Author Topic: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?  (Read 2389 times)

Poundwise

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 735
Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« on: January 24, 2017, 09:49:07 AM »
More specifically, will the appointment of new FCC chairman Ajit Pai give the new administration a pressure point to apply to Google, Amazon, Microsoft, and more?

These titans also control a lot of news, via Google News, Washington Post, MSN, etc.  Could this lead to muzzling of the mainstream media? How will this affect dissemination of political speech on the Internet? After all, although free speech is protected, there is no protection for your voice to be heard as loud as another's.

https://www.fastcompany.com/3066623/tech-forecast/heres-how-the-fccs-net-neutrality-rules-might-be-throttled-under-trump
« Last Edit: January 24, 2017, 10:08:54 AM by Poundwise »

deadlymonkey

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 400
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #1 on: January 24, 2017, 10:21:34 AM »
Depends, do you value the equal footing everyone has on the internet.  Should wealthy companies be given another significant advantage?

With net neutrality, every packet of data is treated as equal whether it is from you, Netflix, some healthcare company or the poor guy bumming Mcdonalds wifi. 

Trash Net Neutrality and you can set up special tiers of prioritized traffic.  Sorry you paid for the base plan, if you want to guarantee timely delivery of your packets you need to upgrade to the silver plan for double the cost. 

That may not affect you individually that much yet, but has a massive impact on high bandwidth industries and users like Amazon, Netflix, Google in the short term.  Without rules in place, those paid tiers of data prioritization will inevitably drift down the food chain. 

Also, by not treating all packets equally, you can "value" some more than others.  Say Company A hates foxnews, well they can throttle their packets down and make it harder to deliver quickly and reliably, or they can help CNN get information out faster.  There is a very deep and complex rabbit hole you go down when you decide to treat every packet of data individually based on an arbitrary set of rules.   

caffeine

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 44
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #2 on: January 24, 2017, 10:33:56 AM »
*Warning - I am using a crystal ball*

Without net neutrality, I imagine a conclusion is tiered internet packages. To keep it simple, you could imagine two tiers. The top tier would be the internet as you know it. You have access to everything. The bottom tier, would allow limited access to certain services similar to how you would view a cable package. The bottom tier would have Facebook, CNN, Google, and wide used, established sites.

I could see something markets as $100/month for the full internet package & $15/month for limited access with addon options at an additional charge.

I don't necessarily see anything morally wrong with this. I'd imagine my parents only use Facebook and some cable news sites. Should they be charged for access to the entire internet if they don't care to use it?

The ultimate fear I'd have is how much for full access would cost and could certain sites be throttled anyway despite the full access (if they even offer a full access package). I'd bet US cell phone companies would love to charge additional fees for speeds AND data caps AND content.
« Last Edit: January 24, 2017, 10:35:58 AM by caffeine »

Kris

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2379
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #3 on: January 24, 2017, 10:39:42 AM »
I can't believe every private citizen is not extremely concerned about net neutrality. This ought to be a bipartisan issue. The only people who should actually want to kill net neutrality are:

- corporate telecom overlords who want to only give you access to what they choose, so you have to pay extra to get decent service, and so your eyeballs and credit cards (and your political views) are pointed in the direction they want them to be at all times (Note that Ajit Pai used to be one of them, and is basically in bed with this desire)

- anyone who thinks that those companies should turn over information about what you do online to the government if the government wants them to.

Do you value your freedom to access and distribute information and speak freely online? Then you should value net neutrality.

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

bacchi

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1951
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #4 on: January 24, 2017, 11:59:25 AM »
I don't necessarily see anything morally wrong with this. I'd imagine my parents only use Facebook and some cable news sites. Should they be charged for access to the entire internet if they don't care to use it?

The only bits your parents see are the ones they request. Even without net neutrality, they'd have access to the entire internet.

Your parents are charged by their bandwidth. Net neutrality is more about latency than bandwidth.

lbmustache

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 693
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #5 on: January 24, 2017, 12:07:47 PM »
I can't believe every private citizen is not extremely concerned about net neutrality. This ought to be a bipartisan issue. The only people who should actually want to kill net neutrality are:

- corporate telecom overlords who want to only give you access to what they choose, so you have to pay extra to get decent service, and so your eyeballs and credit cards (and your political views) are pointed in the direction they want them to be at all times (Note that Ajit Pai used to be one of them, and is basically in bed with this desire)

- anyone who thinks that those companies should turn over information about what you do online to the government if the government wants them to.

Do you value your freedom to access and distribute information and speak freely online? Then you should value net neutrality.


Agreed.

Dollar Slice

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2008
  • Age: 40
  • Location: New York City
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #6 on: January 24, 2017, 12:21:40 PM »
If net neutrality goes away it will impact a lot of people trying to save money... because many services that people use to cut their cable bill can and probably will be discriminated against unless they pay big bucks. Netflix, Youtube, Hulu, Amazon Video, Skype, FaceTime, etc. Those services could all be essentially put out of business by ISPs charging them outlandish rates for quality bandwidth in the hopes that you'll be forced to use the ISP's own services for TV, phone, etc. instead.
Referrals for...
Prolific Academic: http://www.prolific.ac/rp?ref=3PJ4H43L (Earn money by taking academic surveys - way better than mturk, I average ~$9/hr)
Robinhood: http://bit.ly/2uGXBPG (Get a free stock!)

FIRE me

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1100
  • Location: Louisville, KY
  • So much technology, so little talent.
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #7 on: January 24, 2017, 02:29:58 PM »
*Warning - I am using a crystal ball*

Without net neutrality, I imagine a conclusion is tiered internet packages. To keep it simple, you could imagine two tiers. The top tier would be the internet as you know it. You have access to everything. The bottom tier, would allow limited access to certain services similar to how you would view a cable package. The bottom tier would have Facebook, CNN, Google, and wide used, established sites.

I could see something markets as $100/month for the full internet package & $15/month for limited access with addon options at an additional charge.

I don't necessarily see anything morally wrong with this. I'd imagine my parents only use Facebook and some cable news sites. Should they be charged for access to the entire internet if they don't care to use it?

The ultimate fear I'd have is how much for full access would cost and could certain sites be throttled anyway despite the full access (if they even offer a full access package). I'd bet US cell phone companies would love to charge additional fees for speeds AND data caps AND content.

It may even be worse that that. It might become a "walled garden" internet, much like AOL. Only worse. Instead of tiers, all you get is the sites and content they want you to get, anything else is timeout territory.
FIRE'd on January 4, 2017

GuitarStv

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8520
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #8 on: January 24, 2017, 02:44:20 PM »
I can't believe every private citizen is not extremely concerned about net neutrality. This ought to be a bipartisan issue. The only people who should actually want to kill net neutrality are:

- corporate telecom overlords who want to only give you access to what they choose, so you have to pay extra to get decent service, and so your eyeballs and credit cards (and your political views) are pointed in the direction they want them to be at all times (Note that Ajit Pai used to be one of them, and is basically in bed with this desire)

- anyone who thinks that those companies should turn over information about what you do online to the government if the government wants them to.

Do you value your freedom to access and distribute information and speak freely online? Then you should value net neutrality.


Agreed.

+1

Losing net neutrality also has the potential to put a big damper on tech innovation.

TheOldestYoungMan

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 645
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #9 on: January 24, 2017, 04:02:50 PM »
It is so important to me that I am a single issue voter.  If any politician were serious about breaking the ISP monopolies, I would support them regardless of their other positions.  Nothing so directly affects me on a visceral, primal, level, as Comcast.

To see comcast destroyed, to see their executives imprisoned, their assets confiscated, the children of the children of the children of anyone related to comcast imprisoned for all time would hardly be enough.

No company should be as passionately hated as the American ISP.

These companies are raping our future, to no purpose.  It would be one thing if it was for profit, but it isn't.  They are just arbitrarily slowing down the internet because of stupidity.  Clinging to old and outdated business models, throttling user speeds, not because of a need to do so.  Not because we won't pay for better speed.  No.  They do this because they can.

Google comes into town, and all of a sudden, Comcast and Time Warner increase speeds by factors of 50 or 60.  They flip a goddamn switch.  Profits don't go down, it doesn't cost massive investments, these companies are literally holding the internet hostage to try and keep people paying for cable TV.

And these are the only folks who benefit from this crap.  Net neutrality is hands down more important than all the other things, because without it you're not going to be able to talk about all the other things.  It's the free speech of this century.  And the battle is all-but lost.  Right now, your ISP is treating your traffic differently, unless you pay their extortion to be treated properly.  Additionally, most of them have started this bullshit with charging you to rent a piece of equipment that they then use to provide wi-fi through the connection you pay for to people you didn't give permission to use that equipment.

If dousing myself in gasoline and lighting myself on fire would get Comcast nationalized, I'd be crispy TOYM already.
Notice is turned in! 35 days until FIRE!  I am excited and at the same time terrified!

bacchi

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1951
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #10 on: January 24, 2017, 05:13:42 PM »
Yeah, Comcast is particularly evil. I dropped them and went to DSL just to rid myself of their incompetent customer service.

Poundwise

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 735
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #11 on: January 24, 2017, 07:39:15 PM »
It is so important to me that I am a single issue voter.  If any politician were serious about breaking the ISP monopolies, I would support them regardless of their other positions.  Nothing so directly affects me on a visceral, primal, level, as Comcast.

Wow!

Thanks folks, I think you just about answered my question.  What can be done? Email Pai and the other FCC commissioners?


Dollar Slice

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2008
  • Age: 40
  • Location: New York City
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #12 on: January 24, 2017, 10:02:54 PM »
Yeah, Comcast is particularly evil. I dropped them and went to DSL just to rid myself of their incompetent customer service.

