Author Topic: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?  (Read 6717 times)

GuitarStv

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 9657
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« on: November 22, 2017, 07:58:44 AM »
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-internet-exclusive/fcc-chief-plans-to-ditch-u-s-net-neutrality-rules-idUSKBN1DL21A

" FCC chief Ajit Pai, a Republican appointed by President Donald Trump in January, said the commission will vote at a Dec. 14 meeting on his plan to rescind the so-called net neutrality rules championed by Democratic former President Barack Obama that treated internet service providers like public utilities. "

" With three Republican and two Democratic commissioners, the move is all but certain to be approved. Trump, a Republican, expressed his opposition to net neutrality in 2014 before the regulations were even implemented, calling it a “power grab” by Obama. "

" Pai said his proposal would prevent state and local governments from creating their own net neutrality rules because internet service is “inherently an interstate service.” "


This might actually be the worst thing Donald Trump has done as president . . . and it's not like there's a short list of terrible stuff to choose from.

Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2660
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #1 on: November 22, 2017, 08:38:17 AM »
I'm pretty worried about this one, because it's not "sexy" enough to attract the attention of a lot of voters. And of course, with the holiday season starting, people are likely to be even less engaged and informed than they usually are.
Please note: Libertarian4321 did not vote for either Hillary or Trump. He voted for Gary Johnson, who was the Libertarian candidate.

ketchup

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2987
  • Age: 26
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #2 on: November 22, 2017, 08:56:41 AM »
Yeah, this is alarming and supremely fucked up.  Literally nobody is in favor of this or stands to gain except the big ISPs (and those like Pai that are in their pocket).

GuitarStv

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 9657
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #3 on: November 22, 2017, 09:04:50 AM »
Yeah, this is alarming and supremely fucked up.  Literally nobody is in favor of this or stands to gain except the big ISPs (and those like Pai that are in their pocket).

There has been a groundswell of support for getting rid of Net Neutrality in the last little while in FCC comments.  Oh wait:

" Schneiderman said in a tweet his office has been investigating a "massive scheme" over the last six months to "corrupt the FCC's comment process on net neutrality by impersonating 100,000s of real Americans."

In the letter, Schneiderman wrote that the process the FCC has "employed to consider potentially sweeping alterations to current net neutrality rules has been corrupted by the fraudulent use of Americans’ identities — and the FCC has been unwilling to assist my office in our efforts to investigate this unlawful activity."

"Specifically, for six months my office has been investigating who perpetrated a massive scheme to corrupt the FCC’s notice and comment process through the misuse of enormous numbers of real New Yorkers’ and other Americans’ identities."

"Such conduct likely violates state law — yet the FCC has refused multiple requests for crucial evidence in its sole possession that is vital to permit that law enforcement investigation to proceed." " - http://thehill.com/policy/technology/361509-ny-ag-probing-massive-scheme-to-influence-fcc-on-net-neutrality-with-fake

WhiteTrashCash

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 983
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #4 on: November 22, 2017, 12:23:53 PM »
VPN will still let people around this stuff, though, right? I haven't heard anything about the USA threatening to make VPN illegal like China.

ketchup

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2987
  • Age: 26
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #5 on: November 22, 2017, 12:29:08 PM »
VPN will still let people around this stuff, though, right? I haven't heard anything about the USA threatening to make VPN illegal like China.
It would, until Comcast decides to block (or throttle) VPN traffic on your line unless you pay $25/mo extra for the VPN package.  And this would allow them to do that without penalty.

And dorks like you or I might consider a VPN an option, but most don't know and don't care so it would more than just another layer for them.

Daley

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3678
  • Location: Cow country. Moo.
  • Got that mustache feeling.
    • Technical Meshugana
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #6 on: November 22, 2017, 12:54:38 PM »
On one hand, I'm glad something out of last week's terrible FCC policy changes is getting some notice, but the neutrality thing is only a small chunk and a bit of a distraction to a much bigger problem. They basically gutted the Lifeline program last week, both phone and internet, citing claims of reducing "fraud" which the changes will do nothing to address (and ignores and undermines the results of the actual policies put in place for qualifying for service this past year). More on this in a minute. They also abolished regional media monopoly ownership paving the way for vertically integrated propaganda saturation, gave the green-light to telcos to abandon maintaining older communications infrastructure that serves nearly 50 million people (mostly rural) without notice, and approved a non-backwards compatible television broadcasting upgrade  that almost no current televisions can support with only a five year transition after its approval to a spec that obliterates viewer privacy as well as allows broadcasters the ability to turn on your television for you.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/11/sorry-poor-people-the-fcc-is-coming-after-your-broadband-plans/
https://www.wired.com/story/the-fccs-latest-moves-could-worsen-the-digital-divide/
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/11/lawmakers-demand-investigation-into-fcc-chairman-ajit-pai/
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-television-technology/fcc-approves-tv-technology-that-gives-better-pictures-but-less-privacy-idUSKBN1DG2XF

The Lifeline issues are massive, especially given most Lifeline customers in this nation have to subscribe to the very third party providers the FCC is trying to get rid of. Why is that? Because earlier in the year, AT&T stopped providing Lifeline services in every state they weren't obligated to provide the service in. This is a pending change that's going to impact nearly nine million financially insecure families very soon. Outside of Conde Nast (Ars Technica, Wired), I've seen very little coverage of this issue either outside of the industry trades... and I live in a state where last Friday's decisions had immediately negative impacts on a not-unsubstantial portion of the population.

