content/service providers (who can pay a premium to get bandwidth) and new entrants (who can't pay as much).
The effect will be to entrench existing players, not foster competition and innovation.
28   mell   2017 Dec 15, 1:10pm  

Heraclitusstudent says
mell says
However it is no different than charging people for different service-tiers now, business, normal vs high-speed dsl etc. I

No, right now the only features they can compete on are what they actually produce: bandwidth and price.
Now they will divert competition toward things they didn't produce: For example you might premium for normal access to Netflix even though your overall bandwidth is not better.

This is actually a good example of why the absence of regulation is not a good regulation.


Disagree, they could also easily simply charge by bytes transferred both ways, that would surely be the fairest pricing. Why should I have reduced bandwidth because somebody binge-watches Netflix with their flat plan? They are already reaping the rewards for stuff they didn't build, e.g. a lot of the infrastructure is from Juniper. Not saying there's an easy solution, but I don't see how the current status is somehow the holy grail.
29   Heraclitusstudent   2017 Dec 15, 1:17pm  

mell says
Disagree, they could also easily simply charge by bytes transferred both ways, that would surely be the fairest pricing. Why should I have reduced bandwidth because somebody binge-watches Netflix with their flat plan?

That's what they will tell you to justify it, but the fact is that different bytes have different values to you, and they are now allowed to use that fact to charge you more for these bytes.

mell says
Not saying there's an easy solution, but I don't see how the current status is somehow the holy grail.

Well in the current situation if you pay for the bandwidth and if you binge on Netflix, it's just your choice of how to use it. If you use a lot of bandwidth you pay more.
The bandwidth is what they are paid for and providing bandwidth for the lowest possible price is exactly what their role should be.
30   Booger   2017 Dec 15, 1:31pm  

anon_7c0c9 says
Cable companies own the internet now since they hold a monopoly on the fastest pipelines and they will extort money for access to certain parts because they like money.


Buy stock in internet service providers.
31   HappyGilmore   2017 Dec 15, 2:09pm  

mell says
Sure. They do it almost everywhere. While FB is proven to be detrimental. I am not saying access to FaceTwat should be denied, that would be a leftoid thing,I am just saying providers should be free to charge what they want for it. That is not the same as denying access. Maybe we can take some of the added profits - should they charge more if NN i repealed - and fix our broken roads in SV.


Kind of like a soda tax to pay for health care for all the obese people?
32   mell   2017 Dec 15, 2:22pm  

HappyGilmore says
mell says
Sure. They do it almost everywhere. While FB is proven to be detrimental. I am not saying access to FaceTwat should be denied, that would be a leftoid thing,I am just saying providers should be free to charge what they want for it. That is not the same as denying access. Maybe we can take some of the added profits - should they charge more if NN i repealed - and fix our broken roads in SV.


Kind of like a soda tax to pay for health care for all the obese people?


Yeah kinda. But the providers could choose not to get those extended billing rights and thus not the surtax, so you could couple it at least with their gain. The soda-tax came out of nowhere. Also make both changes temporary, see how they work out.
33   MisdemeanorRebel   2017 Dec 15, 6:01pm  

Heraclitusstudent says
What prevents them from doing it?


First, if they throttle you they have to tell you.
Second, there is still the FTC.
Third, it creates conflict between Content Provider Monopolies and Cable Monopolies; in the breach it'll likely be better for consumers.

Right now Amazon/Google/Facebook call all the shots. They need an opposing commercial force.

All that happened is we went back to pre 2015 Internet. Was Comcast charging $500 to check Facebook back then?
34   anonymous   2017 Dec 15, 6:53pm  

I've noticed a pattern. More than 50% of right wing memes contain a grade school level spelling or grammar error. Nonetheless, millions pass them on unedited.
35   anonymous   2017 Dec 15, 6:53pm  

Patrick says
Clue: using the word "you" is probably a personal attack.


Like this?

Can "you" provide a link to that article?

How will the tax plan effect "you"?

Will "you" be going on vacation this year?

Does your company offer "you" a retirement plan?

What new car do "you" like?

Where do "you" go grocery shopping?

Can "you" give me a good stock pick?

If "you" were going to pick someone for president, who would "you" pick?

Like those type of personal attacks using "you"?
37   anonymous   2017 Dec 18, 9:11am  

That's an extremely strange opinion considering there are no laws against charging by the gigabyte and lots of ISPs do so. Unlimited data plans don't make logical sense and were only created so ISPs could milk more money out of casual users.

So I'd like to know in your world what forced means?
38   Heraclitusstudent   2017 Dec 18, 10:52am  

zzyzzx says

What do you mean they are forced?
No they are not.
They sell bandwidth to customers for profit.
Customers pay a lot. Bandwidth is in fact already more expensive than in many other countries.
Then customers use it as they want to access services. Customers using Netflix paid for Netflix and also paid for the bandwidth.
Now Telcos use their position to extort Netflix which will pass that cost to customers.

If AT&T needs money maybe they can cut their dividend a bit. This is not money invested in their network.
39   Heraclitusstudent   2017 Dec 18, 10:56am  

TwoScoopsMcGee says
Second, there is still the FTC.
Third, it creates conflict between Content Provider Monopolies and Cable Monopolies; in the breach it'll likely be better for consumers.


No it will not: they will both agree to screw the customers. Like happens between healthcare providers and healthcare insurance. You still won't have a competitor to FB but you'll have to pay extra to access it.

The Telco will claim it's a favor they make to let you access it. They will sell it to you like an extra service, even though they added 0 value.
40   zzyzzx   2017 Dec 18, 11:13am  

anon_10224 says
More than 50% of right wing memes contain a grade school level spelling or grammar error. Nonetheless, millions pass them on unedited.


Meme generators make meme generation available to the masses!

Most graphic designers are liberals, so the fact that conservative leaning meme's are more prolific, and often do look really well made is even more impressive. A trend that will continue in 2018. Yes, my GF is a Graphic Designer (who is more conservative than I am BTW) and often points out some of the better memes to me.

Comments 1 - 40 of 48       Last »     Search these comments

Please register to comment:

api   best comments   contact   latest images   memes   one year ago   random   suggestions