Man, if you think Comcast is bad, you should have seen Verizon back in the bad old days. They were AMAZINGLY terrible. I would literally wait 2 hours on the phone every time I had to call in a DSL outage, which we had on a weekly basis. We had such terrible problems with them that I was interviewed about them for a NYC daily newspaper and I eventually got the company to send me a letter of apology so I could prove to my boss it was their fault and not some kind of internal IT incompetence. At some point they cut off our service with no explanation or warning, and we had to go through the process of getting a new internet provider (while being totally without internet for 2 weeks), and then like a month after we got set up with the new ISP, I got a call from Verizon offering to set up an appointment to install new service. (LOL?) Then a year later the new ISP went out of business with no warning, the internet just stopped one day and they didn't answer the phones etc. We eventually started paying for a T1 which cost hundreds of dollars a month for 1.5/1.5 (that's megs not gigs!) service. We did that until finally Comcast cable internet was available for our office, which was a glorious day.

You kids today with your cable internet don't know how good you've got it... ;-)
Referrals for...
Prolific Academic: http://www.prolific.ac/rp?ref=3PJ4H43L (Earn money by taking academic surveys - way better than mturk, I average ~$9/hr)
Robinhood: http://bit.ly/2uGXBPG (Get a free stock!)

Lagom

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1227
  • Age: 34
  • Location: SF Bay Area
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #13 on: January 24, 2017, 10:29:02 PM »
It is so important to me that I am a single issue voter.  If any politician were serious about breaking the ISP monopolies, I would support them regardless of their other positions.  Nothing so directly affects me on a visceral, primal, level, as Comcast.

To see comcast destroyed, to see their executives imprisoned, their assets confiscated, the children of the children of the children of anyone related to comcast imprisoned for all time would hardly be enough.

No company should be as passionately hated as the American ISP.

These companies are raping our future, to no purpose.  It would be one thing if it was for profit, but it isn't.  They are just arbitrarily slowing down the internet because of stupidity.  Clinging to old and outdated business models, throttling user speeds, not because of a need to do so.  Not because we won't pay for better speed.  No.  They do this because they can.

Google comes into town, and all of a sudden, Comcast and Time Warner increase speeds by factors of 50 or 60.  They flip a goddamn switch.  Profits don't go down, it doesn't cost massive investments, these companies are literally holding the internet hostage to try and keep people paying for cable TV.

And these are the only folks who benefit from this crap.  Net neutrality is hands down more important than all the other things, because without it you're not going to be able to talk about all the other things.  It's the free speech of this century.  And the battle is all-but lost.  Right now, your ISP is treating your traffic differently, unless you pay their extortion to be treated properly.  Additionally, most of them have started this bullshit with charging you to rent a piece of equipment that they then use to provide wi-fi through the connection you pay for to people you didn't give permission to use that equipment.

If dousing myself in gasoline and lighting myself on fire would get Comcast nationalized, I'd be crispy TOYM already.

I've never quite thought of it this way, but very well stated.

Would love to hear someone actually try to defend destroying net neutrality. I mean, it seems like yet another no-brainer issue that should garner massive bipartisan support, but the Trumpists literally seem incapable of disagreeing with a single thing he does.

deadlymonkey

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 400
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #14 on: January 25, 2017, 06:23:38 AM »
It is so important to me that I am a single issue voter.  If any politician were serious about breaking the ISP monopolies, I would support them regardless of their other positions.  Nothing so directly affects me on a visceral, primal, level, as Comcast.

To see comcast destroyed, to see their executives imprisoned, their assets confiscated, the children of the children of the children of anyone related to comcast imprisoned for all time would hardly be enough.

No company should be as passionately hated as the American ISP.

These companies are raping our future, to no purpose.  It would be one thing if it was for profit, but it isn't.  They are just arbitrarily slowing down the internet because of stupidity.  Clinging to old and outdated business models, throttling user speeds, not because of a need to do so.  Not because we won't pay for better speed.  No.  They do this because they can.

Google comes into town, and all of a sudden, Comcast and Time Warner increase speeds by factors of 50 or 60.  They flip a goddamn switch.  Profits don't go down, it doesn't cost massive investments, these companies are literally holding the internet hostage to try and keep people paying for cable TV.

And these are the only folks who benefit from this crap.  Net neutrality is hands down more important than all the other things, because without it you're not going to be able to talk about all the other things.  It's the free speech of this century.  And the battle is all-but lost.  Right now, your ISP is treating your traffic differently, unless you pay their extortion to be treated properly.  Additionally, most of them have started this bullshit with charging you to rent a piece of equipment that they then use to provide wi-fi through the connection you pay for to people you didn't give permission to use that equipment.

If dousing myself in gasoline and lighting myself on fire would get Comcast nationalized, I'd be crispy TOYM already.

I've never quite thought of it this way, but very well stated.