Pay attention, folks, this is news that's going to radically impact the MVNO and third-party ISP markets as well. You know, all the providers we use around here to help keep costs lower?

So yes, the loss of net neutrality is bad, but only a part of a far uglier larger picture going on. We've already been sold out. It's over. Even if we preserve net neutrality, the market stranglehold and competition killing has already happened in one week that kicked the most financially vulnerable people in this nation to the curb without a second thought. Our own communications infrastructure is actively being weaponized against us.
« Last Edit: November 22, 2017, 01:03:57 PM by I.P. Daley »
Hi, I'm Daley, the Howard Cosell of MVNOs and the Technical Meshugana. I'm also the author of the Frugal Communications Guide and our own Superguide.

Scortius

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 340
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #7 on: November 22, 2017, 01:06:19 PM »
VPN will still let people around this stuff, though, right? I haven't heard anything about the USA threatening to make VPN illegal like China.
It would, until Comcast decides to block (or throttle) VPN traffic on your line unless you pay $25/mo extra for the VPN package.  And this would allow them to do that without penalty.

And dorks like you or I might consider a VPN an option, but most don't know and don't care so it would more than just another layer for them.

Correct, a VPN would not stop this as the link between your computer and your VPN still travels through your ISP first. It's very likely that VPN traffic would be severely throttled, otherwise you could simply watch Netflix through your VPN with no penalty.

zoltani

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1011
  • Location: PNW
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #8 on: November 22, 2017, 01:25:01 PM »
I know we all like to blame Trump for everything, but Ajit Pai was appointed by Obama at the suggestion of Mitch McConnell. Yes, Trump appointed him the head of the FCC, but Obama originally appointed him to the commission.

Obama knew his views, and Ajit Pai has been voting against net neutrality for awhile now. No big surprises here.

"Pai voted against the FCC's 2015 Open Internet Order, classifying Internet service under Title II of the Communications Act of 1934, which bars certain providers from "making any unjust or unreasonable discrimination in charges, practices, classifications, regulations, facilities, or services."" 

Here's a little humor to offset the horror that this may actually happen:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggasfCOmQK8
“The hardest thing in the world is to simplify your life. It’s so easy to make it complex. What’s important is leading an examined life.”

Yvon Chouinard

asiljoy

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 336
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #9 on: November 22, 2017, 01:32:31 PM »
I know we all like to blame Trump for everything, but Ajit Pai was appointed by Obama at the suggestion of Mitch McConnell. Yes, Trump appointed him the head of the FCC, but Obama originally appointed him to the commission.

Obama knew his views, and Ajit Pai has been voting against net neutrality for awhile now. No big surprises here.

"Pai voted against the FCC's 2015 Open Internet Order, classifying Internet service under Title II of the Communications Act of 1934, which bars certain providers from "making any unjust or unreasonable discrimination in charges, practices, classifications, regulations, facilities, or services."" 

Here's a little humor to offset the horror that this may actually happen:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggasfCOmQK8

The commission is always split 2 from minority party, 3 from majority party and my understanding is that the president is limited in his options to those recommended by the leaders of the parties. If that's who McConnell recommended, Obama's hands were more or less tied. Or do I misunderstand this ridiculous process?

Wexler

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 220
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #10 on: November 22, 2017, 01:38:35 PM »
I know we all like to blame Trump for everything, but Ajit Pai was appointed by Obama at the suggestion of Mitch McConnell. Yes, Trump appointed him the head of the FCC, but Obama originally appointed him to the commission.

Obama knew his views, and Ajit Pai has been voting against net neutrality for awhile now. No big surprises here.

"Pai voted against the FCC's 2015 Open Internet Order, classifying Internet service under Title II of the Communications Act of 1934, which bars certain providers from "making any unjust or unreasonable discrimination in charges, practices, classifications, regulations, facilities, or services."" 

Here's a little humor to offset the horror that this may actually happen:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggasfCOmQK8

"Though an Obama appointee, Pai does not share Obama’s progressive views and is by no means someone Obama would have chosen to lead the commission. Rather, there’s a tradition of letting the minority party pick two commissioners, since the majority can only legally hold three seats; in nominating Pai — at the recommendation of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, a Republican — Obama was sticking to that tradition."

https://www.theverge.com/2017/1/23/14338522/fcc-chairman-ajit-pai-donald-trump-appointment

Obama continued the practice of letting the minority party get two picks on a 5 person committee.  Pai was a Republican pick as a member of the committee advanced as part of that practice.  It's a pretty thought for Trump voters and Bernie-or-busters to try to shove the blame on Obama to make themselves feel better about the steaming trash pile of policies advanced by Trump appointees.  If anyone reading this cared about net neutrality, the candidate to vote for was Clinton. If she were president, Pai would not be head of the FCC, three members would be democrats, and net neutrality would not be headed for the dumpster.  Both parties are not the same on this issue, and this was discussed during the campaign.  I am enraged about this and will not give Trump voters a pass.   I have seen this BS about Obama appointing Pai without the full context.

In summary: elections have consequences.  Own your vote.

jrhampt

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1008
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Connecticut
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #11 on: November 22, 2017, 01:47:46 PM »
I know we all like to blame Trump for everything, but Ajit Pai was appointed by Obama at the suggestion of Mitch McConnell. Yes, Trump appointed him the head of the FCC, but Obama originally appointed him to the commission.

Obama knew his views, and Ajit Pai has been voting against net neutrality for awhile now. No big surprises here.

"Pai voted against the FCC's 2015 Open Internet Order, classifying Internet service under Title II of the Communications Act of 1934, which bars certain providers from "making any unjust or unreasonable discrimination in charges, practices, classifications, regulations, facilities, or services."" 

Here's a little humor to offset the horror that this may actually happen:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggasfCOmQK8

"Though an Obama appointee, Pai does not share Obama’s progressive views and is by no means someone Obama would have chosen to lead the commission. Rather, there’s a tradition of letting the minority party pick two commissioners, since the majority can only legally hold three seats; in nominating Pai — at the recommendation of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, a Republican — Obama was sticking to that tradition."

https://www.theverge.com/2017/1/23/14338522/fcc-chairman-ajit-pai-donald-trump-appointment

Obama continued the practice of letting the minority party get two picks on a 5 person committee.  Pai was a Republican pick as a member of the committee advanced as part of that practice.  It's a pretty thought for Trump voters and Bernie-or-busters to try to shove the blame on Obama to make themselves feel better about the steaming trash pile of policies advanced by Trump appointees.  If anyone reading this cared about net neutrality, the candidate to vote for was Clinton. If she were president, Pai would not be head of the FCC, three members would be democrats, and net neutrality would not be headed for the dumpster.  Both parties are not the same on this issue, and this was discussed during the campaign.  I am enraged about this and will not give Trump voters a pass.   I have seen this BS about Obama appointing Pai without the full context.

In summary: elections have consequences.  Own your vote.

^^^^^^^^ yes

zoltani

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1011
  • Location: PNW
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #12 on: November 22, 2017, 01:49:46 PM »
Thanks for the info, I am unfamiliar with the process. I am not a trump voter, but do like to question things.

Do you think contacting senators will do anything for the vote with it being split 3/2? Do they have influence over the commission?
“The hardest thing in the world is to simplify your life. It’s so easy to make it complex. What’s important is leading an examined life.”

Yvon Chouinard

GuitarStv

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 9657
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #13 on: November 22, 2017, 02:13:34 PM »
Thanks for the info, I am unfamiliar with the process. I am not a trump voter, but do like to question things.

Do you think contacting senators will do anything for the vote with it being split 3/2? Do they have influence over the commission?

Currently there are only three people on the FCC commission.  The Republicans Pai and O'Reilley both want to get rid of Net Neutrality and they have enough votes to make it legal (not all five people need to be appointed for a vote to take place).

BlueMR2

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1865
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #14 on: November 22, 2017, 02:22:42 PM »
I'm really not excited about it one way or the other.  On the consumer side what people forget is that we didn't have net neutrality until very recently and it was really a non-issue.  It got a lot of press due to fears of what could happen though.  I've been on both sides of it.  I'm a home consumer, I've been in charge of corporate telecom, I've also been in mangement at an ISP.  On the provider side it's all doom and gloom about the expense and headache of being declared a public utility.  It's really not as bad as all that.  Does it drive cost up, sure, a little.  Not enough to get excited about though.

Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2660
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #15 on: November 22, 2017, 02:35:48 PM »
I'm really not excited about it one way or the other.  On the consumer side what people forget is that we didn't have net neutrality until very recently and it was really a non-issue.  It got a lot of press due to fears of what could happen though.  I've been on both sides of it.  I'm a home consumer, I've been in charge of corporate telecom, I've also been in mangement at an ISP.  On the provider side it's all doom and gloom about the expense and headache of being declared a public utility.  It's really not as bad as all that.  Does it drive cost up, sure, a little.  Not enough to get excited about though.

If it was a non-issue, they wouldn't be working so hard to pass it.
Please note: Libertarian4321 did not vote for either Hillary or Trump. He voted for Gary Johnson, who was the Libertarian candidate.

WhiteTrashCash

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 983
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #16 on: November 23, 2017, 06:55:55 AM »
VPN will still let people around this stuff, though, right? I haven't heard anything about the USA threatening to make VPN illegal like China.
It would, until Comcast decides to block (or throttle) VPN traffic on your line unless you pay $25/mo extra for the VPN package.  And this would allow them to do that without penalty.

And dorks like you or I might consider a VPN an option, but most don't know and don't care so it would more than just another layer for them.

Correct, a VPN would not stop this as the link between your computer and your VPN still travels through your ISP first. It's very likely that VPN traffic would be severely throttled, otherwise you could simply watch Netflix through your VPN with no penalty.

Would they do that, though? A lot of businesses use VPNs (as I do for my job). Wouldn't that be an issue? Also, wouldn't they have to have to target specific VPN services? In that case, it would be like whack-a-mole.

Honest question. I'm unsure about this.

2Cent

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 448
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #17 on: November 23, 2017, 07:33:54 AM »
On the bright side, you might get some very cheap dedicated internet subscriptions which could work great for IOT applications. Also free "internet" might become a thing.

scottish

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 975
  • Location: Ottawa
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #18 on: November 23, 2017, 06:04:13 PM »
VPN will still let people around this stuff, though, right? I haven't heard anything about the USA threatening to make VPN illegal like China.
It would, until Comcast decides to block (or throttle) VPN traffic on your line unless you pay $25/mo extra for the VPN package.  And this would allow them to do that without penalty.

And dorks like you or I might consider a VPN an option, but most don't know and don't care so it would more than just another layer for them.


Correct, a VPN would not stop this as the link between your computer and your VPN still travels through your ISP first. It's very likely that VPN traffic would be severely throttled, otherwise you could simply watch Netflix through your VPN with no penalty.

Would they do that, though? A lot of businesses use VPNs (as I do for my job). Wouldn't that be an issue? Also, wouldn't they have to have to target specific VPN services? In that case, it would be like whack-a-mole.

Honest question. I'm unsure about this.

I think deep packet inspection could identify VPN traffic without too much trouble.    Only a few moles to whack then instead of thousands.
Actually, throughout my life, my two greatest assets have been mental stability and being, like, really smart.

Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2660
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #19 on: November 25, 2017, 09:01:49 AM »
Shared from Reddit:

“There's nothing hypothetical about what ISPs will do when net neutrality is eliminated. I'm going to steal a comment previously posted by /u/Skrattybones and repost here:

2005 - Madison River Communications was blocking VOIP services. The FCC put a stop to it.

2005 - Comcast was denying access to p2p services without notifying customers.

2007-2009 - AT&T was having Skype and other VOIPs blocked because they didn't like there was competition for their cellphones.

2011 - MetroPCS tried to block all streaming except youtube. (edit: they actually sued the FCC over this)

2011-2013, AT&T, Sprint, and Verizon were blocking access to Google Wallet because it competed with their bullshit. edit: this one happened literally months after the trio were busted collaborating with Google to block apps from the android marketplace

2012, Verizon was demanding google block tethering apps on android because it let owners avoid their $20 tethering fee. This was despite guaranteeing they wouldn't do that as part of a winning bid on an airwaves auction. (edit: they were fined $1.25million over this)

2012, AT&T - tried to block access to FaceTime unless customers paid more money.

2013, Verizon literally stated that the only thing stopping them from favoring some content providers over other providers were the net neutrality rules in place.

The foundation of Reason's argument is that Net Neutrality is unnecessary because we've never had issues without it. I think this timeline shows just how crucial it really is to a free and open internet."
Please note: Libertarian4321 did not vote for either Hillary or Trump. He voted for Gary Johnson, who was the Libertarian candidate.

scottish

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 975
  • Location: Ottawa
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #20 on: November 25, 2017, 09:28:01 AM »
My vision is that you muricans will wind up paying:

$60/month fee for connecting to the internet
$5/month fee for search
$20/month fee for access to social networks
$20/month fee for access to netflix

If you want all access (access to anything the ISP doesn't like and that's not in the basic packages) that's a
$60/month fee for a prosumer package.

If you want VPN, that's another
$25/month for enhanced privacy

The monetization opportunities are startling once you remove all the pesky regulation.   maga.
Actually, throughout my life, my two greatest assets have been mental stability and being, like, really smart.

GuitarStv

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 9657
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #21 on: November 25, 2017, 10:04:35 AM »
My vision is that you muricans will wind up paying:

$60/month fee for connecting to the internet
$5/month fee for search
$20/month fee for access to social networks
$20/month fee for access to netflix

If you want all access (access to anything the ISP doesn't like and that's not in the basic packages) that's a
$60/month fee for a prosumer package.

If you want VPN, that's another
$25/month for enhanced privacy

The monetization opportunities are startling once you remove all the pesky regulation.   maga.

Sadly, an awful lot of our traffic gets routed through the US.  We're going to feel pain from this too, I suspect . . .

Wexler

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 220
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #22 on: November 26, 2017, 04:21:06 PM »
Thanks for the info, I am unfamiliar with the process. I am not a trump voter, but do like to question things.

Do you think contacting senators will do anything for the vote with it being split 3/2? Do they have influence over the commission?

An ounce of prevention is worth of pound of cure. The best way to restore net neutrality after the near-certain vote to repeal it is to elect democrats.

Don't forget that the Senate voted earlier this year along strict party lines to remove FCC privacy measures that prevented ISPs from selling your browsing data to advertisers.  Who wanted to let them do this?  50 Republicans. Who voted against letting advertisers have access to your private data and for increased internet privacy?  48 Democrats.  Still think that both parties are the same? 

I'm sending a plea out into America to every edgelord Bernie-bro, every antivax Stein voter, every "how bad could Trump be" lulz voter to consider that your votes have an impact on policy. Your elected representatives know that your angry phone calls won't mean squat because voters almost never hold them accountable at the polls.  Is internet privacy important to you?  Is a free internet your issue?  Only if you vote like you mean it.  When should you start? November 6, 2018.  Or December 12, 2017 if you live in Alabama.

Zamboni

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1967
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #23 on: November 26, 2017, 04:40:43 PM »
I don't think it will matter, but you can send your opinion directly to the fcc through a direct link set up some time ago by John Oliver:

www.gofccyourself.com

And yes, voting for the party who will not pull this bullshit is ultimately much more important.

NoStacheOhio

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1774
  • Location: Cleveland
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #24 on: November 27, 2017, 08:56:36 AM »
Cory Doctorow wrote an interesting piece over at BoingBoing: https://boingboing.net/2017/11/26/rule-of-law-not-shills.html

TL;DR the FCC can't change rules without a reason, and has yet to articulate a reason for eliminating net neutrality. Obviously, when something gets to court it could go either way, but it's more complex than "Ajit Pai said so."

I have little (no) hope that it won't sail through the FCC as-is, especially given the shenanigans around the public comments, but I'm hopeful the courts will knock it down (again). Even with the Supreme Court tilted right, this is still a pretty important commerce and regulator-behavior issue.
The first step is acknowledging you have a problem, right?

https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/journals/digging-out-of-a-hole/

Rufus.T.Firefly

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 235
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #25 on: November 27, 2017, 09:23:39 AM »
I don't think it will matter, but you can send your opinion directly to the fcc through a direct link set up some time ago by John Oliver:

www.gofccyourself.com

And yes, voting for the party who will not pull this bullshit is ultimately much more important.

Wow ... up to 22 million filings. Intelligent politicians would attach themselves to the opposition, you would think. But it barely seems to get a mention.
"I have worked my way up from nothing to a state of extreme poverty"

~ Groucho Marx

Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2660
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #26 on: November 27, 2017, 10:11:35 AM »
I don't think it will matter, but you can send your opinion directly to the fcc through a direct link set up some time ago by John Oliver:

www.gofccyourself.com

And yes, voting for the party who will not pull this bullshit is ultimately much more important.

Wow ... up to 22 million filings. Intelligent politicians would attach themselves to the opposition, you would think. But it barely seems to get a mention.

You would think. But their corporate bed-partners are more important to them.
Please note: Libertarian4321 did not vote for either Hillary or Trump. He voted for Gary Johnson, who was the Libertarian candidate.

Wexler

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 220
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #27 on: November 27, 2017, 12:55:39 PM »
I don't think it will matter, but you can send your opinion directly to the fcc through a direct link set up some time ago by John Oliver:

www.gofccyourself.com

And yes, voting for the party who will not pull this bullshit is ultimately much more important.

Wow ... up to 22 million filings. Intelligent politicians would attach themselves to the opposition, you would think. But it barely seems to get a mention.

You would think. But their corporate bed-partners are more important to them.

Agree.  They wouldn't be if the voters held them accountable, but that's not how things work now.  The net neutrality-minded crowd has a spotty voting record and is full of edgelords who think that saying both sides are the same exempts them from any civic responsibility and who pretend they will only bother to vote when (insert thing that will never happen like abolishing the electoral college).  If you are such an edgelord, flex your muscles and become an important voting block instead.  Make politicians fear you like how they fear racist old people.  Right now, you aren't worth catering to because you don't bother to vote. 


Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2660
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #28 on: November 27, 2017, 01:14:06 PM »
I don't think it will matter, but you can send your opinion directly to the fcc through a direct link set up some time ago by John Oliver:

www.gofccyourself.com

And yes, voting for the party who will not pull this bullshit is ultimately much more important.

Wow ... up to 22 million filings. Intelligent politicians would attach themselves to the opposition, you would think. But it barely seems to get a mention.

You would think. But their corporate bed-partners are more important to them.

Agree.  They wouldn't be if the voters held them accountable, but that's not how things work now.  The net neutrality-minded crowd has a spotty voting record and is full of edgelords who think that saying both sides are the same exempts them from any civic responsibility and who pretend they will only bother to vote when (insert thing that will never happen like abolishing the electoral college).  If you are such an edgelord, flex your muscles and become an important voting block instead.  Make politicians fear you like how they fear racist old people.  Right now, you aren't worth catering to because you don't bother to vote.

Good lord, this 100%.
Please note: Libertarian4321 did not vote for either Hillary or Trump. He voted for Gary Johnson, who was the Libertarian candidate.

MrMoogle

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 981
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Huntsville, AL
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #29 on: November 28, 2017, 09:23:53 AM »
Agree.  They wouldn't be if the voters held them accountable, but that's not how things work now.  The net neutrality-minded crowd has a spotty voting record and is full of edgelords who think that saying both sides are the same exempts them from any civic responsibility and who pretend they will only bother to vote when (insert thing that will never happen like abolishing the electoral college). 

I've said in the past that both sides have more in common than differences, but I'm typically talking about the people, not the politicians.  There are few politicians that I agree with.

I'm conservative, and I'm struggling to come up a reason Net Neutrality is a bad thing.   I read a Pros and Cons of it, but the Cons either seemed to apply as a Pro, or it didn't make sense.  The only thing that comes close, is that less government intervention the better, except when protecting liberty, which NN does.  I mean, it doesn't even promote capitalism, it promotes monopolies. 

I was planning on staying out of the senate vote coming up here in Alabama, but maybe I'll just vote for the Democrat because of this ridiculousness. 

zolotiyeruki

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2366
  • Location: State: Denial
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #30 on: November 28, 2017, 09:35:08 AM »
For me, Net Neutrality is a really tough issue to decide on.  I'm generally very anti-regulation, especially on a federal (i.e. "one-size-fits-none") level, but I recognize that there are edge cases where regulation is needed.  In this case, many ISPs are monopolies or duopolies in their area, often because they have demanded (and received) exclusivity from the local government.  In that way, they very much *do* need to be regulated like a utility.  Also, because of their position as a mono/duopoly, and because the cable companies especially have other services tied to it, there's a tendency to abuse that monopoly position.

If the market were truly open and competitive, I'd be all against Net Neutrality.  But it's not, and so I'm not.

I find it especially egregious that ISPs are demanding payments from the likes of Netflix, when their customers are already paying for that same data.  That, to me, is slimy.

At the same time, I see the value in being able to treat different traffic differently--give lower latency to packets associated with online FPS's, allow larger buffers for video streaming, give higher priority to, say, business-critical traffic.  But I see that as more of a hypothetical, future benefit.

NoStacheOhio

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1774
  • Location: Cleveland
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #31 on: November 28, 2017, 09:41:35 AM »
At the same time, I see the value in being able to treat different traffic differently--give lower latency to packets associated with online FPS's, allow larger buffers for video streaming, give higher priority to, say, business-critical traffic.  But I see that as more of a hypothetical, future benefit.

I don't see ISPs ever making it easier/faster to do anything online without paying ransom.

