Net Neutrality and your thoughts

Serious and MATURE conversations about Christianity
User avatar
Imagine Wagons
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1207
Joined: July 16th, 2013, 3:22 pm
Steam Profile: STEAM_0:1:32234823
Location: Somewhere on the interwebs
Contact:

Net Neutrality and your thoughts

Post by Imagine Wagons » December 6th, 2017, 12:52 pm

I just want to see everyone thoughts on Net Neutrality and the current state of it. Do you support it? Why or Why not? Do you think that the internet as we know it is going to end?

I have been having serious discussions IRL, and some have been good and bad. Me personally I am against Net Neutrality because of this article stating that net neutrality is bad for consumers as it becomes regulated Ma Bell Circa 1934. Basically it means that Washington Lawyer and un-elected officials are now exteremly influential in how [the internet] industry proceeds. FCC Chairman Ajit Pai has cited a decrease in domestic broadband capital expenditures among the nation's 12 largest ISPs between 2014 to 2016. Also smaller ISPs have reported that the Title II regulations are preventing them from offering new services and deepening their networks (I can attest to this as my ISP said this as well).

Also all of the problems mentioned in the Open Internet Order (Net Neutrality) of 2015 was a preventative measure rather than an actual action. My thoughts on this is that it is doing more harm than good, and could actually offer better services such as unlimited Streaming for Music, or even provide free services such as Netflix for the length of contract, like metroPCS is offering, and T-Mobile as well. I personally think that rolling back is a good idea and let the Federal Trade Commission handle the internet instead of the FCC is a better Idea than what is going on right now. But my main concern is how this will effect the current lawsuit with AT&T right now.
word count: 278
Image

User avatar
Cpt-Suicide
CC Member
CC Member
Posts: 263
Joined: January 1st, 2009, 2:10 pm

Re: Net Neutrality and your thoughts

Post by Cpt-Suicide » December 7th, 2017, 7:26 pm

Alright.. You did it.. you drew a lurker into posting..

Net Neutrality is an absolute must in some fashion or another. Perhaps it's current iteration isn't perfect, but that's a completely different discussion. There are also many facets to this discussion. Traffic fast-lane is a real thing, that has happened already. I made a giant post about this on facebook, and can link you a bunch of sources if you want. ISP's have been throttling and blocking traffic since the middle of the 2000's. Including questionable "circumvention" of throttling of Netflix by Verizon this year. The problem with not labeling the internet as a utility is that the internet is distributed the same as a utility.

Power, water, and sewage are all distributed commodities that would be pointless and prohibitively expensive to make multiple times. Even for the sake of "competition"(this is coming from a libertarian leaning person) it wouldn't make sense. The same applies to the internet. Most T2 ISP's and especially those below that don't have any network of their own at all. They simply rent bandwidth from larger ISP's and build a hub for their customers to come through.

The problem with "bundled deals" like netflix and things is that there is no guarantee that they would exist, or that they would provide even half decent quality(MetroPCS gives 420p mobile and requires unlimited data). This doesn't even get into the personal information issue. But I could talk on net neutrality for a very very long time. Feel free to hit me up on TS to REALLY get a deep dive on this issue.
word count: 279
Image

User avatar
Kratos
Council Member
Council Member
Posts: 5630
Joined: May 19th, 2011, 7:50 pm
Steam Profile: joshfitz08
Location: Appleton, WI

Re: Net Neutrality and your thoughts

Post by Kratos » December 7th, 2017, 11:16 pm

The problem with any government subsidized or controlled anything is, you're trading a CEO for a politician or government official. If greed/corruption are your concerns it isn't ideal to put a group of people in charge that fall like flies at all the corruption in their field. The CEO has accountability. He has to make money. Not only that, but his accountability is day to day. As in, if he loses money after a period, his company can move on from him. A politician has accountability too, sort of. His term limits assist him in being able to make foolish decisions.

Also, in a free market arena you can enact change virtually immediately. If the market decides that that particular CEO is out of his mind and is wrong, people can just stop using his service. You're in complete control of your personal assets. You may argue, "You can still stop service even if it's regulated by the government!" Sure. For now. How'd that work with the ACA? Government regulations beckon more regulations. Soon enough, it's entirely possible that the government could require a "tax" (i.e. penalty) for not using their internet provider. Sure, that sounds nuts. If you had asked your average American 15 years ago if they could be penalized for choosing not to use healthcare, they would have thought you were nuts, too.