Would love to hear someone actually try to defend destroying net neutrality. I mean, it seems like yet another no-brainer issue that should garner massive bipartisan support, but the Trumpists literally seem incapable of disagreeing with a single thing he does.

The only real defense I've heard is the free market defense.  They are their own company, they put the money into building infrastructure, they should be able to monetize their investment however they want.

Freedom2016

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 477
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #15 on: January 25, 2017, 07:14:47 AM »
This is probably preaching to the choir but John Oliver did a lengthy piece on net neutrality in June 2014, and so many people commented on the FCC's (non) net neutrality proposal due to his piece that he is credited with helping to scuttle it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpbOEoRrHyU

"Prevent cable company fuckery!"

My $0.02 is that cable companies should be treated (and regulated) like public utilities.

ncornilsen

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 605
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #16 on: January 26, 2017, 07:51:16 AM »
The one thing I could say against net neutrality is that it doesn't seem reasonable that a facebook cat video has the same priority as the data file containing the 3D printer data for a million dollar aerospace casting.

Unfortunately, I'm ignorant in the details of how the internet works  enough to not know how one could tier priorities like that without creating the potential for abuse of free speech and such, so we'll just continue to 'sneaker net' that stuff across town for now.

NoStacheOhio

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1514
  • Location: Cleveland
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #17 on: January 26, 2017, 08:51:21 AM »
The only real defense I've heard is the free market defense.  They are their own company, they put the money into building infrastructure, they should be able to monetize their investment however they want.

Except they're using publicly-owned resources. Yes, they built out a network, but it's not like bought up all the land to run the lines.

It's a utility, and should be treated as such. The sooner everybody realizes this, the better off we'll be.
The first step is acknowledging you have a problem, right?

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

scantee

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 266
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #18 on: January 26, 2017, 09:22:47 AM »
Agreed with basically everyone here.

My one beef with net neutrality is the name: it's too opaque for the average internet user and explanations of why net neutrality is important are too complicated and technical. I think it is going to be really hard to rally people around this issue when it feels so conceptually intimidating to them.

We really need to find a better way to describe what it is and why it is so important. I like deadlymonkey's packet description. Are there other pithy descriptions out that describe the issue well, using lay language?

NoStacheOhio

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1514
  • Location: Cleveland
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #19 on: January 26, 2017, 09:24:56 AM »
Agreed with basically everyone here.

My one beef with net neutrality is the name: it's too opaque for the average internet user and explanations of why net neutrality is important are too complicated and technical. I think it is going to be really hard to rally people around this issue when it feels so conceptually intimidating to them.

We really need to find a better way to describe what it is and why it is so important. I like deadlymonkey's packet description. Are there other pithy descriptions out that describe the issue well, using lay language?

Just call it a utility, like phone or electric. The "Treat Internet Service Like a Utility Law of 2017!" ;)

TISLUL rolls right off the tongue.
The first step is acknowledging you have a problem, right?

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

scantee

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 266
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #20 on: January 26, 2017, 09:46:40 AM »
Agreed with basically everyone here.

My one beef with net neutrality is the name: it's too opaque for the average internet user and explanations of why net neutrality is important are too complicated and technical. I think it is going to be really hard to rally people around this issue when it feels so conceptually intimidating to them.

We really need to find a better way to describe what it is and why it is so important. I like deadlymonkey's packet description. Are there other pithy descriptions out that describe the issue well, using lay language?

Just call it a utility, like phone or electric. The "Treat Internet Service Like a Utility Law of 2017!" ;)

TISLUL rolls right off the tongue.

I'm going to try the TISLUL argument on my 67-year-old mom. I don't have high hopes that it will go well.

Boomers are the group most in need of convincing, but unfortunately they're generally technology ignorant and in thrall to the idea of "privatization." "Why shouldn't we privatize the internet? We don't need the government involved in our internet! Plus, Comcast told me that if we make the internet a utility, I'll have to pay $2.53 more each month! I just want to get to my Facebook blog website page and my conspiracy theory news and I don't need to pay more for that!"

That might actually be the most compelling argument for this group, "You know Uncle Jerry, if we privatize the internet, you might not be able to get to those news [conspiracy theory] sites you like to read so much..."

ncornilsen

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 605
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #21 on: January 26, 2017, 02:43:10 PM »
Agreed with basically everyone here.

My one beef with net neutrality is the name: it's too opaque for the average internet user and explanations of why net neutrality is important are too complicated and technical. I think it is going to be really hard to rally people around this issue when it feels so conceptually intimidating to them.

We really need to find a better way to describe what it is and why it is so important. I like deadlymonkey's packet description. Are there other pithy descriptions out that describe the issue well, using lay language?

Just call it a utility, like phone or electric. The "Treat Internet Service Like a Utility Law of 2017!" ;)

TISLUL rolls right off the tongue.

I'm going to try the TISLUL argument on my 67-year-old mom. I don't have high hopes that it will go well.

Boomers are the group most in need of convincing, but unfortunately they're generally technology ignorant and in thrall to the idea of "privatization." "Why shouldn't we privatize the internet? We don't need the government involved in our internet! Plus, Comcast told me that if we make the internet a utility, I'll have to pay $2.53 more each month! I just want to get to my Facebook blog website page and my conspiracy theory news and I don't need to pay more for that!"

That might actually be the most compelling argument for this group, "You know Uncle Jerry, if we privatize the internet, you might not be able to get to those news [conspiracy theory] sites you like to read so much..."

Believe it or not, that's exactly how I got one of my uncles on board with net neutrality. I told him that these 'wussies at your internet provider will get pressured to stop letting you go to any site except CNN for news!' He's all on board to stop Obama from controlling the internet now!

GuitarStv

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8520
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #22 on: January 26, 2017, 02:48:36 PM »
Thanks Obama!

scantee

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 266
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #23 on: January 26, 2017, 02:53:12 PM »
Agreed with basically everyone here.

My one beef with net neutrality is the name: it's too opaque for the average internet user and explanations of why net neutrality is important are too complicated and technical. I think it is going to be really hard to rally people around this issue when it feels so conceptually intimidating to them.

We really need to find a better way to describe what it is and why it is so important. I like deadlymonkey's packet description. Are there other pithy descriptions out that describe the issue well, using lay language?

Just call it a utility, like phone or electric. The "Treat Internet Service Like a Utility Law of 2017!" ;)

TISLUL rolls right off the tongue.

I'm going to try the TISLUL argument on my 67-year-old mom. I don't have high hopes that it will go well.

Boomers are the group most in need of convincing, but unfortunately they're generally technology ignorant and in thrall to the idea of "privatization." "Why shouldn't we privatize the internet? We don't need the government involved in our internet! Plus, Comcast told me that if we make the internet a utility, I'll have to pay $2.53 more each month! I just want to get to my Facebook blog website page and my conspiracy theory news and I don't need to pay more for that!"

That might actually be the most compelling argument for this group, "You know Uncle Jerry, if we privatize the internet, you might not be able to get to those news [conspiracy theory] sites you like to read so much..."

Believe it or not, that's exactly how I got one of my uncles on board with net neutrality. I told him that these 'wussies at your internet provider will get pressured to stop letting you go to any site except CNN for news!' He's all on board to stop Obama from controlling the internet now!

Clearly you and I should be messaging strategy consultants for the net neutrality lobby.

Poundwise

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 735
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #24 on: January 28, 2017, 06:42:09 AM »
You know, I was lying awake in bed this morning, and I suddenly realized that this issue really IS as big as TheOldestYoungMan and others make it out to be.  It is as big a potential problem as Citizens United and gerrymandering.

Now, many may say "no duh" to me. Yes, it took me a long time to get to this point. But I'm there.

This is a bipartisan issue that all should be concerned about. I don't know how long it would take to roll back the rules, but we need to be ready.

I did some googling and here are a organizations that seem to want to protect net neutrality.  I don't know about their backgrounds, so if you know a better group, please post!
https://www.battleforthenet.com/
http://www.savetheinternet.com/sti-home

NoStacheOhio

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1514
  • Location: Cleveland
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #25 on: January 28, 2017, 10:53:28 AM »
You know, I was lying awake in bed this morning, and I suddenly realized that this issue really IS as big as TheOldestYoungMan and others make it out to be.  It is as big a potential problem as Citizens United and gerrymandering.

Now, many may say "no duh" to me. Yes, it took me a long time to get to this point. But I'm there.

This is a bipartisan issue that all should be concerned about. I don't know how long it would take to roll back the rules, but we need to be ready.

I did some googling and here are a organizations that seem to want to protect net neutrality.  I don't know about their backgrounds, so if you know a better group, please post!
https://www.battleforthenet.com/
http://www.savetheinternet.com/sti-home

EFF is probably the biggest one https://www.eff.org/issues/net-neutrality
The first step is acknowledging you have a problem, right?

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

Poundwise

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 735
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #26 on: January 28, 2017, 11:12:45 AM »
Thanks!!

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5311
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #27 on: January 28, 2017, 09:20:43 PM »
Believe it or not, that's exactly how I got one of my uncles on board with net neutrality. I told him that these 'wussies at your internet provider will get pressured to stop letting you go to any site except CNN for news!' He's all on board to stop Obama from controlling the internet now!

Clearly you and I should be messaging strategy consultants for the net neutrality lobby.

This is genius.
Give me one fine day of plain sailing weather and I can mess up anything.

MustacheMathTM

Lagom

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1227
  • Age: 34
  • Location: SF Bay Area
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #28 on: February 06, 2017, 01:55:27 PM »

Tasty Pinecones

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 762
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #29 on: February 06, 2017, 02:03:45 PM »
Okay, I'm very scared...

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5311
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #30 on: February 06, 2017, 07:55:58 PM »
Okay, I'm very scared...
I was honestly terrified when Obama appointed Wheeler. This is at least as bad as that. Being scared for net neutrality for the past 4 years is probably the proper reaction.
Give me one fine day of plain sailing weather and I can mess up anything.

MustacheMathTM

GuitarStv

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8520
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #31 on: February 07, 2017, 06:04:54 AM »
Okay, I'm very scared...
I was honestly terrified when Obama appointed Wheeler. This is at least as bad as that. Being scared for net neutrality for the past 4 years is probably the proper reaction.

Wheeler had plans to scrap net neutrality in 2014 . . . plans that Obama helped to scuttle.  Trump has already shown a desire to get rid of net neutrality, and appointed someone who has no problems helping him do that.

Why do you think the situations are comparable at all?  Why you think we should be afraid of Obama (who helped enshrine net neutrality) when Trump is currently in power and poised to throw it out?

Metric Mouse

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5311
  • FU @ 22. F.I.R.E before 23
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #32 on: February 08, 2017, 01:32:19 AM »
Okay, I'm very scared...
I was honestly terrified when Obama appointed Wheeler. This is at least as bad as that. Being scared for net neutrality for the past 4 years is probably the proper reaction.

Wheeler had plans to scrap net neutrality in 2014 . . . plans that Obama helped to scuttle.  Trump has already shown a desire to get rid of net neutrality, and appointed someone who has no problems helping him do that.

Why do you think the situations are comparable at all?  Why you think we should be afraid of Obama (who helped enshrine net neutrality) when Trump is currently in power and poised to throw it out?
No one was terrified of Obama.  I was terrified when Obama appointed one of the most powerful telecom lobbyists to chairman of the FCC. It was asking the fox to watch the hen house. I know people who were certain this was the end of net neutrality. Thankfully it wasn't, but I've been terrified of the possibility that Wheeler would follow through on his proposed rules to tier internet speeds and kill net neutrality. I was also terrified when he met with the Obama administration several times when formulating the Title II rules they did finally adopt - the FCC is supposed to be an independent agency and overt involvement by the president leads to exactly the kind of issues we are experiencing. How would an informed person not be terrified?
Give me one fine day of plain sailing weather and I can mess up anything.

MustacheMathTM

Poundwise

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 735
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #33 on: March 23, 2017, 03:48:05 PM »
FYI, netizens.
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/115/sjres34

GovTrack's summary:
Quote
A Republican bill would block a regulation of President Obama’s that they see as executive overreach, but privacy advocates claim it could allow companies to sell your private Internet and search history. Who’s right?

The context and what the bill does

The Federal Trade Commission maintains jurisdiction over most aspects of the Internet. But after the 2016 election during the lame-duck session, another Washington agency called the Federal Communications Commission issued new regulations related specifically to Internet service providers, also known as ISPs. (You’ve probably heard of some of the country’s biggest ISPs, which include Comcast, Verizon, AT&T;, Time Warner, Cox, and CenturyLink.)

These new rules required all Internet browsing data, as well as data regarding app usage on mobile devices, be subject to the same privacy requirements as sensitive or private personal information. This overtook the previous rule by the FTC, the agency which previously had authority over regulating ISP’s and differentiated privacy requirements based upon the sensitivity of the information, with more stringent rules for such things as health information or Social Security numbers. The methods are also more invasive to the ISP companies, since the FCC also issues pre-emptive regulations while the FTC primarily conducted investigations.

Introduced by Sen. Jeff Flake (R-AZ) — chair of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology and the Law — and Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN7), Senate Joint Resolution 34 and House Joint Resolution 86 are companion bills that would nullify the FCC’s rule. However, they would not return jurisdiction over regulating ISP’s back to the FTC, as they were previously.

What supporters say

Many Republicans saw these new rules as a power grab during the closing days of the Obama Administration. The rule was issued on December 2, 2016 and took effect on January 3, 2017, less than three weeks before President Trump took office. Supporters of the bill argue that the legislation would prevent the one-size-fits-all regulation.

“Under the FTC’s watch, our internet and data economy has been the envy of the world. The agency’s evidence-based approach calibrates privacy and data-security requirements to the sensitivity of information collected,” Senate lead sponsor Flake wrote in a Wall Street Journal op-ed.

“The FCC rules subject all web browsing and app usage data to the same restrictive requirements as sensitive personal information. That means that information generated from looking up the latest Cardinals score or checking the weather in Scottsdale is treated the same as personal health and financial data.”

ISP companies also contended that the FCC rules have placed them at a disadvantage with other non-ISP Internet companies that also collect user data, like Netflix or Facebook.

What opponents say

Privacy advocates warn that the legislation could produce dire consequences for consumer privacy, with Privacy News Online calling it “a bill to let telecoms sell your private Internet history.”

“Its goal is to remove all the hard-earned net neutrality regulations gained to protect your internet history from advertisers and and worse,” they wrote. “Specifically, the FCC had been able to prevent internet service providers (ISPs) from spying on your internet history, and selling what they gathered, without express permission. This legal protection on your internet history is currently under attack thanks to these 24 Senators and lots of ISP lobbying spend.”

That’s not false, as ISPs have been previously shown to sell user data to third parties, who in turn use it for marketing or other purposes.

Odds of passage

The odds of passage are decent — if Trump’s new FCC Commission Ajit Pai doesn’t overturn the rule on his own first. Pai already placed a partial halt to some of the ISP rules in February.

The Senate legislation has attracted 23 cosponsors, all Republicans. It awaits a vote in the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee.

The House legislation has attracted 16 cosponsors, also all Republicans. It awaits a vote in the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Blackburn is the third-most conservative House member, based on a GovTrack analysis of voting records so far during this Congress.

Dollar Slice

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2008
  • Age: 40
  • Location: New York City
Referrals for...
Prolific Academic: http://www.prolific.ac/rp?ref=3PJ4H43L (Earn money by taking academic surveys - way better than mturk, I average ~$9/hr)
Robinhood: http://bit.ly/2uGXBPG (Get a free stock!)

Tasty Pinecones

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 762
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #35 on: March 23, 2017, 09:56:38 PM »
So what will everyone here do about this new situation?

AdBlockPlus?
EFF Badger?
EFF HTTPSEverywhere?
Tor?
VPN?

My ISP outsourced their email operation to Yahoo some time ago. At one point today while using webmail AdBlock was saying it blocked ~50 ads and EFF Badger blocked 3 trackers. And I PAY for this email service (and internet access?).

Not many competitors in my town. As in none.

Poundwise

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 735
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #36 on: March 27, 2017, 08:36:05 AM »
All is not lost yet. The House is voting on the companion bill, H.J. Res. 86, TOMORROW.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-joint-resolution/86/related-bills
Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Federal Communications Commission relating to "Protecting the Privacy of Customers of Broadband and Other Telecommunications Services"

Call your rep TODAY if you value your internet search privacy.
For your rep contact info, click:
http://whoismyrepresentative.com/


Scandium

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1960
  • Location: EastCoast
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #37 on: March 27, 2017, 09:10:37 AM »
So what will everyone here do about this new situation?

AdBlockPlus?
EFF Badger?
EFF HTTPSEverywhere?
Tor?
VPN?

My ISP outsourced their email operation to Yahoo some time ago. At one point today while using webmail AdBlock was saying it blocked ~50 ads and EFF Badger blocked 3 trackers. And I PAY for this email service (and internet access?).

Not many competitors in my town. As in none.

Wait, you pay for email service? What is this , 1997?? I think I have fewer ads and trackers on gmail.. It should then at least be on your on privately hosted, encrypted server

Tasty Pinecones

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 762
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #38 on: March 27, 2017, 10:14:41 AM »
Our email service comes with our internet service. Yeah I could use GMail (I have an account for my Google interactions).

Poundwise

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 735
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #39 on: March 28, 2017, 04:35:57 PM »
House just voted to rescind search privacy protections. Now the bill goes to Trump.

VPN won't help.

NoStacheOhio

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1514
  • Location: Cleveland
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #40 on: March 29, 2017, 06:09:45 AM »
The cognitive dissonance when you look at this and the "I like Trump because he's going after the elites, and I don't care what else happens" explanation just floors me. This is such a blatant handout. It's literally the exact opposite.

I guess I'm downloading Tor tonight?
The first step is acknowledging you have a problem, right?

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

Poundwise

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 735

LifeHappens

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1821
  • Location: SnowBirdLand
  • Downshifting from 5th to 3rd Gear
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #42 on: March 29, 2017, 11:37:45 AM »
The cognitive dissonance when you look at this and the "I like Donald because he's going after the elites, and I don't care what else happens" explanation just floors me. This is such a blatant handout. It's literally the exact opposite.

I guess I'm downloading Tor tonight?

I read the Wired article and might do this as well. Any other suggestions for ways to safeguard privacy? I know it's mostly illusion, but I want to do what I can.

NoStacheOhio

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1514
  • Location: Cleveland
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #43 on: March 29, 2017, 11:57:55 AM »
The cognitive dissonance when you look at this and the "I like Donald because he's going after the elites, and I don't care what else happens" explanation just floors me. This is such a blatant handout. It's literally the exact opposite.

I guess I'm downloading Tor tonight?

I read the Wired article and might do this as well. Any other suggestions for ways to safeguard privacy? I know it's mostly illusion, but I want to do what I can.

Take up residence in the woods with no electronics? Using Signal and Whisper instead of texting in the clear? But the people you communicate with also need to use it.

I don't know. I just hope they succeed in publishing Congressional web info.
The first step is acknowledging you have a problem, right?

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

Tasty Pinecones

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 762
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #44 on: March 30, 2017, 10:46:20 AM »
EFF Badger, EFF HTTPS Everywhere, AdBlockPlus? Those prob don't reach deep enough.