There's also a First Amendment element to this. The Internet has become a de facto public space, and it's in the public interest to treat various packets of data [speech] the same, without regard for their source.
The first step is acknowledging you have a problem, right?

https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/journals/digging-out-of-a-hole/

OurTown

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 555
  • Age: 48
  • Location: Tennessee
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #32 on: November 28, 2017, 10:08:38 AM »
So I'm going to pay more, right?  And get shitty service, right?  Slow lanes, data throttling, content discrimination, and all the rest, right?  Sounds great, sign me up!

A Definite Beta Guy

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 552
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #33 on: November 28, 2017, 10:40:20 AM »
For me, Net Neutrality is a really tough issue to decide on.  I'm generally very anti-regulation, especially on a federal (i.e. "one-size-fits-none") level, but I recognize that there are edge cases where regulation is needed.  In this case, many ISPs are monopolies or duopolies in their area, often because they have demanded (and received) exclusivity from the local government.  In that way, they very much *do* need to be regulated like a utility.  Also, because of their position as a mono/duopoly, and because the cable companies especially have other services tied to it, there's a tendency to abuse that monopoly position.

If the market were truly open and competitive, I'd be all against Net Neutrality.  But it's not, and so I'm not.

I find it especially egregious that ISPs are demanding payments from the likes of Netflix, when their customers are already paying for that same data.  That, to me, is slimy.

At the same time, I see the value in being able to treat different traffic differently--give lower latency to packets associated with online FPS's, allow larger buffers for video streaming, give higher priority to, say, business-critical traffic.  But I see that as more of a hypothetical, future benefit.

You're not the only one having a hard time deciding the issue. The survey of economists on this leads to a similar lack of certainty:
http://www.igmchicago.org/surveys/net-neutrality-ii

The most popular answer is "I don't know."

MrMoogle

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 981
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Huntsville, AL
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #34 on: November 28, 2017, 10:42:09 AM »
I finally found something that makes some on why NN isn't great:
http://reason.com/blog/2017/11/27/john-conyers-net-neutrality-podcast
NN starts at 19 minutes, I wish there was a transcript.

Mostly it's about slowing down innovations, it's currently implemented in a vague manner, and there weren't that many instances of problems occurring beforehand that didn't already get resolved on its own.  So it's not helping anything, and it's slowing down improvements. 

It's also unlikely that you'll pay more or get worse service as OurTown suggests, since that wasn't happening before 2014.

GuitarStv

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 9657
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #35 on: November 28, 2017, 10:54:07 AM »
I finally found something that makes some on why NN isn't great:
http://reason.com/blog/2017/11/27/john-conyers-net-neutrality-podcast
NN starts at 19 minutes, I wish there was a transcript.

Mostly it's about slowing down innovations, it's currently implemented in a vague manner, and there weren't that many instances of problems occurring beforehand that didn't already get resolved on its own.  So it's not helping anything, and it's slowing down improvements. 

It's also unlikely that you'll pay more or get worse service as OurTown suggests, since that wasn't happening before 2014.

How did it speed up innovation when AT&T and Apple decided to prevent iPhone users from using Skype?  It was costing AT&T a lot of money to have those phone users using their phones with a competing technology.  It took threats of FCC movement on the issue before they finally stopped doing that.  Remember when Verizon decided to block people from using Google wallet?  Probably coincidental that Verizon had a competing service, ISIS.  Another instance of speeding up innovation?

MrMoogle

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 981
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Huntsville, AL
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #36 on: November 28, 2017, 11:10:49 AM »
I finally found something that makes some on why NN isn't great:
http://reason.com/blog/2017/11/27/john-conyers-net-neutrality-podcast
NN starts at 19 minutes, I wish there was a transcript.

Mostly it's about slowing down innovations, it's currently implemented in a vague manner, and there weren't that many instances of problems occurring beforehand that didn't already get resolved on its own.  So it's not helping anything, and it's slowing down improvements. 

It's also unlikely that you'll pay more or get worse service as OurTown suggests, since that wasn't happening before 2014.

How did it speed up innovation when AT&T and Apple decided to prevent iPhone users from using Skype?  It was costing AT&T a lot of money to have those phone users using their phones with a competing technology.  It took threats of FCC movement on the issue before they finally stopped doing that.  Remember when Verizon decided to block people from using Google wallet?  Probably coincidental that Verizon had a competing service, ISIS.  Another instance of speeding up innovation?

If this happened before NN was enacted, FCC didn't have the power to threaten them, it was changed because of popular demand/bad press.  If it was after NN was enacted, they are claiming popular demand/bad press would have fixed it.  The claim of slow down innovations is because of the decrease of infrastructure spending since NN was enacted. 

I am obviously no expert, so I really don't have any good answers for you.  I'm just trying to summarize what they are claiming.

MrMoogle

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 981
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Huntsville, AL
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #37 on: November 28, 2017, 11:12:44 AM »
Also, no system is perfect.  Just because it had some issues before, doesn't mean this fix is a better solution (either NN or killing NN).

NoStacheOhio

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1774
  • Location: Cleveland
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #38 on: November 28, 2017, 11:13:33 AM »
How did it speed up innovation when AT&T and Apple decided to prevent iPhone users from using Skype?  It was costing AT&T a lot of money to have those phone users using their phones with a competing technology.  It took threats of FCC movement on the issue before they finally stopped doing that.  Remember when Verizon decided to block people from using Google wallet?  Probably coincidental that Verizon had a competing service, ISIS.  Another instance of speeding up innovation?

Worth noting that a lot of the throttling/preferential treatment of traffic is done in a quiet, underhanded way. Sometimes it's hard to even determine if there's anything untoward going on behind the scenes.