Whereas with a politician you'd have to wait for their term to end, hope they get voted out, hope that the new politician holds your same views, and then wait for the legislation to be repealed. Then you have to wait for new legislation to be enacted...it's a cumbersome system. It's designed to be cumbersome for laws and such. Not so much for our utilities/services.

Anytime the government is in control the consumer loses control. Obviously. Free market arenas allow the consumer to be in complete control. The reason it isn't working well in America right now is because (as Scrunch eluded to in the Capitalism Vs Socialism thread) America really doesn't have either system playing out. As it stands we have very socialistic standards, but very capitalistic rules. We have a government that gets to decide which companies are allowed to have monopolies, but then those companies have complete rights to their pricing/availability. That isn't how that works. (EPIPEN is the best example of how ridiculous that system is; they are the only ones legally allowed to make it, yet can hike their prices to whatever they want. In a free market, you'd have six "epipens" and the price would be driven down).
word count: 448

User avatar
GAKINACTION
CC Member
CC Member
Posts: 600
Joined: May 2nd, 2011, 5:18 pm
Steam Profile: GamemanAdvKid
Location: Rio Rico, AZ

Re: Net Neutrality and your thoughts

Post by GAKINACTION » December 8th, 2017, 10:44 am

I think you all should check out this website.

http://whatisnetneutrality.org/timeline

I believe that if we are paying our ISP money so that we can access the internet then i believe that we should have access to go wherever we want at any time. There are still too many places where there is only 1 isp available. And if you think that us being without net neutrality is good, ask scooter. Scooter has verizon DSL and he is paying 70 dollars for 3mbps internet. That is the only option he has right now for HOME internet. And if he were to go 4G LTE wireless, he would be paying well over 70 dollars a month for "unlimited" which is a 22gb data bucket.

Try playing a couple of your favorite FPS games on 4G LTE and tell me if you think its a great experience. Because for me, whenever my line is cold and i have to use verizon 4g lte, i would experiance lag freezes here and there and my controls would have a somwhat muddy response. Like playing on a half life deathmatch server located in europe and your connected to it from the US.

Then you have some other cities that are also tired of their ISPs messing up their internet so much that they try to start their own municipal internet like Colorado did. Comcast tried to stop them from doing so but they go it done anyway. 1gbps FIBER OPTIC internet. to each home. Same thing in Tennessee.

Alot of people need an internet connection that works. And the internet is starting to become more of a necessity to have. Last time i was at the DES office, which was 2016, they were already getting rid of paper applications and instead having people sign up online. You have places like walmart, target, home depot, and other big stores that have you fill out an online job application. You have hospitals and their equipment also using the internet. You have public schools, colleges, and universities that are starting to assign homework online more. even home schooled kids need the internet.

And yeah, there is satellite internet. But it will not be as reliable as having a physical internet line run into your home because of the constant downtimes that occur during "peak hours".

EDIT: figured i would add this here since i just found it a while ago

word count: 404

User avatar
loot
Posts: 41
Joined: November 20th, 2016, 6:16 pm
Steam Profile: STEAM_0:1:42100241
Location: Canada

Re: Net Neutrality and your thoughts

Post by loot » December 10th, 2017, 1:24 am

The internet was a much wilder and freer place before so-called "net neutrality" was put into law in 2015. Basically it's a choice between the ISPs limiting your internet rights, or the websites themselves doing it. Either way the web will never be neutral (just try posting socially conservative content on facebook)
Last edited by loot on December 10th, 2017, 1:34 am, edited 1 time in total. word count: 54

User avatar
loot
Posts: 41
Joined: November 20th, 2016, 6:16 pm
Steam Profile: STEAM_0:1:42100241
Location: Canada