Changing our DNS settings to something other than the ISP's such as DYNDNS.org?

Junto Club Gardener

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 6
  • Location: Rural MN
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #45 on: March 31, 2017, 02:41:06 PM »
Senator Franken is a vocal proponent of net neutrality.  For those not familiar with this issue, his 2011 floor statement provides an explanation of the importance of net neutrality: 

https://www.franken.senate.gov/?p=news&id=1834



Spork

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5741
    • Spork In The Eye
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #46 on: March 31, 2017, 06:44:19 PM »
I am about as privacy/security minded as anyone.  And full disclosure: I have at one time worked for an ISP.

Net Neutrality doesn't mean what most people think it means.  I've tried to explain this before here... and done poorly.  I'll try again.

If you think it means "every packet is equal from my computer to the website I am browsing"... that just isn't the case.  And worse: the Internet pretty much breaks if you do this.

Net Neutrality only becomes "a thing" on the public internet.  The vast majority of what we think of as "the internet" is private.  The ISP you're using probably has several classes of service: voice, video, guaranteed bandwidth customers and best effort customers.  You're already probably at the bottom unless you are a corporate customer with a contract in place with a SLA guaranteeing service.

And... the whole "don't prioritize traffic" only really comes into play when you pass this traffic up to the public Internet.  Guess what?  Most traffic doesn't go that way.  It turns out that sending traffic over the public internet is really damned expensive.  So what happens is ISP1 and ISP2 get together and string a cable or two between each other.  And then big data providers: facebook, amazon, google, etc -- they also do private peering.  Big website providers: private peering.  Really big data pushers like Netflix get even better service.  Netflix will set a gigantic box full of movies in all the major data hubs inside the ISP.  Traffic never really even goes to a peer.

And, quite frankly, this works really well.  It's extremely adaptive.  And it's done to be cheaper and for better service for everyone.  But it is definitely NOT neutral.

Where net neutrality concepts ARE important are where it comes to censorship and exchange of ideas.  However... as far as I know, those concepts have never been under attack.  It is generally data prioritization that gets the ire of regulators.  And the data prioritization is pretty much how stuff works... and has worked forever.
Some will sell their dreams for small desires
Or lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps
And start to dream of somewhere
To relax their restless flight

scottish

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 811
  • Location: Ottawa
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #47 on: April 01, 2017, 02:35:21 PM »
You're right - to most people, the internet isn't the collection of fibre-optics networks that are actually carrying data around the world.   It excludes VPLS sold to big enterprises, and the virtual networks running on the same hardware that carry your telephone traffic.    TV broadcast delivery over the network?   Nope.   MPLS?   Never heard of it.

I've always found it a difficult to reconcile the idea of net neutrality with the underlying network architecture.

People got annoyed when the big corporate over the top providers get better service than the small, unfunded applications.   Comcast throttling BitTorrent comes to mind.   Never mind that the vast majority of BitTorrent traffic was pirated material.   

I've decided that net neutrality means that your ISP doesn't single out any particular type of your traffic for special treatment.   

For example, your ISP could decide to (try to) block or throttle VPNs as they prevent it from harvesting meta-data about your web activity.   This would violate net neutrality.

Thoughts?


Spork

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5741
    • Spork In The Eye
Re: Should we be concerned about net neutrality, and why?
« Reply #48 on: April 01, 2017, 04:23:10 PM »
People got annoyed when the big corporate over the top providers get better service than the small, unfunded applications.   Comcast throttling BitTorrent comes to mind.   Never mind that the vast majority of BitTorrent traffic was pirated material.   

An inside perspective for what it's worth... I don't think piracy (or any moral judgment) was behind throttling BitTorrent.  And it wasn't just Comcast.  They just are the ones that got caught. 

The problem was network architecture vs a new protocol.  Everyone pretty much designed their networks like an inverted tree.  Big trunks led to big data.  Smaller limbs to large markets.  Smaller still branches out to smaller markets.... ending in twigs.  It was designed that way because that was always how the data flowed... from the top down.  PtP protocols came along and suddenly people were sharing movies from some small twig in Market1 to another small twig in Market2.  What happened is that one or two customers ended up pretty much taking entire markets offline.  So...  providers started trying to prioritize any way they could.  And what Comcast (and others) did was to insert devices that effectively throttled PtP traffic if (and only if) bandwidth for the link was at 100%.

Effectively there were 2% of the people that were killing the entire network for the other 98%.  And yeah, most likely the big over-the-top guys still got their traffic through, because they paid for an MPLS circuit with guaranteed bandwidth.

No one liked it.  The customers didn't like it.  The techies at the ISPs didn't like it.  (I know there was a huge collective cheer when "those devices that shall not be named" came out of our network.)  It was a stop gap until networks could be re-engineered.  And re-engineering a very large network can take years and lots of money.
Some will sell their dreams for small desires
Or lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps
And start to dream of somewhere
To relax their restless flight