Part of the theoretical point of regulation (at least good regulation) is to offer a level playing field for commerce, allowing companies with a good product to thrive or fail on their own merits. Giving a handful of huge companies outsize control over how the internet operates does the opposite.
The first step is acknowledging you have a problem, right?

https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/journals/digging-out-of-a-hole/

GuitarStv

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 9657
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #39 on: November 28, 2017, 11:36:29 AM »
I finally found something that makes some on why NN isn't great:
http://reason.com/blog/2017/11/27/john-conyers-net-neutrality-podcast
NN starts at 19 minutes, I wish there was a transcript.

Mostly it's about slowing down innovations, it's currently implemented in a vague manner, and there weren't that many instances of problems occurring beforehand that didn't already get resolved on its own.  So it's not helping anything, and it's slowing down improvements. 

It's also unlikely that you'll pay more or get worse service as OurTown suggests, since that wasn't happening before 2014.

How did it speed up innovation when AT&T and Apple decided to prevent iPhone users from using Skype?  It was costing AT&T a lot of money to have those phone users using their phones with a competing technology.  It took threats of FCC movement on the issue before they finally stopped doing that.  Remember when Verizon decided to block people from using Google wallet?  Probably coincidental that Verizon had a competing service, ISIS.  Another instance of speeding up innovation?

If this happened before NN was enacted, FCC didn't have the power to threaten them, it was changed because of popular demand/bad press.  If it was after NN was enacted, they are claiming popular demand/bad press would have fixed it.  The claim of slow down innovations is because of the decrease of infrastructure spending since NN was enacted. 

I am obviously no expert, so I really don't have any good answers for you.  I'm just trying to summarize what they are claiming.

This happened before Net Neutrality was enacted, and the FCC absolutely did have the power to threaten them . . . particularly as this was coming on the heels of the FCC telling Comcast to stop throttling p2p traffic (https://www.computerworld.com/article/2532555/networking/fcc-rules-against-comcast-p-to-p-throttling.html) without telling subscribers.


Your claims of reduced infrastructure spending are not supported by the telecommunications companies:
- In December 2015, AT&T’s CEO told investors that the company would “deploy more fiber” in 2016 than it did in 2015 and that Title II would not impede its future business plans.
- In December 2016, Comcast’s chief financial officer admitted to investors that any concerns it had about reclassification were based only on “the fear of what Title II could have meant, more than what it actually meant.”
- That same month, Charter’s CEO told investors, “Title II, it didn’t really hurt us; it hasn’t hurt us.”
- Just a few days after the election, Cablevision and Suddenlink’s parent company Altice reaffirmed its plan to deploy FTTH [fiber-to-the-home] service to all of its customers and told investors that it remained “focused on upgrading our broadband networks to drive increases in broadband speeds and better customer experience.”
(https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/05/title-ii-hasnt-hurt-network-investment-according-to-the-isps-themselves/)

So we have a pretend risk of reduced infrastructure spending, that is demonstrably not true . . . and a real risk of allowing companies to perform anti-competitive acts provides which hurt innovation, that have occurred.

MrMoogle

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 981
  • Age: 32
  • Location: Huntsville, AL
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #40 on: November 28, 2017, 12:04:38 PM »
First all, I'm not against the current implementation of NN, I'm just trying to poke holes in your argument.  I'm trying to learn :)

This happened before Net Neutrality was enacted, and the FCC absolutely did have the power to threaten them . . . particularly as this was coming on the heels of the FCC telling Comcast to stop throttling p2p traffic (https://www.computerworld.com/article/2532555/networking/fcc-rules-against-comcast-p-to-p-throttling.html) without telling subscribers.
Weren't similar rulings reversed because they were unconstitutional?  Until ISP were moved from telecom to utilities, did the FCC have authority to do what they tried to do?  Anyway, whatever happened, it got fixed without the NN in place.
Your claims of reduced infrastructure spending are not supported by the telecommunications companies:
- In December 2015, AT&T’s CEO told investors that the company would “deploy more fiber” in 2016 than it did in 2015 and that Title II would not impede its future business plans.
- In December 2016, Comcast’s chief financial officer admitted to investors that any concerns it had about reclassification were based only on “the fear of what Title II could have meant, more than what it actually meant.”
- That same month, Charter’s CEO told investors, “Title II, it didn’t really hurt us; it hasn’t hurt us.”
- Just a few days after the election, Cablevision and Suddenlink’s parent company Altice reaffirmed its plan to deploy FTTH [fiber-to-the-home] service to all of its customers and told investors that it remained “focused on upgrading our broadband networks to drive increases in broadband speeds and better customer experience.”
(https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/05/title-ii-hasnt-hurt-network-investment-according-to-the-isps-themselves/)

So we have a pretend risk of reduced infrastructure spending, that is demonstrably not true . . . and a real risk of allowing companies to perform anti-competitive acts provides which hurt innovation, that have occurred.
If I recall correctly, the claim was that there was a 6% drop in infrastructure spending from 2015 to 2016, not that less fiber was run, or what the CEO thought NN's impact was.  Both can be true.  You can run more fiber and spend less than the previous year.  If NN added cost, they potentially could have run even more fiber without it.

I'm sure there is a cost somewhere, whether it's on the ISPs or through taxes.  Even if two people agree on the benefit and agree on the cost, they can still disagree on which one they prefer. 

doggyfizzle

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 246
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #41 on: November 28, 2017, 12:25:30 PM »
There's also a First Amendment element to this. The Internet has become a de facto public space, and it's in the public interest to treat various packets of data [speech] the same, without regard for their source.

Not to mention that much of the fiber/copper deployed for internet use is run on public right-of-way, in a similar manner as electric transmission lines.  In my opinion, that alone should require ISPs to be regulated like other monopoly utilities, although lack of internet service might not be "essential" like water/gas/electric.

I think one of the fortunate realities about the NN debate is that content demand is shifting (less desire for massive Pay-TV packages, more OTT alacarte consumption), and the integrated providers see tiered internet service as a way of offsetting declining pay-TV revenue while also stymieing the growth of Netflix and Amazon.  From a business perspective, it's brilliant, because whoever controls the copper/fiber really controls data access.  If I was a Verizon exec, I would definitely start to optimize search traffic over Yahoo at the expense of Google, like exempt Yahoo search queries from monthly data caps etc to try and capture more ad revenue.  And that's not even too nefarious an idea that could easily dent Google's bottom line if any significant number of Verizon's 100 million phone/internet/TV subscribers were to change their behavior in a significant way.

NoStacheOhio

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1774
  • Location: Cleveland
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #42 on: November 28, 2017, 12:33:01 PM »
There's also a First Amendment element to this. The Internet has become a de facto public space, and it's in the public interest to treat various packets of data [speech] the same, without regard for their source.

Not to mention that much of the fiber/copper deployed for internet use is run on public right-of-way, in a similar manner as electric transmission lines.  In my opinion, that alone should require ISPs to be regulated like other monopoly utilities, although lack of internet service might not be "essential" like water/gas/electric.

I think one of the fortunate realities about the NN debate is that content demand is shifting (less desire for massive Pay-TV packages, more OTT alacarte consumption), and the integrated providers see tiered internet service as a way of offsetting declining pay-TV revenue while also stymieing the growth of Netflix and Amazon.  From a business perspective, it's brilliant, because whoever controls the copper/fiber really controls data access.  If I was a Verizon exec, I would definitely start to optimize search traffic over Yahoo at the expense of Google, like exempt Yahoo search queries from monthly data caps etc to try and capture more ad revenue.  And that's not even too nefarious an idea that could easily dent Google's bottom line if any significant number of Verizon's 100 million phone/internet/TV subscribers were to change their behavior in a significant way.

Didn't one of the mobile carriers exempt [insert streaming platform] traffic from data usage? My memory is fuzzy on it.
The first step is acknowledging you have a problem, right?

https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/journals/digging-out-of-a-hole/

Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2660
Please note: Libertarian4321 did not vote for either Hillary or Trump. He voted for Gary Johnson, who was the Libertarian candidate.

OurTown

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 555
  • Age: 48
  • Location: Tennessee
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #44 on: November 28, 2017, 01:03:50 PM »
Holy shit, what's going to happen to free porn?

Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2660
Please note: Libertarian4321 did not vote for either Hillary or Trump. He voted for Gary Johnson, who was the Libertarian candidate.

zolotiyeruki

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2366
  • Location: State: Denial
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #46 on: November 28, 2017, 03:40:36 PM »
I think part of the problem (in addition to the lack of competition) is a lack of transparency on the part of the ISPs.  If Verizon is throttling Netflix without telling their customers, that sounds like grounds for a class-action lawsuit.  If you (as an ISP) are going to monkey with someone's internet connection, whether it be throttling a competing video service or collecting/selling customer browsing habits, you gosh darn better well be telling people about it.

kayvent

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 603
  • Location: Canada
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #47 on: November 28, 2017, 04:26:01 PM »
There's also a First Amendment element to this. The Internet has become a de facto public space, and it's in the public interest to treat various packets of data [speech] the same, without regard for their source.

Not to mention that much of the fiber/copper deployed for internet use is run on public right-of-way, in a similar manner as electric transmission lines.  In my opinion, that alone should require ISPs to be regulated like other monopoly utilities, although lack of internet service might not be "essential" like water/gas/electric.

I think one of the fortunate realities about the NN debate is that content demand is shifting (less desire for massive Pay-TV packages, more OTT alacarte consumption), and the integrated providers see tiered internet service as a way of offsetting declining pay-TV revenue while also stymieing the growth of Netflix and Amazon.  From a business perspective, it's brilliant, because whoever controls the copper/fiber really controls data access.  If I was a Verizon exec, I would definitely start to optimize search traffic over Yahoo at the expense of Google, like exempt Yahoo search queries from monthly data caps etc to try and capture more ad revenue.  And that's not even too nefarious an idea that could easily dent Google's bottom line if any significant number of Verizon's 100 million phone/internet/TV subscribers were to change their behavior in a significant way.

Didn't one of the mobile carriers exempt [insert streaming platform] traffic from data usage? My memory is fuzzy on it.

A few blanks could be filled. Facebook, ardent defenders of net neutrality, tried to pay some South American ISPs to not count Facebook usage in data usage.

Just Joe

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1203
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #48 on: November 28, 2017, 07:17:53 PM »
If my neighborhood has only one ISP to choose from then they better damn well not throttle any website or service I want to use. I'm not paying more to utilize certain services over my "broadband".

Scortius

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 340
Re: Net Neutrality is going to be dead shortly?
« Reply #49 on: November 28, 2017, 08:12:51 PM »
If my neighborhood has only one ISP to choose from then they better damn well not throttle any website or service I want to use. I'm not paying more to utilize certain services over my "broadband".

That's certainly a nice sentiment, but I'm not sure how you plan on actually implementing this sound strategy.