Re: Net Neutrality and your thoughts

Post by loot » December 10th, 2017, 1:33 am

Not much of a "muh free market" guy but this article from back when they were initially implementing net neutrality is a decent read: https://mises.org/library/net-neutrality-scam
The administration insists these measures are necessary because — even though there is no evidence that this has actually happened — it is possible that at some point in the future, internet service providers could restrict some content and apps on the internet. Thus, we are told, control of content should be handed over to the federal government to ensure that internet service providers are “neutral” when it comes to deciding what is on the internet and what is not.
And in the FCC's own words, from a Reuters article about their final repeal memo draft 2 weeks ago (lost link by accident):
The FCC goes on to mention that the current net neutrality rules don’t prevent selective blocking. They can already be bypassed by ISPs if they offer “curated services,” which allows them to filter content on viewpoint grounds. And Edge providers also block content because it violates their “viewpoints,”
But I guess ultimately I don't see why I would care if an ISP wants to charge the guy who eats up all the bandwidth with netflix a bit more money a month

edit:
GAKINACTION wrote: Try playing a couple of your favorite FPS games on 4G LTE and tell me if you think its a great experience.
FWIW I've actually done that and had no problem, LTE has SIGNIFICANTLY faster upload and download speeds than any ISP offers here
word count: 264

User avatar
Scrunch
CC Member
CC Member
Posts: 168
Joined: September 24th, 2016, 8:33 pm
Steam Profile: Scrunch
Battle.net Profile: Scrunch#11921

Re: Net Neutrality and your thoughts

Post by Scrunch » December 10th, 2017, 11:36 am

Comcast and Verizon have both throttled content providers for money. If I recall correctly it was Verizon vs. FCC that kicked this whole thing off in the first place. When the FCC lost that battle in court, President Obama pushed to reclassify ISPs as telecoms. I'm a big time free market guy, but ISPs don't operate in a free market, many of them have complete regulatory control over the market they provide to. I don't like either side of this debate.

Edit: Though I'd add my reasoning as to why I don't like either side.
1) Service providers don't have to provide the best service for the cheapest price because many of them control the markets they provide to, thus allowing them to squeeze content creators or service purchaser's for more money.

Versus

2) I generally don't like federal government to be involved in anything, like at all...
word count: 156
Image
Self proclaimed master of crappy MS Paint drawings.

User avatar
loot
Posts: 41
Joined: November 20th, 2016, 6:16 pm
Steam Profile: STEAM_0:1:42100241
Location: Canada

Re: Net Neutrality and your thoughts

Post by loot » December 10th, 2017, 12:41 pm

The debate arose in the first place because Netflix wanted the ability to push unlimited amounts of streaming video at no cost to themselves on infrastructure owned, paid for and maintained by ISPs, and Comcast wanted to be able to charge higher rates for Netflix users to be able to afford infrastructure upgrades that can handle the traffic. There was never any throttling in question
word count: 65

User avatar
Scrunch
CC Member
CC Member
Posts: 168
Joined: September 24th, 2016, 8:33 pm
Steam Profile: Scrunch
Battle.net Profile: Scrunch#11921

Re: Net Neutrality and your thoughts

Post by Scrunch » December 10th, 2017, 12:56 pm

If Comcast were in a market where they had to compete with the latest technology, such as Google Fiber, Comcast would be forced to upgrade their stuff and be competitive or lose market share.
word count: 34
Image
Self proclaimed master of crappy MS Paint drawings.

User avatar
loot
Posts: 41
Joined: November 20th, 2016, 6:16 pm
Steam Profile: STEAM_0:1:42100241
Location: Canada

Re: Net Neutrality and your thoughts

Post by loot » December 10th, 2017, 1:08 pm

That's really not how the industry works, the reason Comcast dominates so many areas is that they go in and invest millions of dollars to build all the infrastructures, lay wire etc. Other companies decide it's not worth the investment. There is no state-sanctioned monopoly, there are only localities where the margins are so small it makes starting local competition not lucrative. I never see complaints that there aren't alternatives to the local gas company, it's the exact same situation (and this is also why reclassing ISPs as utilities makes no difference)

So, do you think other companies should be allowed to walk in and use the infrastructure Comcast built? More to the point, this pseudo-monopoly problem didn't improve at all in 2015 when Net Neutrality was implemented so why is it used as an argument against scrapping Net Neutrality? And what about the existing Net Neutrality bill would prevent willing ISPs from offering competition if the legislation is scrapped?

The major pro-Net Neutrality players (Mark Zuckerberg, Google, Reddit, Jeff Bezos etc) aren't arguing for more ISP options, they aren't arguing for free and open internet (they are the worst offenders for limiting internet use), they are purely arguing to save themselves money at the expense of the ISPs
word count: 219

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest